PORT OF SEATTLE 
MEMORANDUM 
COMMISSION AGENDA             Item No.      6f 
ACTION ITEM             Date of Meeting    June 5, 2012 

DATE:    May 30, 2012 
TO:      Tay Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer 
FROM:   Darlene Robertson, Director, Harbor Services, Real Estate Division 
Melinda Miller, Director, Portfolio Management, Real Estate Division 
SUBJECT: Fishermen's Terminal Net Shed Buildings Code Compliance Improvements for
Project Design and Permitting (CIP #800045) 
Amount of This Request:  $650,000        Source of Funds:    Tax Levy 
Preliminary Estimated Total Project Cost: $4,700,000 seven (7) buildings to $6,000,000 nine
(9) buildings for recommended Option 3. 
ACTION REQUESTED:
Request Commission authorization for the Chief Executive Officer to proceed with design,
permitting, and project management for recommended Option 3 for the Fishermen's Terminal
(FT) Net Sheds Buildings Code Compliance Improvements in the amount of $650,000. Staff
will return to Commission at the end of 2012 with additional design and cost information
including construction details. The preliminary estimated total project cost is $4,700,000 for 7
net shed buildings to $6,000,000 for all nine net shed buildings per the recommended storage
Option #3. 
SYNOPSIS:
Fishermen's Terminal is the homeport of the North Alaska Fishing Fleet, the hub of the maritime
industry on the Lake Washington Ship Canal and a small but significant economic engine for
Puget Sound. In 2007, John Martin Associates estimated that there were 3,500 jobs tied to FT.
Jobs associated with FT generated $356,000,000 in wages and salaries. Local business received
$180,000,000 in revenue from purchases by the FT fishing fleet, not including the landed value
of the fish catch. State and local governments received $44,000,000 of tax revenue generated by
the activity at FT.

COMMISSION AGENDA 
Tay Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer 
May 30, 2012 
Page 2 of 11 
The FT 25-Year Plan and Century Agenda: 
The net shed code compliance project has been moving forward in concert with the FT 25-year
planning process. The planning effort included: looking at how the Port can continue to support
the North Pacific fishing fleet; analyzing the adequacy of all existing assets; and creating a
framework for considering new upland development opportunities that could contribute to the
Port's long-term goal of self-sustainability of FT. Unlike the discretionary decision-making for
new development, the Net Shed Buildings Code Compliance Improvements project involves an
SFD-mandated deadline for adopting and executing a compliance action plan. Further details are
discussed below. 
Maintaining FT as a welcoming, safe and user-friendly facility helps to ensure the viability of the
fishing industry in the Seattle area. The FT net shed building improvements supports the Port's
goal of ensuring the ongoing vitality of FT while providing necessary services to fishermen. In
April 2009, the Seattle Fire Department (SFD) inspected the net sheds and cited the Port for
various fire and building code violations. Since that time the Port, SFD and the Department of
Planning & Development (DPD) have worked closely together to address the code compliance 
and safety issues. We are now at a point when a decision must be made on which of the
improvement options will be selected to address the SFD mandated requirement that the
buildings be brought up to code. We must show progress toward bringing the net shed buildings
into compliance with the code. 
The fate of the net shed buildings has been discussed with the Commission for a number of
years. F unds for the code improvements have been in the Real Estate capital plan since 2009,
and the evolving plans have been reviewed with the Commission annually. For example, in
March 2009, staff briefed the Commission at the Working Waterfront Commission meeting in
Ballard on the existing storage conditions in the net sheds. The SFD Fire Marshall provided a
brief testimony.
SFD and DPD and Port staff have been working for some time to interpret the codes and develop
compliant options. Specific options were identified in 2011, which the SFD and DPD agreed are
code compliant, and they were presented to the Commission on December 6, 2011, including
staff's recommendation of Option 3. The only other financially feasible option is Option 1. The
other two options (2 and 4) are not feasible given the high costs of the required improvements. 
Today we are requesting authorization to proceed with design of Option 3 as it most closely
matches the fishermen's current use of the net lockers, provides the greatest guaranteed amount
of gross storage among the four options, is the most realistic for both the Port and the tenants to
comply with and does not require the Port to be the enforcement agency. Option 3 is the only 
option that does not require tenants and staff to differentiate between different classes of stored
commodities. We will engage SFD and DPD in the design. As mentioned, staff will return to
Commission at the end of the year with additional information on design, scope of work, costs
and request funding for construction.

COMMISSION AGENDA 
Tay Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer 
May 30, 2012 
Page 3 of 11 
BACKGROUND: 
FT Net Sheds and the 25-Year Plan: 
As shared at the December 6, 2011Commission briefing, one of the guidelines in the 25-year
plan is that the Port would continue to provide critical inside net shed locker storage in support
of the commercial fishing fleets. Given that, the planning effort has included a comprehensive
analysis of the existing nine net shed buildings. It was determined that all nine net shed
buildings are serviceable for their current use. Various scenarios were explored from
maintaining existing buildings, to replacing buildings with new construction, remodeling 
interiors, to newly constructed buildings with a second level of other higher revenue generating
uses. In each of the cases involving replacement of netted units as new construction, the
financial analysis showed that these alternatives were not financially feasible and would not
cover capital costs.
Staff also identified various conceptual planning scenarios for the landside, several of which call
for demolishing two net shed buildings including the three scenarios featured in the December 6,
2011 Commission briefing. This can be done given that approximately 80% of the net sheds are
utilized by active commercial fishermen and the other 20% are upland tenants and the general
public. As the Commission has not yet made a decision on the FT 25-year plan and potential
development scenarios, staffs' recommendation is to phase the compliance building
improvements plan such that the four potentially-demolished buildings are the last phase. (The
four net sheds are in limbo because some planning scenarios demolish the pair of buildings Net
Shed 3 and Net Shed 4, while other scenarios demolish the pair of buildings Net Shed 7 and Net
Shed 8). This phasing strategy would allow Commission enough time to make the necessary
decisions on the Century Agenda and FT 25-year plan. Staff would begin with the code
improvements to the five buildings that would remain in any development scenario. 
With the potential demolition of two of the net sheds, the proposed net sheds improvements
project likely will only involve seven of the existing nine net sheds and the overall project cost
would be reduced accordingly. Code compliance improvements to the two net sheds that have
been identified as potentially being demolished would be bid as alternate final construction
phases in order to allow the FT 25-Year Plan effort the maximum additional time for
Commission to decide on a final development scenario. These details would be discussed further
with the Commission when staff returns at the end of the year with further design, costs and
construction details. 
Next Steps on the FT 25-Year Plan: 
Since December, staff has continued to seek input on the 25-year landside planning options from
FTAC and other stakeholders. Staff members have also explored whether FT operational
changes could contribute to the Port's long-term goal of self-sufficiency of FT, and revised the
financial model to extend the cost and revenue projections to a 25-year horizon to match the
horizon used in the Century Agenda process. Moving forward, staff members will be refining

COMMISSION AGENDA 
Tay Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer 
May 30, 2012 
Page 4 of 11 
the assumptions in each planning scenario to make the financial model as accurate as possible.
Staff will return to Commission by the end of 2012 to discuss the landside planning scenarios. 
FT Net Sheds Code Compliance: 
As mentioned, the improvements being requested today are safety and code compliance
requirements. The Port received a citation from the SFD in April 2009 identifying code
violations in the FT net sheds. Working with the SFD, the DPD, and the Fishermen's Terminal
Advisory Committee (FTAC), staff completed a complex evaluation of code compliant options
for storage lockers. This included  performing a detailed interpretation of the applicable and
complex building and fire codes. A number of Port departments, such as Risk Management,
Engineering, and Marine Maintenance, were involved in this effort. The Port, with the assistance 
of a fire protection engineering consultant, produced a fire protection report involving the
determination of potential code compliant net locker storage options and a comprehensive
evaluation and cost estimation of the options. Four options were identified. 
Both SFD & DPD concurred that the four determined storage options (identified as Options 1, 2,
3 & 4) were compliant with the code. These options were in turn discussed in detail with FTAC 
at several meetings and summarized in the December 6, 2011 Commission Meeting. Based on a
thorough review, of the options, staff's recommendation is to proceed with Option 3 for the
following reasons: 
It best meets the current storage situation by fishermen considered by SFD to be mixed
commodity, high-piled storage; 
It provides the most realistic required volume of the options and meets other evaluation
criteria listed in the Background section below; 
It does not put the Port in the role of enforcement agency to ensure storage of commodities
are in compliance with codes on a perpetual basis 

Today we are requesting authorization to proceed with design of Option 3 and show progress
toward bringing the net shed buildings into compliance with the code. We will engage SFD and
DPD in the design. As mentioned, staff will return to Commission at the end of the year with
additional information on design, scope of work, costs and request funding for construction. 
ADDITIONAL BACKGROUND: 
FT currently has nine net shed structures that vary in age, size, construction, and interior net
locker configuration. The majority of these net sheds were originally constructed when cotton
fishing nets were the norm and were hung from the ceiling while in storage. As modern nets are
made of quick-drying synthetic materials, the current ceiling height is no longer needed for net
storage.

COMMISSION AGENDA 
Tay Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer 
May 30, 2012 
Page 5 of 11 
Consequently, over the past 40 years, tenants have constructed non-permitted structural
modifications, such as lofts and stairways, within many net lockers in order to better utilize their
available storage height. The overall quantity and types of items being stored in the net sheds
have increased accordingly and have in turn resulted in an existing mixed commodity storage
condition that is defined as "high-piled" per the City Fire Code. The condition is subject to
greater regulatory restrictions and/or building improvements than are currently in place. 
Recognizing the need to correct a potentially hazardous storage condition, the Port of Seattle
began working with FT tenants in 2006 to address the non-permitted interior structural additions
within net lockers as well as storage policy violations. After inspecting the net sheds in April
2009, the SFD cited the Port for various City of Seattle fire and building code violations. Since
receiving this citation letter, the Port has worked with the SFD and DPD to develop a viable plan
to bring all of the net sheds into compliance with the applicable fire and building codes as
quickly as possible. As part of this effort, FT Operations has corrected many of the policy
violations by enforcing storage policies, implementing various programs to assist tenants with
cleaning out their net lockers and encouraging their participation in a pilot storage program in
which the Port has removed tenant constructed lofts and supplied rack shelving units. To date,
approximately 100 net lockers have had tenant lofts removed from them prior to and as part of
the net locker pilot storage program, and approximately 94 remain to have the loft structures
removed. 
Additionally, the Port procured the services of a fire protection engineering consultant to assist
staff in determining and evaluating code compliant net shed storage options. After numerous
meetings with SFD, DPD, and FTAC, four separate code compliant net shed storage options
were identified as follows. The costs shown below are for nine buildings, however, as
mentioned, staff would proceed with seven buildings pending decision by Commission on the FT
25-year planning scenarios. Note: as the buildings were built at different times and have
differing configurations, the design requirements will vary by building. In other words the
improvements will not be "cookie cutter" so-to-speak. For example, some buildings will not
require false ceilings or the same type of sprinkler improvements.
Code Compliant Storage Options: 
Option 1. Non-high-piled Storage, Single Level (illustration provided on attached slides) 
Preliminary estimated cost: Approximately $2,000,000 
Code Requirements: 
Segregation of commodities by Class I-IV and Group A Plastics 
Storage height limitation of 6 feet maximum for Group A Plastics commodities 
Storage height limitation of 12 feet maximum for Class I-IV commodities 
Maintenance of 2 feet minimum wide aisle between entrance and rear of each net locker
storage level as well as between commodity types 
Potential net locker storage height limit guidance marking and/or signage 
Master planning within each net shed building to coordinate required commodities
separation between adjacent net lockers per code

COMMISSION AGENDA 
Tay Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer 
May 30, 2012 
Page 6 of 11 
Option 2. Nonhigh-piled Storage, Multi-level (illustration attached) 
Preliminary estimated cost: Approximately $8,700,000 
Code Requirements: 
Installation of independent structural mezzanine level within overall net shed 
Segregation of Class I-IV and Group A Plastics commodities 
Storage height limitation of 6 feet maximum for Group A Plastics commodities 
Storage height limitation of 12 feet maximum for Class I-IV commodities 
Maintenance of 4 feet minimum separation between commodities underneath and in front
of mezzanine level structure 
Master planning within each net shed building to coordinate required commodities
separation between adjacent net lockers 
Option 3. High-piled, Mixed Commodity Storage, Single Level (illustration attached) 
Preliminary estimated cost: Approximately $6,000,000 
Code Requirements: 
Installation of 20 feet high false ceiling within net shed 
Installation of new sprinkler system below false ceiling within net shed 
Installation of heat and smoke vents in net shed roof 
Installation of fire alarm system within overall net shed for monitoring of sprinkler
systems 
Storage height limitation of 15 feet maximum for mixed commodities 
Maintenance of 2 feet minimum wide aisle between entrance and rear of each net locker 
Potential net locker storage height limit guidance marking and/or signage 
Option 4. High-piled Storage, Multi-level (illustration attached) 
Preliminary estimated cost: Approximately $9,700,000 
Code Requirements: 
Installation of independent structural mezzanine level within overall net shed 
Installation of sprinkler system below mezzanine level structure 
Installation of heat and smoke vents in overall net shed roof 
Installation of fire alarm system within overall net shed for monitoring of sprinkler
systems 
Separation and segregation of Class I-IV and Group A Plastics commodities 
Storage height limitation of 6 feet maximum for Group A Plastics commodities 
Storage height limitation of 12 feet maximum for Class I-IV commodities 
Storage height limitation of 12 feet maximum for mixed commodities (under mezzanine) 
Maintenance of 2 feet minimum wide aisle between entrance and rear of each net locker
storage level as well as between commodity types 
Maintenance of 4 feet minimum separation between commodities underneath and in front
of mezzanine level structure 
Potential net locker storage height limit guidance striping and/or signage

COMMISSION AGENDA 
Tay Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer 
May 30, 2012 
Page 7 of 11 
Master planning within each net shed building to coordinate required commodities
separation between adjacent net lockers 
A FT fire protection report was submitted to the SFD and DPD in February 2011 for review, and
concurrence was requested regarding the code compliance of the four proposed options listed
above. After further coordination, in June 2011 , the SFD and DPD concurred that the four 
identified net shed storage options were compliant with the applicable fire and building codes
and could therefore be used as a basis for developing a net shed improvement project design for
eventual permit review by the City prior to construction. 
Staff subsequently evaluated the four identified code compliant storage options using various
criteria including, but not limited to: 
the volume of storage provided and how well it meets the tenants' needs 
the impacts to tenants and staff in understanding storage/code requirements 
implementing and enforcing code requirements for each option 
the cost of the required improvements 
After consideration of all these factors, Option 3 was determined to be the best all-around and
most realistic in meeting the evaluation criteria. All four options were discussed in detail with
FTAC; and subsequently recommended by staff to the Commission on December 6, 2011, as
part of the FT 25-Year Plan and Net Sheds briefing. 
Recommendation: 
Option 3 is being proposed for the following primary reasons: 
Option 3 is the option that most closely replicates the way the majority of lockers are
currently used by commercial fishermen, i.e., a "high-piled", mixed commodities storage
condition, within the net sheds and as such, provides a feasible storage volume and best 
meets tenants' storage needs. 
Option 3 is the only option that does not require tenants and staff to differentiate between
different classes of stored commodities such as Group A Plastics items made from
polyethylene, ABS, acrylic, butyl rubber, and PVC (greater than 15% plasticized) versus
Groups B and C Plastics items made from silicone rubber, fluoroplastics, melamine, and
PVC (less than 15% plasticized) for example, in order to segregate, horizontally separate, and
store them under different height limitations according to the code. This avoids a very
challenging requirement for tenants and staff as well as the perpetual effort necessary to
maintain and enforce long-term storage code compliance in the net lockers. Another
alternative for segregation would be to require all plastics to be stored in the marked area at
the 6' height and this would reduce the volume available even further than it already will be.

COMMISSION AGENDA 
Tay Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer 
May 30, 2012 
Page 8 of 11 
Option 3 is the only option that does not require an overall storage master plan within each of
the 242 net sheds in order to maintain the code required separation between stored
commodities in adjacent net lockers. 
Because of the factors listed above, Option 3 is the most realistic for tenants and staff to achieve,
and maintain, long-term storage code compliance within the FT net sheds.
PROJECT JUSTIFICATION: 
The improvements are a safety and code compliance requirement as cited by the SFD. The
construction of the proposed FT Net Sheds Code Compliance Improvements project will enable
the Port to comply with legal requirements, address potentially unsafe storage conditions, and
meet its customers' needs to the best extent possible within the identified storage options.
Additionally, continuing the net sheds as a service and viable asset is an essential element in
meeting fishing customers' needs, maintaining the fleet at FT and helping to achieve the Port's
Century Agenda goal to "double the economic value of the fishing and maritime cluster". 
PROJECT SCOPE OF WORK AND SCHEDULE: 
The work to be completed per this requested initial funding is the project design, permitting,
construction planning, and the preparation of construction bid documents. 
Construction Scope of Work for Option 3: 
The proposed future building improvements will generally consist of the installation of an 
approximately 20 feet high false ceiling where required (some net sheds' ceilings are already
near the necessary 20 feet height) , an associated sprinkler system extension or addition under
this ceiling, roof heat/smoke vents, and a fire alarm system for monitoring the sprinkler systems
within each net shed. The design work will look at the requirements for each building. As the
building configurations are different, the improvements will not be a "cookie cutter" approach. 
Schedule: 
The project improvements design and the final construction cost estimates are anticipated to be
completed by early 2013. Staff will subsequently return to Commission in early 2013 for
construction funding approval. Construction would start in mid-2013 with an anticipated
duration of up to 3 years. Once Commission approves the design, the Port will meet with the
SFD & DPD regarding the overall final schedule to bring the net sheds into code compliance.

COMMISSION AGENDA 
Tay Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer 
May 30, 2012 
Page 9 of 11 
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: 
Note: the following information assumes worse case and includes nine buildings. As
mentioned, the preliminary cost estimate for seven buildings is approximately $4,700,000. 
Budget/Authorization Summary:                              Capital 
Previous Authorizations for this project                               $25,000 
Current request for capital project authorization                         $625,000 
Total Authorizations, including this request                           $650,000 
Estimated remaining budget to be authorized                       $5,350,000 
Total Preliminary Estimated Project Cost                          $6,000,000 
Note: A separate but related expense project to evaluate and identify options to bring the net sheds into code 
compliance was previously authorized in the amount of $500,000. Of the amount authorized for the expense work,
approximately $353,000 has been spent to date. 
Project Cost Breakdown:                            This Request 
Construction                                                   $0 
Construction Management                                      $0 
Design                                                 $400,000 
Project Management                                     $200,000 
Permitting                                                 $50,000 
State & Local Taxes (estimated)                                      $0 
Total                                                     $650,000 
Budget Status and Source of Funds: 
The project was included in the 2012 Draft Plan of Finance under Business Plan Prospective 
CIP #C800045, FT Net Shed Code Compliance Improvements, in the amount of $3,750,000 
which assumed seven net shed buildings. Additional amounts needed to fund the overall
estimated project cost of $4,700,000 for seven buildings to $6,000,000 for nine buildings are
available in the Contingency Renewal and Replacement CIP #C800216. The source of funds
will be the tax levy. 
Financial     Compliance 
Analysis and
Summary:CIP
Category 
Project Type   Regulatory 
Risk adjusted  8.0% 
discount rate

COMMISSION AGENDA 
Tay Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer 
May 30, 2012 
Page 10 of 11 
Key risk      Capital costs increase due to unforeseen needs or higher than planned costs. 
factors         Life of assets is less than 25 years. 
Revenues not met due to changes in competitive forces or a drop in
occupancy. 
Project cost   $6,000,000 is utilized for the analysis and is for nine buildings. Preliminary
for analysis    cost estimate for seven buildings is approximately $4,700,000. 
Business Unit  Harbor Services Group  Fishermen's Terminal 
(BU) 
Effect on     This code compliance project will not generate any incremental revenue.
business     However, the project is necessary to keep the FT Net Sheds in-service and thus
performance   will preserve revenues generated for the remaining useful life of the sheds. 
$000's               2016    2017   2018    2019     2020     2021
Effect on Business Performance following completion of Code Compliance Project
NOI                    575    586    601      616         631         631 
Depreciation                 (200)        (200)        (200)          (200)      (200)          (200)
NOI After Depreciation:     375    386    401       416          431          431 
IRR/NPV 
Remaining   NPV     IRR   Payback
Life of Net (in $000's)           (in years)
Sheds
25 years   ($1,577)    4.0%     17
40 years    ($663)    6.3%     17
BUSINESS PLAN OBJECTIVES: 
This project is aligned with the business plan objectives to maintain safe facilities and assets and
provide customers with compelling value. It is needed to continue to provide material, gear and
equipment storage as required by commercial fishing tenants at Fishermen's Terminal. It also
contributes toward the Century Agenda goal to maintain the fishing fleet at Fishermen's and
work toward "doubling the economic value of the fishing and maritime cluster." 
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED AND THEIR IMPLICATIONS: 
Alternative 1: Do nothing. The improvements to the buildings are a code requirement and
therefore, doing nothing is not an option if we are to continue to provide the fishermen with the
service. Without completion of this project, the Port will not resolve the existing building and
fire code violations, will risk the potential of SFD red tagging the buildings nor will it meet
commercial fishing customers' net shed storage needs. For these reasons, Alternative 1 is not
recommended. 
Alternative 2: Complete the required code improvements by implementing storage Option 1, 2
or 4, as shared at the December 6, 2011 Commission briefing. As addressed in the Background
section above, these options all require segregation of, and separation between, different classes

COMMISSION AGENDA 
Tay Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer 
May 30, 2012 
Page 11 of 11 
and types of stored commodities by tenants; places the Port in the enforcement role, as well as
consequently requiring a master plan for each building in order to maintain the required
separation between commodities in adjacent net lockers. As such, they would be challenging at
best to achieve and maintain long-term storage code compliance within the net sheds. Therefore, 
Alternative 2 is not recommended. 
Alternative 3: Recommended. Complete the required code improvements by implementing 
Option 3, as shared at the December 6, 2011 Commission briefing. As mentioned above in the
Background section, Option 3 best meets the current storage gear utilization by fishermen,
requires no segregation of various types of commodities and plastics and does not place the Port
in the enforcement role, and does not require a master plan for each building. It provides more
volume than the other three options. This is the recommended Alternative. 
OTHER DOCUMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH THIS REQUEST: 
April 14, 2009 FT net sheds citation letter from the Seattle Fire Department 
PowerPoint presentation 
PREVIOUS COMMISSION ACTIONS OR BRIEFINGS: 
On March 10, 2009, as part of the Working Waterfront roundtable discussion held at the
Nordic Center in Ballard, a briefing was provided to the Commission regarding the need to
address the existing net shed storage concerns at Fishermen's Terminal. 
On April 12, 2011, the Commission authorized increasing the budget of the FT Net Sheds
Code Compliance Effort expense project from $300,000 to $500,000. 
On December 6, 2011, as part of the FT 25-Year Plan and Net Sheds briefing, a summary of
four net shed storage code compliance options identified as a result of the FT Net Shed Code
Compliance effort, was provided to the Commission along with a recommendation that
Option 3 be implemented as a capital improvement project to achieve the required code
compliance.