COMMISSION 
AGENDA MEMORANDUM                        Item No.          10d 
ACTION ITEM                            Date of Meeting       April 13, 2021 
DATE:     March 25, 2021 
TO:        Stephen P. Metruck, Executive Director 
FROM:    Stephanie Jones Stebbins, Managing Director Maritime 
Kyra Lise, Director Real Estate and Economic Development 
SUBJECT:  Pier 86 Public Fishing Pier restoration, in partnership with Expedia and Department
of Fish and Wildlife 
Amount of this request:                  $83,000 
Total estimated project cost:          $1,000,000 
ACTION REQUESTED 
Request Commission authorization for (1) the Executive Director to execute a Funding Agreement
with Cruise, LLC (Expedia Group) and Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife to spend
up to $83,000 for the Port's one-sixth contribution towards a Cost and Feasibility Analysis which
seeks to understand the engineering demands and construction costs for the rebuilding of the
Public Fishing Pier at Pier 86 with a ferry float to support commuter ferry service; and (2) to
exempt this opportunity from a competitive process. The total cost of th is cost and feasibility
analysis is anticipated to be no more than $500K and will be additionally supported by a
contribution of up to $167,000 by Department of Fish and Wildlife and a contribution of $250,000
and any additional costs of the cost and feasibility analysis to be borne by Cruise, LLC (Expedia
Group). 
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
This Cost and Feasibility study will allow the Port and its partners at Pier 86 -- Cruise, LLC (Expedia
Group) and Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife  to determine the technical
requirements and potential costs of construction of rebuilding the public fishing pier at Pier 86 
with a "ferry float" to support commuter service into the Expedia Campus. This  cost and
feasibility analysis will be conducted by Reid Middleton under the supervision of Cruise, LLC, and
will cover general site analysis, structural evaluations, structural design, zoning and regulatory
permitting analysis, and criteria for facility construction. The purpose of the study is to allow the
partners to evaluate the potential costs of construction and the technical requirements of the
project. Only after the study is completed and the partners have reviewed its conclusion that
Port staff will make final recommendations to the Port of Seattle Commission about additional
funds for construction and make such financing requests. The Port recognizes that Cruise, LLC is

Template revised January 10, 2019.

COMMISSION AGENDA  Action Item No. _10d_                               Page 2 of 6 
Meeting Date: April 13, 2021 
uniquely positioned to provide the feasibility study through the Funding Agreement, as they have
already selected a partner, Reid Middleton to perform preliminary work. Staff is recommending
Commission determine that a competitive solicitation process is not appropriate or cost effective
for the specific scope of work included in the attached Funding Agreement. 
JUSTIFICATION 
The feasibility analysis confirming the costs and technical requirements of rehabilitating Pier 86 
for public fishing contributes to the mission of the Port and its Century Agenda by: 
Expanding economic, cultural and community benefits of maritime operations and tourism while
preserving industrial lands.  Become a model for equity, diversity and inclusion by providing
equitable opportunities for all and delivers on the Port mission requirement to set the standard
for high quality, cost-effective and timely delivery of capital programs. 
It is in the port's best interest to contract with Cruise, LLC (Expedia Group) and Washington State
Department of Fish and Wildlife, utilizing Reid Middleton, to provide a cost-effective approach to
provide a feasibility analysis for the potential construction of rebuilding the public fishing pier at
Pier 86.  Reid Middleton, Engineers of Everett WA has been under contract to Cruise, LLP to
support their work rebuilding and expanding the Expedia Campus over the last 2 years. More
significantly, Reid Middleton performed a conditions analysis of the Pier in 2013 as Expedia was
preparing for the campus project and are therefore uniquely positioned to efficiently do this cost
and feasibility evaluation work as a continuation of their work in 2013.  An efficiently performed
analysis is also a preference of Department of Fish and Wildlife as their pledged allocation of
funds towards this project from the State of Washington will expire within this calendar year. 
Diversity in Contracting 
Seeking waiver language 
DETAILS 
The public dock structure at Pier 86 was first constructed in 1979 through a combination of state,
federal, and Port of Seattle funding. That facility has provided critical public access to the
waterfront, to neighbors walking through the Port's Centennial Park and to fishermen casting
lines from the pier. Since that time, the public pier was operated by the Port under an agreement
with WDFD. It was closed in 2017 due to safety concerns. During this time, there was also
confusion of ownership of the fishing pier.  During the process to develop the agreement to
proceed with the cost and feasibility study, the Port and Washington Department of Fish and
Wildlife worked to clarify ownership and determined that the Washington Department of Fish
and Wildlife the fishing pier structure. The Port signed a Quit Claim Bill of Sale agreement in favor
of DFW in furtherance of DFW's ownership of the fishing pier structure. Since then, Expedia
Group has opened its new campus adjoining Pier 86 and has invested substantial funds to-date
in  enhancements  and  improvements  to  the  pedestrian  and  bicycle  trails  and  shoreline
environment north of Pier 86. 

Template revised June 27, 2019 (Diversity in Contracting).

COMMISSION AGENDA  Action Item No. _10d_                               Page 3 of 6 
Meeting Date: April 13, 2021 
The parties now jointly desire to evaluate the feasibility of the renovation of the Public Pier
through a detailed due diligence exercise, as described below (the "Feasibility Analysis").  The
Feasibility Analysis would precede any determination by the parties to proceed (or not proceed)
with the possible renovation of the Public Pier. Toward this end, the parties are prepared to
provide proportional funding in support of this feasibility analysis, subject to the terms outlined
herein. 
Scope of Work 
(1)   Feasibility Analysis Elements. The Feasibility Analysis may include preparation and
evaluation of the following elements: 
o  Site Analysis and Design 
Survey 
Bathymetric survey 
Geotechnical studies 
Structural condition evaluation 
Structural design 
Zoning, regulatory and permitting analysis 
Preliminary assessment of potential impacts and mitigation
(including microalgae and eelgrass surveys) 
Feasibility of Ferry Float operations under King County Ferry
District guidelines 
Usage projections for passenger ferry 
Measures to implement security consistent with other similar
marine facilities 
Lighting plans 
Criteria for facility construction (i.e., target for useful life of
renovated Public Pier) 

o  Project Budget: 
Construction pricing estimates 
Maintenance and operational cost evaluation 
Preparation of project capital budget 
Schedule 
The timing for the feasibility analysis work will include the following: 
Site Analysis and Design: 3 months 
Project Budget: 2 months 
Permit Documents: 3 months 
Implementing Agreements: 7 months (overlapped with Permit Documents) 
Target Completion: Target would be for Site Analysis and Design and Project Budget work
to be complete by July 2021. If the parties decide to proceed, then Permit Documents
and Implementing Agreements would be completed by January 2022. 

Template revised June 27, 2019 (Diversity in Contracting).

COMMISSION AGENDA  Action Item No. _10d_                               Page 4 of 6 
Meeting Date: April 13, 2021 
Activity 
Study Completed                              3rd quarter 2021 
Funding plan and project agreements           1st Quarter 2022 
negotiated 
Construction and permit plan                    3rd Quarter 2022 
Construction start                                1th Quarter 2023 
In-use date                                       2nd Quarter 2024 
Cost Breakdown                                     This Request           Total Project 
Design                                                     $83,000             $1.000,000 
Construction                                                     $0                    TBD 
Total                                                            $83,000                    $TBD 
ALTERNATIVES AND IMPLICATIONS CONSIDERED 
Alternative 1  Do nothing.
Cost Implications: 
Pros: 
(1)   The Fishing Pier is not a Port-owned asset and is not therefore obligated to repair the
Pier.  It is possible, though unlikely, that the other partners could pursue the project
without Port funds. 
(2)   Port would save both the planning funds of $83,000 but would save a further $1M which
is the extent of funds the Port may consider putting towards the construction project. 
Cons: 
(1)   It is unlikely that without Port support this project will be pursued in the near term. 
(2)   DWF's investment of $1.75M for the project may lose its authorization from the State
of Washington as the time to use funds will have expired.  Therefore, their funds will
likely be lost to the project. 
This is not the recommended alternative. 
Alternative 2  Port pursues the redevelopment of the Pier on its own through a Public Works
project. 
Cost Implications: 
Pros: 
(1)   Port would retain control of the project. 
(2)   Port has a good deal of expertise to bring to such a project. 
Cons: 
(1)   The fishing Pier is not a Port-owned asset. It is unclear by what methods and authority
the Port would have to see the Pier rebuilt. 

Template revised June 27, 2019 (Diversity in Contracting).

COMMISSION AGENDA  Action Item No. _10d_                               Page 5 of 6 
Meeting Date: April 13, 2021 
(2)   The reconstruction of the Pier would have to be entirely reconceived as a Public Works
project, with likely higher costs and longer timeframes to completion. 
This is not the recommended alternative. 
Alternative 3 - Partner with DFW and Expedia to complete the Cost and Feasibility Analysis and
if promising continue towards mutually supporting the reconstruction project. 
Pros: 
(1)   Expedia is actively working to complete the Expedia Campus project and can effectively
jump in and complete the evaluation work as an extension of their current adjacent development
project leading to the potential reconstruction of the public fishing Pier.
(2)   Pursuing this partnership will allow DFW's already allocated funds to be used before
their authorization expires. 
(3)   The public fishing may return to Pier 86 by the Spring of 2023. 
Cons: 
(1)   Port will have to expend $83,000 to support this study at a time where cash is limited. 
(2)    Coordinating among 3 partners and their requirements is challenging and may cause
inefficiencies. 
This is the recommended alternative. 
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS 
Cost Estimate/Authorization Summary              Capital        Expense           Total 
COST ESTIMATE 
Original estimate                                          $0         $83,000         $83,000 
Previous changes  net                                    0                0                0 
Current change                                          0               0               0 
Revised estimate                                          0          83,000          83,000 
AUTHORIZATION 
Previous authorizations                                    0                0                0 
Current request for authorization                          0                0                0 
Total authorizations, including this request                  0                0                0 
Remaining amount to be authorized                    $0             $0             $0 
Annual Budget Status and Source of Funds 
This public expense project was included in the 2021 Plan of Finance with a total estimated
spending of $1,000,000 in 2022.
This project will be funded by the Tax Levy. 

Template revised June 27, 2019 (Diversity in Contracting).

COMMISSION AGENDA  Action Item No. _10d_                               Page 6 of 6 
Meeting Date: April 13, 2021 
Financial Analysis and Summary 
Project cost for analysis              $1,000,000 
Business Unit (BU)                  Maritime General 
Effect on business performance     This authorization will increase non-operational expenses
(NOI after depreciation)             by $83K in 2021.
IRR/NPV (if relevant)                N/A 
CPE Impact                       N/A 

ATTACHMENTS TO THIS REQUEST 
(1)      Funding Agreement 
(2)      PowerPoint 
PREVIOUS COMMISSION ACTIONS OR BRIEFINGS 
None 












Template revised June 27, 2019 (Diversity in Contracting).