PORT OF SEATTLE
MEMORANDUM 
COMMISSION AGENDA  STAFF BRIEFING
Item No.       7a
Date of Meeting   December 6, 2011

DATE:   November 28, 2011
TO:     Tay Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer
FROM:  Melinda Miller, Director, Portfolio Management
Darlene Robertson, Director, Harbor Services
Joseph Gellings, Seaport Senior Planner
SUBJECT: Fishermen's Terminal 20-Year Plan and Net Shed Briefing
SYNOPSIS:
The Real Estate Division is committed to the maintenance and improvement of capital
assets at Fishermen's Terminal (FT). Between 2002 to 2011 the Port invested nearly $70
million in various capital improvement projects that included the modernization of Docks
3 through 10, south and west wall replacement, the NW Dock fender system, and utility
upgrades among others.
These investments set the stage for a comprehensive assessment of all assets including
the upland buildings, which resulted in the compilation of the 20-Year Asset Condition
Assessment and Plan. Thus, the 20-Year Planning effort has been launched as an
umbrella project for the important components of the Net Shed Code Compliance project
as well as the Asset Condition Assessment. The planning process has created a
framework for considering new upland development opportunities that could contribute
to the Port's long-term goal of self-sustainability of Fishermen's Terminal. However,
unlike the discretionary decision-making for new development, the Net Shed Code
Compliance project involves a Seattle Fire Department-mandated deadline for adopting
and executing a compliance action plan.
The process has also generated the following questions:
Should the Port replace some aging buildings when financial modeling indicates a
marginal increase in net present value compared with maintaining the existing
buildings?
Should the Port pursue a ground leasing arrangement for redevelopment of
selected areas at FT?

COMMISSION AGENDA
Tay Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer
November 22, 2011
Page 2 of 19
This briefing covers some preliminary conclusions and poses several questions for which
staff seek Commission guidance. The next steps in the process are also summarized.
BACKGROUND:
Economic Significance
While Washington State's fisheries have seen significant changes in recent decades, the
majority of commercial fishers at FT continue to have a strong link to fisheries in Alaska
and an increasing presence off the continental coast including the North Pacific. The
North Pacific and Bering Sea fisheries are generally regarded as amongst the most
sustainably-managed in the world. Two advantages that FT will continue to have over
Alaskan fishing ports are freshwater moorage and proximity to a deep network of
suppliers and specialized trades. The 2009 Martin Associates Economic Impact Study
found that FT is responsible for 3,424 local jobs and $179 million in business revenue.
Planning Guidelines
Throughout the process of evaluating existing upland assets and development
opportunities staff adhered to the following planning guidelines:
1.  Supporting the fishing fleets
2.  Achieving a financial return that justifies the capital investment
3.  Achieving maximum utilization of assets
4.  Aligning the Port's triple bottom line mission
Stakeholder Outreach Program
Stakeholder outreach activities have been ongoing throughout the planning process. At
the beginning of the process, the stakeholder groups were identified as 1) the fishing
fleets, 2) upland tenants, and 3) community and industry groups. Several forums for
engagement were used ranging from one-on-one interviews, an open house, community
group meetings, a postcard survey, the creation of a subcommittee of the FT Advisory
Committee. A project website was also created. Combined with other FT news, it has
generated 1,047 email addresses which have been used for notices of project milestones.
A planning and real estate consulting firm was asked to render an assessment of the
completeness of the stakeholder outreach program. The result was supportive of our
program.
Asset Condition Assessment
The Capital Development Division and Marine Maintenance staff have completed an
Asset Condition Assessment of all FT assets. The effort identified the maintenance and
repair projects that will likely be needed to support the existing upland assets for the next

COMMISSION AGENDA
Tay Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer
November 22, 2011
Page 3 of 19
20 years. Cost estimates for this work have been developed with all dollars assigned to
specific years within the 20-year horizon.
Summary of Planning Constraints
The planning process started with an inventory of constraints on development of the site.
The primary constraints are
Land use regulations  Two bodies of land use code apply to the FT property.
The Shorelines Management Overlay places limitations on the amount of nonwater-dependent
uses that are allowed in the portion of the site governed by this
code. (See Attachment 1). The base zone regulations place limitations on the
amount of non-industrial land uses. A 2007 ordinance tightened the base zone use
restrictions and created a nonconforming use situation in which FT exceeds the
allowed size-of-use standards for the use categories of office and restaurant.
Continuing these uses above the size limit is allowed under grandfathering
provisions. However, such grandfather rights expire if the building containing the
use is demolished.
Soil conditions  The soils on the property are predominately poor soils for
construction. Our planning process assumed that any new building will require
pile foundations, which is a significant addition to the per-square-foot cost of the
building. A 2009 consultant report also points to the possibility of soil
contamination issues. Furthermore, the long history of industrial operations on the
site suggests that remediation cost contingencies should be part of any
development proforma on the site.
Low revenue services  Approximately 15% of the site is devoted to the net shed
function with lease rates in the range of $5 to $6 per square foot per year. In
addition approximately 10% of the site is devoted to the open gear storage
function with lease rates in the range of $2 to $4 per square foot per year.
Stakeholder outreach and general industry knowledge indicate that both functions
are of vital importance to the fishing fleets. However, it should be noted that
these lease rates are quite low compared to typical on-site retail and offices leases
in the range of $14 to $18 per square foot per year. One condition that provides a
small amount of planning flexibility is that not all of the net shed units are
presently leased to active fishermen. A small portion of the units are leased to
other businesses, which can be viewed as a non-essential service for FT to
provide.
Real Estate Market Research
Staff has relied on a combination of consultant recommendations and first-hand
experience with the local real estate market. The recommendations include industrial
flex space that is a common format of industrial space for which we believe there is a
strong demand in the Ship Canal area. In fact, there are many maritime businesses that
use this type of product. Also, the market for retail space is relatively strong. However,

COMMISSION AGENDA
Tay Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer
November 22, 2011
Page 4 of 19
the demand for retail is highly dependent on our marketing strategy and the actual
configuration and location of the space. The office market is presently saturated and
recovery is estimated at five to seven years into the future.
Financial Analysis
Staff developed a financial model with the intent of determining the financial
performance of the planned developments. Due to the conceptual nature of this planning
effort, the model is appropriately meant to be a high-level comparative view of the
incremental return on the Port's potential investment in the site. To identify overall
financial performance, results were aggregated into four composites (see Attachment 5)
that addressed each development zone (see Attachment 2). Financial modeling included
capital costs required to develop the property, the revenue associated with such
development, and the reversion value of the assets at the end of the 20 year analysis
period. The capital costs, which include demolition, construction, and asset management
costs where appropriate, are inflated based on the anticipated year of implementation.
Asset management costs include significant projects, such as roof and electrical system
replacements, as well as code compliance costs associated with the net sheds located in
the development zones. In addition, a capital reserve assumption was included as a proxy
for sustaining the value of the assets. The revenue streams accrue over the twenty year
analysis period, inflate over time, are based on current lease rates, and assume a certain
percentage of vacancy dependent upon asset type.  At the end of the twenty year
analysis period, the value of the assets was captured, utilizing market terminal
capitalization rates, to determine a reversion value. It is important to note that the model
does not include site-wide operating costs such as staffing, utilities, and insurance; nor
does the model include land value or the value of the existing improvements. These
factors would clearly affect the returns identified in the financial model.
Preliminary Conclusions
1.  Determination of critical functions FT is already providing the upland
functions that are the most critical to supporting the fishing fleets. A clear
message from the outreach to the fleets is that open gear storage, secured covered
storage (net sheds), and a net repair yard are the three most critically-needed
support functions for the fleets.
2.  Serviceability of buildings  While various repair projects are projected, the
Asset Condition Assessment found that all but one building is still serviceable for
its current use. The exception is the C9 ("Seattle Ship Supply") building. The
former tenant, Seattle Ship Supply, vacated the building in 1999. Its interim use
has been limited to short-term storage and bi-monthly onsite safety
training. Making the building fit for leasing again would trigger cost-prohibitive
repairs to bring the building to code including but not limited to seismic,
electrical, and Americans with Disabilities Act standards, and fire suppression
regulations.

COMMISSION AGENDA
Tay Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer
November 22, 2011
Page 5 of 19
3.  Feasibility of building new net sheds  Staff has explored alternative
configurations of net sheds including single-purpose new construction buildings
as well as newly constructed buildings that combine net sheds with other higherrevenue
uses. In both cases, however, financial analysis showed that the low
revenue from the net sheds would not cover the capital cost.
KEY MESSAGES AND ISSUES:
Net Shed Building Code Compliance
Background FT currently contains nine net shed structures that vary in age, size,
construction, and interior net locker configuration. Although the majority of these net
sheds were originally constructed to primarily accommodate cotton fishing nets to be
hung while being stored, this is no longer typically needed by commercial fishermen as
modern nets are made of synthetic materials. 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 this in turn has resulted in an existing mixed commodity storage
condition that is defined as "high-piled" per code, and 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 as part of this effort, the Seattle Fire Department
(SFD) cited the Port for various City of Seattle fire and building code violations. Since
receiving this citation letter, the Port has been working with the SFD and Department of
Planning and Development (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 implemented various programs to assist tenants with
cleaning out their net lockers and to encourage their participation in a pilot storage
program in which the Port has removed tenant constructed lofts and supplied rack
shelving units.
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 and DPD, four separate code compliant net shed storage
options were identified . The report was submitted to the SFD and DPD in February
2011, for their review and requested concurrence regarding the code compliance of the
proposed options. After further coordination, in June of 2011 the SFD and DPD
concurred that the various net shed storage options identified were compliant with the

COMMISSION AGENDA
Tay Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer
November 22, 2011
Page 6 of 19
a1pplicable 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. 
Code Compliant Net Locker Storage Options  The four code compliant net shed
storage options that are acceptable to the Seattle Fire Department are summarized below.
All of the options contain a common requirement that a two feet minimum width aisle be
maintained among the stored commodities between the entrance and rear wall in each net
locker for firefighter access purposes in the event of a fire. Another common
requirement is that hazardous materials must be stored in a certified metal cabinet.
Options 2, 3, and 4 also commonly require the monitoring of the required sprinkler
systems by an automatic alarm system. The preliminary cost estimates range from $2
million to $10 million for the nine buildings.
Note: The following illustrations reflect the general required storage limitations within a
generic net locker. They are not to scale.











1

COMMISSION AGENDA
Tay Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer
November 22, 2011
Page 7 of 19

Option 1  Single Level Non-High-Piled Storage 
This option avoids the "high-piled" storage classification, and any associated
required building improvements, by restricting the maximum storage height of
commodities to 6 feet for Group A (most) plastics and 12 feet for Class I-IV
(most other) commodities. These two groups of commodities are also required to
be segregated from one another and physically separated by a 2 feet minimum
width horizontal space wherever they are adjacent to one another. Hazardous
materials such as paints, oils, marine flares, etc. will need to be stored within a
type of metal cabinet that is specifically certified for that purpose.

COMMISSION AGENDA
Tay Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer
November 22, 2011
Page 8 of 19
Option 2  Multi-Level Non-High-Piled Storage
As in Option 1, Option 2 also avoids the "high-piled" storage classification, and
any associated required building improvements, by restricting the maximum
storage height of commodities to 6 feet for Group A (most) plastics and 12 feet
for Class I-IV (most other) commodities. These two groups of commodities are
also required to be segregated from one another and physically separated by a 2
feet minimum width horizontal space wherever they are adjacent to one another.
Hazardous materials such as paints, oils, marine flares, etc. will need to be stored
within a type of metal cabinet that is specifically certified for that purpose.
Additionally, this option includes a second level of storage, by means of an
installed structurally independent mezzanine level that may be approximately up
to half the depth of each net locker and will require a sprinkler system to be
installed underneath it. All aforementioned commodity segregation and
separation requirements apply to the mezzanine level storage as well.

COMMISSION AGENDA
Tay Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer
November 22, 2011
Page 9 of 19

Option 3  Single Level High-Piled Storage. RECOMMENDED. 
Option 3 allows "high-piled" storage (which is the current situation in the
majority of the lockers) of mixed commodities up to 15 feet in height by
installation of a false ceiling, a sprinkler system to provide coverage below the
new ceiling, and smoke/heat vents in the overall net shed building roof. Since the
stored items are allowed to be mixed, there is no segregation or separation
required between the different commodities which works well for the fishermen
and the way gear and other materials are currently stored. Hazardous materials
such as paints, oils, marine flares, etc. will need to be stored within a type of
metal cabinet that is specifically certified for that purpose.

COMMISSION AGENDA
Tay Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer
November 22, 2011
Page 10 of 19
Option 4  Multi-Level High-Piled Storage 
Option 4 is essentially the same as Option 2 with the exception that "high-piled"
mixed commodity storage is allowed underneath the mezzanine level structure by
virtue of a higher flow sprinkler system being installed below it, and smoke/heat
vents being installed in the overall net shed building's roof. Mixed commodities
are not allowed above the mezzanine level due to overall commodity density and
height limitations per the applicable codes. Hazardous materials such as paints,
oils, marine flares, etc. will need to be stored within a type of metal cabinet that is
specifically certified for that purpose.

COMMISSION AGENDA
Tay Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer
November 22, 2011
Page 11 of 19
Storage Options Evaluation and Recommendation 
Recommendation: Option 3. Staff has evaluated the four options that are acceptable to
the Seattle Fire Department using various criteria including, but not limited to, the
amount of storage provided, the impacts to tenants and staff in understanding,
implementing and enforcing code requirements for each option, and the cost of the
required improvements. After consideration of all these factors, staff is recommending
that the Port proceed with a net sheds improvement project to implement Option 3 and
achieve the required code compliance. This option was selected for the following major
reasons:
Option 3 most closely matches the way the majority of lockers are currently used
i.e. the existing mixed commodities storage condition within the net sheds and as
such, provides the greatest flexibility in meeting tenants' storage needs.
Option 3 is the only option that does not require segregation of and separation
between different classes of stored commodities such as plastic fenders for vessels
and other plastics needing to be separated from non-plastic materials and gear and
at differing heights. This alleviates the very challenging requirement for tenants
and staff to be able to differentiate between different commodity types for
segregation purposes, ensuring the different height limits required between
commodities, as well the never ending effort necessary to maintain and/or
enforce long-term code compliance in 242 lockers.
Option 3 is the only option that does not require overall storage master planning
within each net shed in order to maintain the required separation between stored
commodities in adjacent net lockers.
Option 3's preliminary estimated improvement costs are in the range of $5.7 to
$6.4 million to bring nine buildings into code compliance.
Staff will be further developing an implementation plan and preliminary cost estimate for
the preferred option and returning to Commission early 2012 to request funding for
design, permitting and a more detailed cost estimate.
Suggested New Fishing Fleet Support Services for the 20-year plan
In addition to confirming the importance of net sheds, open storage, and net repair, the
stakeholders suggested that eight new fleet support services are needed. Staff has been
investigating each of these with a focus on 1) up-front capital costs, and 2) utilization
rates and cost recovery. The suggestion was that the Port should undertake the
investment in providing these services and they are evaluated below in that context.

COMMISSION AGENDA
Tay Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer
November 22, 2011
Page 12 of 19
Risks to the Port would be eliminated if the Port ground leased to private party to
establish these services but no such proposal has emerged.
Attachment 3 is a graphical depiction of the process undertaken to study all discrete
planning strategies including the eight suggested new services. The graphic reflects four
different milestones in the planning process, which are termed "feasibility screens." As
shown in the diagram staff is recommending no further consideration of four of the new
support services. Further detail is as follows:
Covered work areas  A roof-only structure available to all moorage customers
for bench work or minor fabrication. This idea has had support to the extent that
hot work that was occurring within net shed units and is no longer allowed so this
facility may be an attractive alternative. Staff is concerned about the upfront
capital costs and utilization rates. Only 10 percent of postcard survey respondents
stated that they would pay "a reasonable fee" to use the facility.
Covered net repair  A roof-only structure. An enhancement of the existing net
repair yard in that it offers shelter from the elements as well as better net support
via overhead rigging. Staff is concerned about upfront capital costs and utilization
rates. Only 6 percent of postcard survey respondents stated that they would pay
to use the facility.
Farmer's market stalls  The suggestion was for a Port-managed farmer's market
at some regular interval in some multi-purpose outdoor area. The event would
help those fishers interested in marketing their own product. Staff is concerned
about low utilization rates. Only 8 percent of postcard survey respondents stated
that they would pay to use the facility. Feedback from operators of existing
markets and various associations that represent the market community indicate
that there may already be over-saturation of the current market for farmer's
markets.
Wash down facilities  The suggestion was for a permanent facility for processing
fish. Staff is concerned about upfront capital costs, utilization rates, and the
feasibility of securing health department permits. Only 8 percent of postcard
survey respondents stated that they would pay to use the facility. Staff
recommends no further consideration.
Smokehouse  The suggestion was for a permanent facility for smoking seafood
products. Staff is concerned about upfront capital costs and utilization rates.
Only 6 percent of postcard survey respondents stated that they would pay to use
the facility. Staff recommends no further consideration.
Cold storage  The suggestion was for cold storage facilities available to moorage
customers. Staff is concerned about utilization rates and management issues.
Only 12 percent of postcard survey respondents stated that they would pay to use
the facility. Staff recommends no further consideration.
Large scale ice machine  The suggestion was for an ice machine sized to supply
the ice needs of a small fishing boat such as a gillnetter or a troller. Staff is
concerned about upfront capital costs and utilization rates. Only 12 percent of

COMMISSION AGENDA
Tay Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer
November 22, 2011
Page 13 of 19
postcard survey respondents stated that they would pay to use the facility. Staff
recommends no further consideration.
Conference center  The suggestion was for a facility catering to commercial
fishing and other maritime organization with conference space needs. Staff is
concerned about upfront capital costs and utilization rates. Staff believes that the
Port would most logically pursue such a venture in conjunction with development
of new offices at FT. However, at this conjuncture new office development does
not appear to be feasible.

COMMISSION AGENDA
Tay Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer
November 22, 2011
Page 14 of 19
Redevelopment Concepts Examined
The current tenants of leased building space at FT are a mix of businesses that are related
to maritime industry and those that are not. The outreach process suggests that new
developments will attract a similar mix and that the industrial character of FT will not be
eroded. Two logical development pads were explored. The vicinity of Building C9 is a
logical development pad because Building C9 is no longer serviceable, the net shed pair
of N3 and N4 could be demolished to enlarge the pad, and the waterfront location could
be an asset to potential tenants. This led to designation of the "Waterfront Yard
Development Zone" as shown in Attachment 2. A second logical development pad is
centered on Building C12 ("Bank Building"). That footprint could be expanded with the
demolition of the net shed pair of N7 and N8 and the combined pad could attract tenants
with its visibility to the considerable traffic on Emerson Street. This led to the
designation of the "Parking Lot Development Zone" and the "Emerson Net Sheds
Development Zone" per Attachment 2.
As stated above not all net sheds are presently leased to active fishers. There is some
fluctuation in the portion that are leased to active fishers but historic trends suggest that
two of the nine net sheds could be demolished without an impact to the fleets.

COMMISSION AGENDA
Tay Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer
November 22, 2011
Page 15 of 19
After identifying the two logical development pads the land use regulations played the
biggest role in defining the actual development scenarios. Industrial flex space is
unlimited in size and has high demand. Retail space has relatively strong demand but
only 15,000 square feet can be added due to the non-industrial size-of-use restrictions.
One scenario emphasized visibility along Emerson by demolishing net shed buildings N7
and N8 and putting a combination of retail and industrial flex in along Emerson Street as
well as more industrial flex at the current C9 ("Seattle Ship Supply") location. However,
a better financial performance came from building 40,000 square feet of retail and
industrial flex space on the waterfront in the footprints of net shed buildings N3, N4, and
the C9 building. This would be configured as two buildings of 20,000 square feet each as
shown below. Since the retail is restricted to 15,000 square feet, it is assumed that it
would be clustered together in the west building  closer to the retail core of the property.


5K sf industrial
flex 

15K sf retail 

20K sf
industrial flex

COMMISSION AGENDA
Tay Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer
November 22, 2011
Page 16 of 19
Ground leasing is a potential strategy to accomplish new development while avoiding the
higher costs associated with a Port-managed development process. Possible
disadvantages are the Port's reduced control over the ongoing management and
maintenance of the area and the potential for operational conflict over time. The
boundaries of two different ground leasing concepts are shown below.

Ground lease
boundaries






Ground lease
boundaries

COMMISSION AGENDA
Tay Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer
November 22, 2011
Page 17 of 19

Staff also examined the development possibilities under a hypothetical rezone of the
property or a portion of a property to a zone designation that is less restrictive of
commercial uses. Various scenarios featuring office, retail and incubator space were
modeled. However, the financial performance of the scenarios did not merit further
consideration of a rezone at this time.
Economic Impact Considerations
Staff has been coordinating this process with the ongoing Terminal 91 planning process
and it is recognized that economic impact is a key driver of the development schemes in
the Terminal 91 process. Similar to Terminal 91, there is already substantial economic
impact generated by the fishing fleets moored at FT. This is due to the jobs multiplier
effect associated with the fishing vessels that homeport at FT. Differing from Terminal
91, the amount of land available for new development at FT cannot compare with the
amount of vacant land and corresponding job creation potential at Terminal 91. As a
result it appears that the best economic impact strategy for FT is continued protection of
the fishing fleet moorage business.

COMMISSION AGENDA
Tay Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer
November 22, 2011
Page 18 of 19
FINANCIAL MODELING OF DEVELOPMENT SCENARIOS:
The table below summarizes the financial performance by zone and by total of each of
the four proposed development composites. As constituted, Composites 2 through 4
result in a positive NPV that can be compared to Composite 1 (Maintain or Status Quo).
The financial projections for each option; however, are best understood by separately
examining the different development zones. In preparing the four development
composites, staff envisioned that any recommended option will likely be a hybrid of two
or more of the initial options and that feedback from the Commission and further
refinement of the financial modeling will be necessary before developing a firm staff
recommendation.
FISHERMEN'S TERMINAL 20 YEAR PLAN
Summary Table
Composite #1:         Composite #2:         Composite #3:         Composite #4:
Current Code, Major    Ground Lease Waterfront  Ground Lease Emerson Net
Zone                              Maintain
Investments        Yard & Bank Building     Sheds & Bank Building
Waterfront Yard - Current
Option   #1 Maintain w/Demo      #3 Ind Flex/Retail        #2 Ground Lease      #1 Maintain w/Demo
Code
Port Investment      $4,572,970           $13,169,264           $1,052,152            $4,572,970
NPV     ($798,864)        ($2,252,288)        $2,221,064         ($798,864)
Nordby Building                Option      #1 Maintain           #1 Maintain           #1 Maintain           #1 Maintain
Port Investment      $1,316,846            $1,316,846            $1,316,846            $1,316,846
NPV     $1,615,829         $1,615,829         $1,615,829         $1,615,829
Emerson Net Sheds             Option      #1 Maintain          #1 Maintain          #1 Maintain         #2 Ground Lease
Port Investment      $2,057,270            $2,057,270            $2,057,270            $462,835
NPV     $59,655          $59,655          $59,655          $924,151
Parking Lot                    Option      #1 Maintain            #1 Maintain          #2 Ground Lease         #2 Ground Lease
Port Investment      $2,604,272            $2,604,272            $2,197,898            $2,197,898
NPV     $640,027         $640,027         $1,214,388         $1,214,388
Total                   Port Investment      $10,551,359           $19,147,653            $6,624,167            $8,550,549
IRR        11.0%               9.4%               17.90%              13.2%
NPV - 10% Discount Rate      $2,160,150           $1,555,380           $5,561,821           $3,487,051
NPV - Zone Specific       $1,516,648              $63,224              $5,110,936             $2,955,504
NPV - 7% Discount Rate      $4,896,245            $5,600,852            $8,745,055            $6,345,387

COMMISSION AGENDA
Tay Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer
November 22, 2011
Page 19 of 19
OTHER DOCUMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH THIS BRIEFING:
Attachment 1: Land Use Regulations
Attachment 2: Development Zones
Attachment 3: Concept Screening Summary
Attachment 4: PowerPoint
NEXT STEPS:
For the Net Shed Code Compliance portion of this effort, the Port must identify which
option it plans to proceed with and submit a plan to the SFD. Staff would further develop
the implementation plan for this option and preliminary cost estimates and return to the
Commission in the first quarter of 2012 with a request to fund the design, permitting, and
more detailed cost estimation.
The intent of the 20 Year Plan process is to arrive at a strategy to guide investment in the
upland facilities. After Commission feedback and guidance and additional outreach to
existing tenants, the community, and other stakeholders, the planning work will be
refined to a recommended course of action.