HomeMy WebLinkAbout047Michelle Farfan
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Hollinger, Kristy < khollinger@eaest.com>
Monday, April06, 2015 1:48 PM
David W. Joh nson (djoh nson @co jefferson.wa.us);'peckassoc@comcast.net'
Schipanski, Rich
Pleasant Harbor - Comment Response Instructions
Comment Response Assignments.docx;Appendix S_Economic Impact Report, Part 1.pdf;
Responding to Draft SEIS Comments.docx; Planning Commission Public Comment
12-03-2015.pdf
Hi David and Craig,
As discussed, attached is a document with some basic instructions on responding to comments. Also, I realized I forgot
to include the meeting transcript in the list and the package of letters I sent you last week. That is attached for your
review as well, and comment assignments for the transcript have been added to the Comment Assignment list. Most of
the comments from the meeting are assigned to EA.
Craig, did you say that you will send out the package of letters, comment assignments and memo to the appropriate
team members?
lhavealsoincludedtheAppendixthatwetookoutoftheDraftSElSbyMichael K.Evans. Let'splantoresolveastrategy
forrespondingtotheFiscalcommentsonournextMondaycall. lnthemeantime, lcanpulloutsomeofthemainfiscal
comments and circulate them so we are all on the same page about what needs to be addressed.
Thanks -
Kristy M. Hollinger
Planner
Kristy
ffi
EA Engineering, Science and Technology, lnc., PBC
2200 Sixth Ave, Suite 707 | Seattle, WA 98121
(t) 206.452.5350 ext. 1726 | (0 206.443.7646
khollineer@eaest.com
http://www.eaest.com
a.
fi ,"tor" printing, think about ENVTRONMENTAL responsibility
1
PLEASANT HARBOR F!NAL SEIS
COMMENT RESPONSE ASSIGNMENTS
Fiscal
Letter 7, Comment 1, 8, 10, L2, L3,74
Letter 8, Comment 5
Letter 9, Comment 17
Letter 29, Comment 5
Letter 38, Comment 73, 2L, 24
Letter 40, Comment 6
Letter 47, Comment 5
Letter 7, Comments t, 2, 3, 4, 5,7, 9, 11., 12, 74, 17, 34, 37
Transcript: Comments 11, 30
TENW
Letter 7, Comments 15, 16, 18, 19, 36
Letter 8, Comment 8
Letter 9, Comment 18, 19
Letter 12, Comment 4
Letter 14, Comment 5
Letter 15, Comment 2, 3
Letter 34, Comment 3
Letter 37, Comment 4
Letter 38, Commenl2,3, 4
Letter 40, Comment 4, 5
Letter 42, Comment 2
Letter 47, Comment 4
Letter 49, Comment 5
Letter 65, Commenl4, T ,8
Transcript: Comments t7, 18, 19, 21, 24
Scott Bender
Letter 2, Comment 4
Letter 5, Comment 2
Letter 7, Comments20-22 and 24-30
Letter 8, Comment 8
Letter 9, Comment 9, LL,72, 74
Letter 12, Comment 5
Letter 14, Comment 2
Letter 15, Comment L
Letter 27, Comment 2
Letter 37, Comment 2, 3
Letter 38, Commenl5, 6,7
Letter 40, Comment 7
Letter 47, Comment 3
Letter 49, Comment 3
Letter 53, Comment 1
Pleasant Harbor Final SEIS
April2015 1
Com ment Response Assignments
Craie Peck
Letter 1, Comment 2,4,5,6
Letter 2, Comment 7,4,5
Letter 4, Comments 2-4
Letter 5, Comments 3-6
Letter 7, Comments 11, 16, 23-25 and 31-36
Letter 8, Comment 7, 3
Letter 9, Comment 9,70,22
Letter 1.2, Comment 3
Letter 11, Comment 4
Letter 29, Comment 2, 3
Letter 34, Comment 2
Letter 38, Comment 5, 6,7 ,9,25
Letter 40, Comment 3, 8, 9, 10
Letter 47, Comment 3
Letter 49, Comment 3
Transcript: Comments 10, 20
Letter 66, Comment 1
Transcript: Comments 3, 4,5,
Rick Esvelt
Letter 2, Comment 7
Letter 7, Comments 32 and 36
Letter 8, Comment 7
Letter 1L, Comment 4
Letter 12, Comment 3
Letter 34, Comment 2
Letter 38, Comment 9
Transcript: Comment 10
Geo Engineers
Letter 2, Comment 2, 5, 6,7 , 8
Letter 4, Comment 1
Letter 7, Comment 35
Letter 9, Comment L3
Letter 25, Comment 1,2,3, 4
Letter 29, Comments 1-3
Letter 30, Commenl 1, 2, 3
Letter 59, Comment 1
Countv
Letter 5, Comment 1
Letter 6, Comment 2
Letter 7, Comment 9,14,37
Letter 9, Comment 2L
Letter 38, Comment 14, tG
Letter 42, Comment 3
Pleasant Harbor Fina, SE S
April 2015 2
Com m ent Response Assi g n ments
Letter 47, Comment 1
Letter 65, Comment 5, 6
Transcript: Comment 7
EA
Letter 1, Comment L,2,3,4,5,6
Letter 2, Comment 1, 3, 9
Letter 3, Comment 1
Letter 6, Comment 1, 2
Letter 8, Comment \, 2, 3, 4, 6, lO
Letter 9, Comment 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 75, 76, 20, 2L, 23, 24
Letter 10, Comment 1
Letter 11, Comment L,2,3,5, 6
Letter 12, Comment L,2, 6
Letter 13, Comment L, 2, 3
Letter 14, Commenl L, 3, 4
Letter 15, Comment 4,5,6,7,8
Letter 16, Comment 1
Letter 17, Comment 1
Letter 18, Comment 1
Letter 19, Comment 1
Letter 20, Comment 1
Letter 21, Comment 1
Letter 22, Comment 1
Letter 23, Comment 1
Letter 24, Comment 1
Letter 26, Comment 1, 2
Letter 27, Comment 1, 3
Letter 28, Comment 1
Letter 29, Comment L,4,5
Letter 30, Comment 3
Letter 31, Comment 1
Letter 32, Comment 1
Letter 33, Comment 1
Letter 34, Comment 1,4
Letter 35, Comment 1, 2
Letter 36, Comment 1, 2
Letter 37, Comment L
Letter 38, Comment 1, 8, 70, 77, L2, L3, 74, !5, 76, L7,18, 19, 20,22,23,24
Letter 39, Comment 1
Letter 40, Comment L, 2, 3, 9
Letter 41, Comment 1
Letter 42, Comment 1, 3
Letter 43, Comment 1
Letter 44, Comment 1
Letter 45, Comment 1
Letter 46, Comment 1
Letter 47, Comment L,2,5,6,7,8
Pleasant Harbor Frnal SEIS
April2015 3
Com ment Response Assignments
Letter 48, Comment 1
Letter 49, Commenl 7, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8
Letter 50, Comment 1
Letter 5L, Comment 1, 2
Letter 52, Comment 1
Letter 54, Comment 1
Letter 55, Comment 1
Letter 56, Comment 1
Letter 57, Comment 1, 2
Letter 58, Comment 1., 2
Letter 60, Comment L
Letter 61, Comment 7,2,3, 4
Letter 62, Comment 1
Letter 63, Comment 7,2,3
Letter 64, Comment 1
Letter 65, Comment L, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9
Letter 66, Comment 2
Letter 67, Comment 1
Letter 68, Comment 1
Letter 69, Comment 1
Letter 70, Comment 1
Tra nscri pt: Com ments t, 2,6-9, t2-15, 20, 22-23, 25-29, 3t-34
Pleasant Harbor Frnal SEIS
April2015 4
Com m ent Response Assi g n m ents
Planning Commission
Pleasant Harbor Master Planned Resort
December 3,20L4
Public Comments - transcribed verbatim
Commission ond opplicant responses summorized in itolics
Chair Coker opened the comment period
George Sickel (?), Brinnon, WA: First of all there's lots of documents that you've talked about here, is
there any plan for the documents to be available here in Brinnon for the residents to review? I
recognize it's on the internet, not everybody has internet access. And second - it's really hard to read
these documents on the internet as opposed to a paper copy.
Brinnon fire holl has o complete copy
Mike Weld, Jupiter road, Brinnon, WA: How many acres does this whole thing encompass, and how
many private land owners are going to be evacuated off their land to make this thing up?
256 ocres. No residents disploced.
Miriam Burdock, Brinnon: Any provisions or plans for saltwater intrusion in the aquifer?
lndecipherable.
Woter quolity testing is in ploce. Advonced warning if ony soltwater intrusion. lf wells ore domoged, PH
will make provisions to repoir, provided proof con be mode thot PH impocted their well.
Rob Mitchell, Brinnon: I have here...this is the agreement that Statesman has proposed, and this states
that the well has to be...(indecipherable)...DOE has figured that ....(indecipherable)...are, the well owner
provides conclusive evidencethat overa statistically relevant period of time, chloride levels have
increased. (C) Pleasant Harbor has the right to request additional evidence from the residents, showing
that Pleasant Harbor...(indecipherable)...is the cause of the increase of the chlorides. The burden of
proof is on the homeowner, and if PH replaces the water, it is at Pleasant Harbo/s cost to the
homeowner and then the homeowner has to pay for use. This is in direct conflict with what the DOE
conditions are for the water rights. ln addition, the pump test that was done was aborted after 24 hours
for the well that's existing. A second well was never drilled and second pump test was never completed.
So Statesman doesn't really know, does not have empirical proof that water exists or whetherthey're
I
EA
2
EA
3
Bender
Bender
4
going to affect salt-water intrusion on surrounding wells. Which is going to occur on the edges of the
lenticular formulation. That's in the draft SEIS.
I ron the pump test, ond thot's stondard operoting procedure, to stop the pump test ofter 24 hours.
Rob Mitchel!, Brinnon: No. ln the SEIS, it states the pump test failed because the generator failed, so
which is it?
Bock ond forth conversotion between unknown commenters.
Stoff suggested putting these comments ond questions into written form so thot they can be captured
ond responded to.
Janice Richards, Harbor House, Brinnon: The gentleman said that there's no private property that's
impacted by the new plan, and it looked to us like there's still a road going through our place and some
other things going on, so we don't understand the change, or if we'll be impacted or not.
No one is going to be "disploced." The Richards home will remain ond nothing changes. A "shuttle road"
will not impoct the Richard's home.
Janice Richards, Harbor House, Brinnon: So you can change a legal document that says that it's
pedestrian access only, to a shuttle or whatever access?
Not oware of ony legol document stating thot it's o pedestrion only occess.
Janice Richards, Harbor House, Brinnon: Check with the Health Department. lt was an exchange for
letting us put our septic system up on lot 2, we granted a pedestrian access.
Victoria Marshall, Brinnon: We're waterfront property owners, and we look right at Black Point. Very
supportive of this project. I have looked at the SEIS, haven't made it though I think 269 pages of it, but
certainly through the executive summary and through the table, comparing the options. I think what
we're talking about here is one of two options. One is option 2, or do nothing. I guess the comment I
would like to make is that sometimes, the greatest degradation to the environment is poverty. And I
have witnessed, while certainly people have lots of great concerns, that l'm concerned about the "do
nothing" aspect, and leaving this undeveloped and then having piecemeal septics put in, more wells
drilled. I mean something's going to happen to this property. I was very very impressed with the SEIS, I
think it's well done. Well researched. I would like to add that my entire career was in resort marketing
on a national basis. l've been in many meetings like this with a lot of communities small and large
4 cont.
5
Bender
6
EA
7
EAI
County
8
EA
grappling with a lot of issues. I think that the pace that this is going at, the careful work that's going in
to it is impressive, and it's going to be a wonderful addition to the community.
Joe Baisch, Brinnon: l've lived here for 23 years. I got here right as the federal forest policy affected the
timber county of Jefferson very adversely. South County lost 40 family wage jobs and 4 timber
companies went out of business overnight. About that time the county opted in to the GMA process.
Now the Growth Management Act process was designed for that l-5 corridor section of real estate and
applied dense urban planning standards to dense urban neighborhoods. And when we did this to
Jefferson County, we put dense urban planning standards to building standards and code on rural
residential prop - most of - rural residential zoned land, most of which applies to Jefferson County. And
it's hurt our building trades and it's hurt people who want to split their property or develop their
property. I know a lot of families that wanted to divide their property up into sections, and now it takes
an attorney and ten to twenty thousand dollars to do it. Jefferson County, in the last 20 years that l've
been here has been a leader in unemployment in Western Washington. lt's been consistently above 8%.
When I moved here, we had 133 kids in Brinnon School, we started last year with 24. There's been an
exodus ofschool aged children and school aged children out ofJefferson County because there's no
work here. 87% of my kids in Brinnon School today qualify for free and reduced lunch. Which means
they live in poverty. Over 50% of the school aged children in Jefferson County qualify for free and
reduced lunch. They live in poverty. We've neglected economic development in this county. We need
projects like this. ...(indecipherable)...work with WSU and Community Development, was a quote by
John Knight of Northwestern University who spent an academic career studying why communities thrive
and why they fail: "Communities that thrive focus and build on local assets; Communities that fail focus
on...put their energy into their needs." And that is alive and well here. We need to thrive, and in order
to do that we need to build local assets. This project is an asset, lt's taking a piece of real estate and
making it an asset with Jefferson County. As many of you know, I ran for County Commissioner last fall
and got an hour update on the dire situation the county is in terms of revenue. lt's going to put more
and more pressure on property owners. We need this kind of development, that's well thought out,
that's got global impacts in terms of infrastructure in orderto have a future here. So I urge you to
seriously consider moving this project forward. Thank you.
John Adams, Brinnon: Can you speak for a moment on how the wastewater flow is going to work in the
months of April when you're not necessarily hydrating the golf course, yet you're still April through June
receiving lots of rainfall.
It's going to pond. And then infiltrote bock into oquifer. Prevented from dispersing into the Hood Conol.
Don (indecipherable - Scangee?), Brinnon: When this politic completed thing. How much impact
would do to the home-owner in the tax consequences? Would it increase? How much would increase
my tax?
9
EA
10
Peck /
Esvelt
11
Fiscal
Thot's o questions for the assessor
Don (indecipherable - Scangee?), Brinnon: But by doing this, it would increase the value of my
property, correct?
lndirectly, but thot's o question for the assessor.
Jason Willouby (?), Brinnon: Joe Baish's question about employing people in the community. We just
started this wastewater treatment facility here in the community, right? You guys probably know about
it. Nobody here's involved in that. So if everybody's here worried about employment, why isn't all
these locally people who are employed up there - we never got the Voice and the-or-l think - employed
the paper. lf anybody knows anything about it, please back me up here, but it was never announced in
our paper here in our community but it was in Clallam, Mason, so none of our resources here was able
to even hear, because we didn't know about it. I mean, so if everybody's worried about these jobs and
this, why in the frick aren't we up there working on this wastewater treatment facility for the county of
Brinnon? Why are we worried about this resort?...(indecipherable)...it boils my blood, because I need a
job and there aren't jobs up here. I got injured in a logging accident two years ago and I haven't been
able to work, but man, if everybody's worrying about jobs and I don't think anybody up here's able to.
Or nobody's giving us the opportunity to....why don't these companies require to hire locally? There's
many guys out there with a shovel and a rake who want to work. A lot of people don't have internet
access and smart phones, they check for notices and information at the post office.
ln the onolysis, there may be as mdny os 253 jobs creoted during ond ofter construction of the resort.
Mike Weld: Two years ago, my wife and I went to a meeting and Garth Mann was here, and he filled
this little sketchy thing up here that's on the table for us to look at of what he had planned out, and we
asked him where are you going to get the people to work this, and he said "well, l'm going to bring most
of them in from China, because Chinese people work better than the American people do, and according
quality work. So if he's going to do bring in a lot of people from out of state, what good's it going to do
us to apply to work for them when he's going to have other people from other countries do it?
BOCC condition in the Development Agreement, regording requiring odvertising locally, recruiting locolly,
give preference to local oppliconts, providing they ore quolified.
Stew Engle (?), Brinnon: I think the thing to remember is, you don't get the job if we don't get the thing
built to begin with. Jobs are almost secondary to this thing. We have to develop it, and then get the tax
base, and the jobs a lot of them, I agree with you, aren't living wage jobs. But neither are McDonalds,
l2
EA
11
cont.
13
EA
t4
EA
They're stepping stone jobs. lf one doesn't do it, then you work two. A lot of people in this community
work more than one job. But I think the most important thing to remember is that the thing has to be
built first.
Nicole Black, Brinnon: The reference to the jobs, that actually came up in the 2007 meeting. That was
one of the big topics and they all came forward in the EIS and were like - Hey we want to make sure we
have...causelwaslike, lknowcontractors...andwanttomakesuretheytakelocals. Thenextthingl
wanted to do was go back to something that Joe said about local assets. And he made a quick little
assumption there that the resort is an asset. And it's actually sitting on our asset, And our people are a
local asset, and our infrastructure is a local asset. So before we just assume that this is a local asset, I
want to consider what it's going to take from and as we move forward, which I am pro, but I want to
move forward in a very cautious way. I asked a question about the water because if we have to balance
out equities between green grass, and water up the river, I hope that the MPR would say communicate,
integrate - not just build and pull their selves away from the community, that's not the way to do it, and
I hope the Planning Commission really takes the time to look at all of the questions. These are good
people, but they want to feel like they're being heard and want to know that you guys are listening, and
this gets done correctly.
Richard Whitcom, Brinnon/County lines: I might go play golf it's built, l'll go to the restaurant. I go to
the marina once a year, but one thing that's going to impact all of us, whether you're pro or con, nobody
talks about it, is the highway. And it's just a highway, but it's really a lifeline. Go back to before the
bridge was built - the bridge sank in '80, and everybody comes up and down, they repair it, and
everybody comes up and down. Think of Hoodsport, think of the light they're going to have to put down
there. lt's just a way of life that's going to disappear, and that's sad, because the road really, they can't
handle all this new traffic. There's no problem there, because it's a really under-utilized road but
wouldn't it be more likely a life line - so you make this decision to the Council, to the Commissioners, l'd
put some weight on it. Because it's going to be a future thing that might be cursed when the road's to
capacity and there's only one road. lt is - you know what's going to happen, I was 36 years over in King
County and l've seen a lot of us come and go, and l'm pretty worried this is going to happen. But how
do you - it's just such a big deal -there's twice as much build out, so the road's going to have twice as
much traffic. lt's really going to impact everybody. So look at that point, and when the bridge goes out,
which it willagain, we can use one road. That's all I can say.
Yes, WSDOT has been involved oll olong. They were involved in scoping at intersections, etc., looking ot
sofety, levels of service, shuttle transportation, ond trip generotion.
Un-named commenter: Regarding the traffic study. The original level of service evidence was from the
year 2000. The actual auto count was from the year 2006, During the entire traffic study, for some
reason,noneoftheothersegmentsof roadwayaccidentsandincidentswereincluded. Onlyaccidents
and incidents at intersections were included. Out of the 4100 car trips predicted per day, 65 percent are
going to go up and over Mount Walker, that's over 2600 cars a day over Mount Walker Pass. Mount
Walker Pass is one of our more notorious roll-over points, including our own Sheriff's department, 1200
cars will be traveling south, and the first serious corner is L/10th of a mile South of Black Point Road.
t4
cont.
15
EA
t7
TENW
18
TENW
Many roll-overs, in fact we have a chip truck that disintegrated there last year. We had a head on
fatality collision between an SUV and an oiltanker trunk right in front of Canal Tracts. Further South, I
believe it's six miles, is McDaniel Cove. Everybody who lives around here knows how bad that is. None
of those places were ever considered in this traffic study. Why? The majority of serious accidents do
not occur at intersections. Everyone who's here, knows that.
Weren't required to look at those incidents, due to the low count of those occidents.
Don Haren (?), Brinnon: My thing was, or understanding, was that this is a destination resort, more so
than something that's going to have people here continuously. So, winter-time, very low traffic. What's
the main mode of transportation for people coming here?
Both destination, ond some stoys. Automobile is moin mode of tronsportotion. There will be a van from
the airport. And o von for tours.
Un-named commenter: I guess I have a question about build-out, timing of build-out
and...indecipherable...l live in Cape George, I have a (indecipherable) in Port Ludlow, and there's been so
many vacancies in both those areas. There's the big hotel out there that is completely vacant. And l'm
wondering where are the people going to come from? And if they don't come at some anticipated level,
you know, is there is this capitalized enough that the County isn't going to get left with some bag for
maintaining roads or other infrastructure? lt just seems very very ambitious to me.
Un-named commenter: I have another point regarding the traffic. The shuttle bus that's proposed and
the tour van that's proposed in your traffic study it's assumed that you're going to have 1"00% capacity,
which was supposed to take up to 260 car trips a day off of the 4100. Even in your study in the SEIS, you
admit that that's probably not going to happen. And I say, human nature, most likely will not happen.
Another point that I have to make is that the Duckabush Rd itself is going to get 2% of the car trips,
which is say 1.20 cars a day. Even if that's a L0 hour period, that's L2 cars an hourgoing up the
Duckabush, which, half of the Duckabush, according to you is 1L foot wide lane widths, which it's not.
It's 8 foot and then it goes into the Duckabush extension, which is forest service road. And then it goes
to the Duckabush trail which can park approximately 30 cars for the M--- Falls trail, which has room for
about 8. Where are those 120 cars going?
One of the priorities in terms of troffic, is recreation. The ossumption is thot those cars will be recreating.
Un-named commenter, cont: on top of that, the forest service has just done a study, and their usage of
trailheads is up 25%. So we are experiencing a huge increase of car traffic, up my road in particular, and
18
cont.
19
TENW
20
E,AI
Peck
2l
TENW
22
EA
where are all these people going to go? And what are they going to do? There is no fishing access past
where I live, and I don't know what they're going to do. lt's going to be gridlock in the woods.
Un-named commenter: The gentleman next to me here, you have an amazing capacity for the facts.
It's just awesome. I wish I had that. I guess, what I have to say is more anecdotal. We have - I spent 20
years living in the Sun Valley, ldaho, area. We also have a second home in Sun Peaks area in BC. And
our home in the Sun Peaks area is kind of like the Duckabush. We didn't buy in the resort village, we
bought - it's off a country road,7 kilometers away. I can tellyou that we don't get anything. The
impact - I don't have numbers - but we don't have a whole bunch of people driving down our road.
Un-named commenter: I live on the Duckabush and there is more traffic on the road, and they speed
on the road, and they kill livestock, they kill dogs, hit kids. We've had problems on the Duckabush. This
needs to be considered.
Un-named commenter: I would submit, though, that the type of people that resorts attract are going to
be more interested in golf, and more interested in those types of activities. And I hear you, I understand
that you have concerns.
Un-named commenter: Do you live on the Duckabush?
Un-named commenter: No. I ride my bike on the Duckabush allthe time. So riding the bike up the
Duckabush, there's no lanes. Yes in the summertime, it's really busy, and lgetthat. But, you know, I
don't know that that's a reason to not let something - or to oppose something like this, We can all think
of reasons not to have things changes, but there's also, there are really a lot of positive things that can
come out of this.
Un-named commenter: Ma'am, ljust want to address something you just said. lt's not about not
wanting change or not wanting this to happen, it's about recognizing the problems before they happen,
having a little bit of fore-thought and saying let's plan this so that we consider these kinds of problems,
and build the infrastructure needed.
John Dowd, Brinnon: After working 27 years for the Jefferson County road department, I can tell you
there's no forcing Jefferson County to maintain portions of the Duckabush road that's only 8 feet wide in
either lane. Only if there's a broken piece of blacktop.
George Sicke!: Let's turn more to the positive. Why should we be approving this? lt will double the tax
base in Brinnon, More than. I mean conservatively. Which means more taxes for the schools, for the
fire department. They're proposing a medical facility so we don't have to travel to Shelton, to Port
Townsend, to Silverdale to get medical services. There'll be a sales tax increase. The County is already
hurting, They're spending more money than they have coming in, so they need to increase the tax base
in one form or another. This'll increase the sales tax base, the motel tax and then also look at the spin-
off businesses that will occur. Nicole will be able to have more people riding her horses. There'll be a
shuttle service to be able to go to the casino - north or south. There'll be hiking opportunities - guided
hikes. That's what those people would be doing, going up the Duckabush. There'll be people here to go
diving, and that'll hopefully Don Coleman's going to be able to add additional boats. There'll be fishing
opportunities. There's so many good things that can come of this, and we have struggled now for 8
years. lt's going to be two more years at a conservative estimate when they're going to be able to break
ground here, so believe it or not it's going to be 2020 before we even see this tax coming in. So, what
23
EA
24
TENW
25
EA
26
EA
27
EA
28
EA
29
EA
do we want to do, do we want to put it off for another 5 years? Or do we want to have Garth pull his
money out and subdivide that area into one acre, two acre or 5 acre tracts and have allthese additional
wells and septic systems? So think about those things, and don't totally look at allthe negatives coming
out, but look at the positive things that this can do for our community, for all of South County, and for
all ofJefferson County. Thank you.
Un-named commenter: ln return to Mr. Shickel's comment, I don't dive, I don't golf, I don't ride horses
and I don't do all the things that you described will happen to our taxes, but our taxes will increase and I
don't know about you but I live on a very fixed income, because l'm retired. I can't really afford a lot of
tax increase.
Phil Dunster, Brinnon: My wife and I moved here about 7 years ago, We're fortunate - more fortunate
than most - because when we moved here, we brought our jobs with us. We telecommute. We work
for a company that's on the other side of the water. One of the things that makes me sick, is when I
kind of needle out of people here that have to commute to places like Port Townsend or Shelton for
their jobs, the price of fuel is high, negates and cuts off their income level because they're traveling and
they'vegotall theseextraexpenses-they'vegotmoremaintenancetodoontheircars. Formeto
work out of my house is a real benefit for me. What I see here is that yes, there's jobs being created
here, but a lot of them being created may not be at the highest levels, but the ability to have a local job,
to be able to put your local kids who are without having to worry about what am I going to do this
summer. George mentioned the tax base - the County's struggling. We've got budget cuts, revenue
shortfalls. lthink it's time that we all realized that the resorts going to bring allthis revenue, doubling
the tax base. This is a key thing for us. Our residents are over-taxed. Property owners - my property
taxes keep going up. Oddly enough, because of the restrictions on waterfront properties, waterfront
properties are going down, so the County's balancing it by increasing taxes off of waterfront properties.
l'm not pleased about it and l'm sure nobody in this room that owns property is pleased about it. And
really, what better way to pay your bills than from people bringing in money from out of the area? You
know, that makes sense. We've going to increase our sales tax revenue from people that are coming
here from out of County. Jefferson County's biggest exports are dollars. When you want to go shop,
there's - a resident said to me the other day: You know, a good example of why people go to shop in
Clallam County or Mason County or Kitsap County - you can't even buy underwear in this County. lt's a
basicnecessity,andlthoughtitwasfunnywhenitwassaidtome,butreally,it'sareality. lt'soneofthe
things I read online this week: They compared the resort to the dam on the Elwha River. And I thought
that was kind of funny, because really, they were talking about the environmental impact and the dam
and how it took a hundred years to correct it. Well, a lot more is known about the environment today
and how to correct it, than there was in 1910. The EIS they've demonstrated that this is a low-impact
development. This isn't something that should be the way of the future, it should be the way of today. I
think it's time that we bring a little prosperity back to our county.
Don Skangee (?): I travel to Port Ludlow over the years. l've been living here for 7 years. I have heard a
lot of people from Ludlow share the same comments, the same concerns as here today. But look at Port
Ludlow today, compared to what we could become like Port Ludlow. They're more prosperous, they
have businesses, bring in a lot more revenue. And so yes, I think that at the beginning it may be a little
painful, because of inconvenience and this and that. But that is progress. I would love to live where I
am now and don't have any changes - no traffic so forth - but this place is dying, it truly is. I have a
friend who looked for 3 years to find a job. He used to live on Duckabush. Couldn't find a job anywhere,
29
cont.
30
Fiscal
3r
EA
32
EA
had to move away, almost lost his house, I think a lot of time we're so concerned about our individual
comfort - I can understand that - but this place is dying. We don't have anything to bring in and infuse
the community. Have the opportunity to work - to go to school - better teachers. I think we're fooling
ourselves. Nothing will remain the same forever. lf progress don't come today, it will come tomorrow.
Un-named commenter: I have two points. Progress is inevitable, it's a question of how much the
surrounding infrastructure can absorb it. The problem with a development of this scale is that this
infrastructure's going to get slammed. lt's going to have a very hard time absorbing all these impacts.
Addressing George Sickel's comment about taxes. This project which was originally supposed to be 4-7
years, and now it's 4-10 years, depending on how the economy goes, supposed to be built in phases.
We could be seeing a 10 year period of just slowly kind of trying to get to the finished phased. lt's only
after full build-out that the collection of taxes will have a positive effect. There will be a certain amount
of revenue from the building phase, but a lot other negative effects. After the taxes are collected, 6.5
goes to the State, 2.5 goes back to Port Townsend to be distributed as the County seat sees fit. lt
doesn't mean that any of that money is going to be used to take care of the infrastructure in Brinnon or
the surrounding areas. The money that goes to the State goes to an open pool. And so, yes, in theory,
this revenue is going to be a great boon to the County. But is it going to be a boon to the people who
have to withstand the increased traffic, and not being able to get to the doctor if any accidents on 10L,
and the risk of losing their wells on Black Point. ls that tax money going to help those people?
Un-named commenter: You plan on gradually building out to up to 890 units. What if you build 400
units and they're not selling, Do you stop there? Or will you build out fully?
The EIS soid thot build-out will occur at morket demand.
Chair asked for written comments, and closed the public comment period.
32 cont.
33
EA
34
EA
1
Economic lrnpact of Developing the Pleasant Harbor Marina
and Golf Resort in Brinnon, Jefferson Gounty, WA, as part of
New EB-s Regional Center in Western Washington.
Prepared for:
The Statesman Group of Gompanies
9300 E. Raintree Drive, Suite 100
Scottsdale, A285260
Prepared by:
Michael K. Evans
Evans, Carroll & Associates, lnc.
2795 NW 26th St.
Boca Raton, FL 33434
561-470-9035
mevans@eva nscarrol lecon. com
April, 2012
2
+
Table of Contents
1. Executive Summary
2. f abulation of Principal Results
3. lntroduction and Scope of Work
4. Brief Discussion of RIMS ll model
5, Explanation of Calculation for lndirect Jobs
6. Economic Parameters for Jefferson, Kitsap, and Clallam Counties
7. Location of Pleasant Hill Marina and Golf Resort
8. Economic lmpact of Construction in Each of Three Phases
9. Economic lmpact of Operations in Stage 1, All Phases
10. Economic lmpact of Operations in Stage 2, Phase 1
11. Economic lmpact of Operations in Stage 2, Phases and 3
12. Summary Statistics for Pleasant Harbor Marina by Stages
Appendix: Resume of Dr. Michae! K. Evans
3
4
8
I
12
17
25
31
38
40
41
50
53
3
1. Executive Summary
. The Statesmen Group of Companies plans to develop and operate the Pleasant Hill
Marina and Golf Resort, to be located at 308913 US Highway 101, Brinnon, WA 98320,
which is in Jefferson County. The project will take approximalely 7 years to complete,
so the economic impact analysis is presented in three phases. The actual tasks
undertaken in each phase are discussed below. Each of these stages will take slightly
longer than 2 years to complete.
. All of the economic impact calculations in this report are based on the RIMS ll
inpuUoutput model coefficients for the three-county area that includes Clallam,
Jefferson, and Kitsap counties in Washington state.
. The resort is being developed as a Master Planned Resort Community. Stage 1, will
be used for the initial stages of development. These projects will include a waste water
reclamation plant, conversion of a land depression to a reservoir, the redevelopment of
the marina operations, the construction of the Maritime Village with 42 units and 11,700
square feet of retail space, and two 12-plex buildings for guest facilities. Based on
these figures, there will be 233 jobs created from conshuction activity, and 48 jobs from
operations of the hotel and retail space, for a total of 281 jobs in Stage 1.
. Stage 2 is divided into two phases, each of which is expected to take 27 months.
Phase t has an expected hard construction cost budget ol$47.74, which would create
a total of 577 jobs from construction. Phase 1 of Stage ll includes the construction and
grading of the golf course, plus the central resort complex of 140,000 square feet. That
central building will include restaurants, a spa/fitness center, conference centers, a
wedding chapel (no full-time jobs), management offices, and retail stores. The resort
will construct a building for the storage of golf carts and other equipment, and staff
housing to accommodate 104 ful!-time support staff. As explained in more detail in
Section (10), the activity in the resort complex will generate about 424 new jobs from
operations, and a total of 1,001 new jobs for this part of the project.
. Phases 2 and 3 of Stage ll have an expected hard construction cost budget of
$148.94 million, which would create 1,801 new jobs from construction activity. lt will
include the terrace resorts for short-term stays and 293 villas and vistas for longer-term
stays, some of which may be second or vacation homes; those facilities would create
176 new jobs, for a total of 1 ,977 new jobs for this part of the project.
. Since this resort is in a rural area, it will be located in a TEA, which means each EB-S
immigrant can invest $500,000 instead of $1 million. As a result, up to 28 EB-s
immigrants could raise up to $14 million in EB-S funds for the first part of the project; up
to 100 immigrants could raise up to $50 million for the second part and up to 197
immigrants could raise up to $98.5 million in EB-S funds for the third part of the project.
4
2. Tabulation of Principal Results
The results for the employment multipliers for each part of the project are
summarized in Tables 2-1, 2-2, and 2-3. The upper part of each of these tables
contains the employment summary; the lower part shows the increase in key measures
of household income and output. The RIMS ll final demand multipliers include the
direct as well as the indirect and induced effects for all types of activity. All figures in
these three tables represent permanent new jobs created.
Sta8e 1, All Phases Expenditure/
Revenues
($ million)
FinalDemand
Multiplier
Total
Jobs
Construction
HotelOperatlons
Retail space *
19.32
1.44
3.84
12.0931
14.7727
6.9419
233.6
21.3
26.7
Total these categories
* Value added basis
24.6 281.6
All figures in thousands of dollars
Household lncome from
Construction
Hotels
Retail Space *
9,907
627
78r
Total these 3 categories 11,315
267
135
!,477
1,92L
Demand (output) for:
Utilities
Maintenance a nd repair construction
Supplier/vendor links with manufacturers
Professional and business support services
Total these 4 categories
Table 2-1. Summary of Employment, lncome, and Output for Stage 1
Household Earnings (Labor lncome)
5
The jobs created by the various components of Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf
Resort will subsequently create new sources of household income. The household
income for the total jobs created by construction for the first part of the project, which
inctudes all phases of Stage 1, would be about $11.3 million. This income calculation
comes from the RIMS ll input-output model, which measures the average income per
job by industry. The mode! calculations are based on the types of jobs that will be
created within the regional center, with indirecUinduced impacts allocated based on the
types of commodity inputs required by the businesses that would potentially locate in
the regional center.
Household earnings will be generated from all of the various industry
classifications listed above. They are calculated by taking the number of new
employees in each industrial classiflcation and multiplying by the average earnings for
each industry as incorporated in the RIMS ll model. The industry details underlying
these calculations are given in the tables found in Section (9).
!n all cases, household income equals the increase in employment times the
average annual compensation. The number of total jobs is calculated from the RIMS ll
model by multiplying total estimated revenue by the appropriate final demand
multipliers. Alternatively, the same results could be obtained by multiplying the number
of direct jobs by the employment multiplier.
Demand for Buslness Services, Utllltles, Malntenance and Constuctlon, and New
Suppl ierMendor Relatlon sh I ps C reated w ith Man ufacturers
The total economic impact of the regional center from the supplier purchases and
business relationships for the first part of the Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort
will create approximately $3.8 million in additiona! economic activity across the region.
These supplier purchases are calculated from the indirect increase in output generated
by the RIMS ll model. lt should be noted that some of these supplier industries might
potentially locate within the regional center, and their economic output is included in this
total.
The estimate of supplier purchases is based on the commodity data in the RIMS
ll input-output model. This data specifies the amount and type of commodity input
needed to maintain specific types of business operations. The model estimates the
supplier purchases based on the types of jobs and number of jobs that will be created
within the regional center. ln addition, the model allocates the supplier purchases to
businesses within the region, based on trade flow data from the U.S. Bureau of
Economic Analysis.
The output figures for utilities represents the amount spent on electric power,
natural gas, and water and sewer expenditures. These are based on the inpuUoutput
coefficients showing how much the output of utilities would increase for each million
o
dollars of final demand for each type of project. The economic impact for utility services
totals about $0.3 million.
The RIMS ll inpuUoutput model has only one category for construction
expenditures, which includes both new construction and maintenance and repair
construction, however, the model does not separate these. The project would create an
economic impact of about $0.1 million within these sectors in the region. These are
permanent, ongoing jobs for maintenance and repair and do not reflect the original
construction expend itures.
For the manufacturing sector, the increase in output depends on several factors.
The amount of manufactured goods purchased for construction activity is based on the
amount of locally produced and sold products and materials used in the project. For
restaurants, it would be related to the amount of food and beverages that are produced
locally. For retail stores, it would be the amount of products produced locally, if an$ this
figure would also include printing of advertising and packaging materials that are locally
produced. For various professiona! and business seryices, it would be the amount of
office supplies and similar products that are produced locally.
For the first part of the Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort project, new
supplier/vendor relationships with manufacturers would create an economic impact of
about $1.5 million. Most of this represents the production of local goods used in
construction.
The figures for the output from business services are calculated from the rows in
the RIMS !l inpuUoutput table for professional and scientific services, managernent of
companies, and administrative and waste management services. ln general, the
demand for professional and scientific services reflects the relative importance of these
categories for each of the various economic activities. For the construction sector, for
example, most of the jobs in this sector represent architects and engineers. For retail
and restaurant operations and other consumer-related services, professional and
business services consist mainly of accounting and bookkeeping, and marketing and
advertising.
For the first part of the Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort, the impact of
this activity totals about $1.9 million annually. ln this phase, most of this represents the
payments to architects, engineers, and other professionals engaged in the construction
activity.
Expenditure/
Revenues
(S million)
Stage 2, Phase 1
Construction 47.74 12.0931 577.3
FinalDemand
Multiplier
Total
Jobs
Table 2-2. Summary of Employment, lncome, and Output for Stage 2, Phase 1
7
HotelOperations
Retai! space *
Spa/fitness center
Office administration
Conference center
Restaurant
Building and grounds maintenance
1.05
6.4
2.7
1.88
0,86
3.85
5.39
74.7727
6.947925
32.8902
76.737
13.4498
21.3826
23.5323
15.5
M.4
88.8
30.3
11.5
82.3
125.9
Total these categories
t Value added basis
69.87 977.2
Allfigures in thousands of dollars
Household lncome from
Construction
Hotels
Retail Space *
Spa/fitness center
Office administration
Conference center
Restaurant
Building and grounds maintenance
24,48!
457
1,302
1,224
1,218
180
!,672
2,661
Total these 7 categories 33,195
Demand (outPut)for:
Utilities
Maintenance and repair construction
Supplier/vendor links with manufacturers
Professional and business support services
813
407
3,964
12,723
Total these 4 categories t7
Household Earnings (Labor lncome)
The jobs created by the second part of the Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf
Resort, consisting of Phase I of Stage 2, will subsequently create new sources of
household income. The household income for the total jobs created by construction
would be about $24.5 million, with another $8.8 million in household income created by
the various operations for this part of the project.
8
This income calculation comes from the RIMS ll input-output model, which
measures the average income per job by industry. The model calculations are based
on the types of jobs that will be created within the regional center, with indirecUinduced
impacts allocated based on the types of commodity inputs required by the businesses
that would potentially locate in the regional center.
Household earnings will be generated from all of the various industry
classifications listed above. They are calculated by taking the number of new
employees in each industrial classification and multiplying by the average earnings for
each industry as incorporated in the RIMS ll model. The industry details underlying
these calculations are given in the tables found in Section (10).
ln all cases, household income equals the increase in employment times the
average annual compensation. The number of totaljobs is calculated from the RIMS ll
model by multiplying total estimated revenue by the appropriate final demand
multipliers. Alternatively, the same results could be obtained by multiplying the number
of direct jobs by the employment multiplier.
Demand for Buslness Services, Utllltles, Malntenance and Constructlon, and New
SuppllerNendor Relationshlps Created wtth Manufacturcrs
The total economic impact of the regional center from the supplier purchases and
business relationships for this part of the Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort
project will create approximately $17.8 million in additional economic activity across the
region. These supplier purchases are calculated from the indirect increase in output
generated by the RIMS ll model. lt should be noted that some of these supplier
industries might potentially locate within the regional center, and their economic output
is included in this total.
The estimate of supplier purchases is based on the commodity data in the RIMS
ll input-output model. This data specifies the amount and type of commodity input
needed to maintain specific types of business operations. The model estimates the
supplier purchases based on the types of jobs and number of jobs that will be created
within the regional center. In addition, the model allocates the supplier purchases to
businesses within the region, based on trade flow data from the U.S. Bureau of
Economic Analysis.
The output figures for utilities represents the amount spent on electric power,
natural gas, and water and sewer expenditures. These are based on the inpuUoutput
coefficients showing how much the output of utilities would increase for each million
dollars of final demand for each type of project. The economic impact for utility services
totals about $0.8 million.
The RIMS ll inpuUoutput model has only one category for construction
expenditures, which includes both new construction and maintenance and repair
I
construction, however, the model does not separate these. The project would create an
economic impact of about $0.4 million within these sectors in the region. These are
permanent, ongoing jobs for maintenance and repair and do not reflect the original
construction and renovation expenditures.
For this part of the Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort project, new
supplier/vendor relationships with manufacturers would create an economic impact of
about $3.8 million. Most of this represents the production of local goods used in
construction; there are also some purchases of locally produced or sold food and
beverage items for the restaurant, as well as printed material such as advertising
brochures for the hotel, retai! stores, and other amenities.
The figures for the output from business services are calculated from the rows in
the RIMS ll inpuUoutput table for professional and scientific services, managernent of
companies, and administrative and waste management services. For this part of the
Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort project, the impact of this activity totals about
$12.7 million annually. Most of this represents the payments to architects, engineers,
and other professionals engaged in the construction activity; the rest represents the
output of professional services, such as attorneys, accountiants, and advertising
personnelfor hotel, restaurant, retail, and related activities.
Stage 2, Phases 2 and 3
1977.4
Total these 3 categories 81,569
160.872
t,879
FinalDemand
Multiplier
Total
Jobs
Expenditure/
Revenues
(S million)
L48s42
11.93
Construction
Hotel Operations
12.0931
14.7727
1801.2
176.2
Total these categories
r Value added basis
All figures in thousands of dollars
Household lncome frorn
Construction
Hotels
76,377
5,192
Demand (outPut)for:
Utilities
Table 2-3. Summary of Employment, lncome, and Output for Stage 2, Phases 2 and 3
10
Ma intenance and repair construction
Supplier/vendor links with manufacturers
Professional and business support services
954
11,198
14,258
Total these 4 categories 28,289
Household Earnlngs (Labor lncome)
The jobs created by the various components included in this part of Pleasant
Harbor Marina and Golf Resort project will subsequently create new sources of
household income. The household income for the total jobs created by construction
would be about $76.4 million. The household income for the total jobs created by the
operation of the guest rental facilities would add another $5.2 million.
This income calculation comes from the RIMS ll input-output model, which
measures the average income per job by industry. The model calculations are based
on the types of jobs that will be created within the regional center, with indirecUinduced
impacts allocated based on the types of commodity inputs required by the businesses
that would potentially locate in the regional center.
Household earnings wil! be generated from all of the various industry
classifications listed above. They are calculated by taking the number of new
employees in each industrial classification and multiplying by the average eamings for
each industry as incorporated in the RIMS ll model. The industry details underlying
these calculations are given in the tables found in Section (11).
In all cases, household income equals the increase in employment times the
average annual compensation. The number of totaljobs is calculated from the RIMS ll
model by multiplying total estimated revenue by the appropriate final demand
multipliers. Alternatively, the same results could be obtained by multiplying the number
of direct jobs by the employment multiplier.
Demand for Buslness SewIces, Utllltles, Malntenance and Constructlon, and New
Su pplierNendor Rel ationsh i ps Crcated w ith Man ufacturers
The total economic impact of the regional center from the supplier purchases and
business relationships for this part of the Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort
project will create approximately $28.3 million in additional economic activity across the
region. These supplier purchases are calculated from the indirect increase in output
generated by the RIMS ll model. lt should be noted that some of these supplier
industries might potentially locate within the regional center, and their economic output
is included in this total.
11
The estimate of supplier purchases is based on the commodity data in the RIMS
ll input-output model. This data specifies the amount and type of commodity input
needed to maintain specific types of business operations. The model estimates the
supplier purchases based on the types of jobs and number of jobs that will be created
within the regional center. ln addition, the model allocates the supplier purchases to
businesses within the region, based on trade flow data from the U.S. Bureau of
Economic Analysis.
The output figures for utilities represents the amount spent on electric power,
natural gas, and water and sewer expenditures. These are based on the inpuUoutput
coefficients showing how much the output of utilities would increase for each million
dollars of final demand for each type of project. The economic impact for utility services
totals about $1.9 million.
The RIMS ll inpuUoutput model has only one category for construction
expenditures, which includes both new construction and maintenance and repair
construction, however, the model does not separate these. The project would create an
economic impact of about $1.0 million within these sectors in the region. These are
permanent, ongoing jobs for maintenance and repair and do not reflect the original
construction and renovation expenditures.
For this phase of the Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort project, new
supplier/vendor relationships with manufacturers would create an economic impact of
about $1'1.2 million. Most of this represents the production of local goods used in
construction.
The figures for the output from business services are calculated from the rows in
the RIMS ll inpuUoutput table for professional and scientific services, management of
companies, and administrative and waste management services. For this phase of the
Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort project, the impact of this activity totals about
$14.3 million annually. Most of this represents the payments to architects, engineers,
and other professionals engaged in the construction activity.
Table 2-4 shows the NAICS codes and definitions for each of the industries
included in this study.
2362 Commercial and lnstitutional Building Construction
7211 Traveler Accommodations
722 Food Services Ald !!nf!ng Ilqqeq
44145 Retail Stores
71394 Fitness and Recreational Sports Centers
53119 Lessors of Other Real Estate Property
5611 ffice Administrative Services
5617 Services to Buildings and Dwellings
Table 2-4 NAICS Codes and Definitions
12
I rerszl o.srzsl rzosrol oeesel r.lsrrl t.64s€l210000 Conrtrucrlon
I t2 trAo xor.t.
"nd
nrotrts. lnctudhry co.lno [or.b I r.Osr I O.rfsr I rLzne | 0.93651 r.trrr I t.3829
722000 Food rorvic.. ond drlntirg doc.r I r.rzeel o.rrrll 2l.3sail 91q11 t1grl.ll 12231
r.1899 0.4530 26.0260 0,9257 r.4054 r. r894
t 5230 0.4535 32.8900 0 8982 r.4432
7!3800 ot[er amu..martt ond recraotioo hldoal]l.r
7131r/30 Flhea! aitd recrcotloltol apon8 cdrlero r. r551
r 5.4263R.toll rade r 1763I 4576 0.452r 0.9459 I
r.281 I 0.2085 r3.4498531000 R.ol ..lolc 0.9573 r_5403 t.20$
r.623r 0.6182 t5. r37 r r.0 r{9 r 3738561 100 Ollicc adm[li3lrotlv. csfr ico.r.5170
| 50.16 0.r936 23.5323 0.8600 t.3968561700 S.rvh.. ro buildlngr and dwalllrgo t22r9
R.gion Oetiniton: Clallcm, WA; Jefercon, WA: Kilrop, WA
'krludcs Government cnierpnx3.
l. Each anfy h cobmn I rapfr'ant! lh. loLl ddb. chang. in ouhut that occun in all irdurh.r for cach lddilion{l dolhr o, ouDd d.livcrgd to
lind drm.md by 0to hdrety corrcgond,tg to th. cnty.
2. Eadr enry h corrmn 2 r.p?t!.ntt tha totd dolbr d/langc in corni{r d hourholdt snployad lrt all industiec for codr additiond dorar ot
olJE{f ddvarad to final demod by 0ta and.J3fy cor.tPonding lo ul. 3n1ry.
3. EEch ant, n cot mn 3 ngrrortr llr bld chongp in numbor of pbr lhd ocoro m d rndurti.t h ..idr oddilbnrl I milkn dolor3 of outpt
dchsed fo iiul dglrrd b, lha mdurfy com.Poodihg lo $t enlry. Becsus€ lha omgbynEol mutirliers ar. bc.d m 2008 drla. th. outsut
dc$vltad to lbel ddnad rhould ba tn 200E dollac.
a. Eadr rrty h cot mn I mpr.rrnlr lfir btd ddlar -chongc- in valw oddrd hal occun in dl irdu*ia hr .och ddrlirnd dotr r ol osgut
d.hr(.d b ftul dmiltd by lh. indtr.ry comlpondkE to lh. .ntry.
5. F:dt anty h cohmn 5 raprarar{3 tha totd dolla. chang. io .mrirys ot hou3.trcldc coplcpd by all indr*ies h coch additrnol dolla of
cariur poid dircctly b hou!.holdr empbyod bf fte irdusfy conerponding b hr crfi.
6. Each ahfy h cofrinn 6 ,?rr.antt 0io brd chil!. in numbat olitbt h oll irdurtio hr oad[dd(ionol ir, in f'n indr$y cdrafonding b
th. €nry.
NOlE.-{lulpliet3 a]! ba..d on lha 2lx)2 Brnclma* lnpuloupul TiUe fd lh€ Nltion ard 2000 r.gidd d5til. hdu!fiy List A irr.rrifrcs fic
indnthr conarDondinq lo ha anlri€.
SOURCE-Rrgionol lqiutsOtrpul llod.ITE Sytbrt (RIMS ll), Rtimd Producl Divirkn, Ermar ol Economh AnsVrl.r.
Table 2-5 Print Screen of RIMS ll Multipliers Used
13
3. lntroduction and Scope of Work
This report presents an analysis of the economic impact of constructing and
operating the Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort, located in Brinnon, Jefferson
County, Washington state. This report contains the economic impact analysis for the
construction and renovation of the building, and the operations of the casino, hotel, food
and beverage service, retail shops, and convention space. All calculations are based
on the RIMS ll inpuUoutput model coefficients for Clallam, Jefferson, and Kitsap
counties.
Section (4) contains a brief discussion of the RIMS ll model and its multipliers.
Section (5) provides a more detailed explanation of how indirect jobs are calculated in
regional inpuUoutPut model.
Section (6) presents summary economic statistics for Clallam, Jefferson, and
Kitsap counties and compares them to the statistics for the state of Washington and the
overall U. S. economy. These tables include employment by occupation and industry
sector, family and household income by decline and for the mean and median, and
poverg rates. Additional tables in Section (6) show labor market statistics for the past
decade, and the level and growth rate of population and personal income for these
areas through 2009. Section (7) shows the location of these three counties, together
with maps of the area. Because this is a rural county, the property is located in a
Targeted Employment Area.
The remainder of the report contrains the economic impact tables for the various
components and the total impact caused by the activity generated by the Pleasant
Harbor Marina and Golf Resort. Section (8) contains the calculations of the increase in
employment, output, and earnings that will be created from construction and renovation
activity for the 20 major industrial sectors in the RIMS ll model. Because this project will
be built in three phases, the number of jobs created is shown in three separate tables.
Section (9) contains economic impact tables for the operations in the first part of
the project, which includes hotel and guest rooms and retail space. Section (10) shows
similar tables for operations in the second part of the project, which will include hotels,
retail stores, spa and fitness center, office administration, conference room facilities,
restaurants, and building and grounds maintenance. Section (11) provides similar
information for the hote! facilities to be added in the final phase of the project. Section
(12) provides summary statistics for each of the three phases, combining the results for
construction and operating jobs in each phase.
14
4. Discussion of RIMS !l Final Demand Methodology
The following material has been condensed from the RIMS ll User Handbook
lntroductlon and General Comments
Effective planning for public- and private-sector projects and programs at the
State and local levels requires a systematic analysis of the economic impacts of these
projects and programs on affected regions. ln turn, systematic analysis of economic
impacts must account for the inter-industry relationships within regions because these
relationships largely deterrnine how regional economies are likely to respond to project
and prograrn changes. Thus, regional input-output (l-O) multipliers, which account for
inter-industry relationships within regions, are usefu! tools for conducting regional
economic impact analYsis.
ln the 1970s, the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) developed a method for
estimating regional l-O multipliers known as RIMS (Regional lndustrial Multiplier
System), which was based on the work of Garnick and Drake. ln the 1980s, BEA
completed an enhancement of RIMS, known as RIMS !l (Regional lnput-Output
Modeling System), and published a handbook for RIMS ll users. ln 1992, BEA
published a second edition of the handbook in which the multipliers were based on
more recent data and improved methodology. ln 1997, BEA published a third edition of
the handbook that provides more detrail on the use of the multipliers and the data
sources and methods for estimating them.
RIMS ll is based on an accounting framework called an l-O table. For each
industry, an l-O table shows the industrial distribution of inputs purchased and outputs
sold. A typical l-O table in RIMS ll is derived mainly from two data sources: BEA's
national l-O table, which shows the input and output structure of nearly 500 U.S.
industries, and BEA's regional economic accounts, which are used to adjust the national
l-O table to show a region's industrial structure and trading patterns.
Using RIMS ll for impact analysis has several advantages. RIMS ll multipliers
can be estimated for any region composed of one or more counties and for any
industry, or group of industries, in the national l-O table. The accessibility of the main
data sources for RIMS ll keeps the cost of estimating regional multipliers relatively low.
Empirical tests show that estimates based on relatively expensive surveys and RIMS ll-
based estimates are similar in magnitude.
BEA's RIMS multipliers can be a cost-effective way for analysts to estimate the
economic impacts of changes in a regional economy. However, it is important to keep in
mind that, like all economic impact models, RIMS provides approximate order-of-
magnitude estimates of impacts. RIMS multipliers are best suited for estimating the
impacts of small changes on a regional economy. For some applications, users may
15
want to supplement RIMS estimates with information they gather from the region
undergoing the potential change. To use the multipllers for impact analysis effectively,
users must provide geographically and industrially detailed information on the initial
changes in output, earnings, or employment that are assoclated with the project or
program under study. The multipliers can then be used to estimate the total impact of
the project or program on regional output, earnings, and employment.
RIMS ll is widely used in both the public and private sector. ln the public sector,
for example, the Department of Defense uses RIMS ll to estimate the regional impacts
of military base closings. State transportation departments use RIMS ll to estimate the
regional impacts of airport construction and expansion. ln the private-sector, analysts
and consultants use RIMS ll to estimate the regional impacts of a variety of proJects,
such as the development of shopping malls and sports stadiums.
R nts ll Methodology
RIMS ll uses BEA's benchmark and annual l-O tables for the nation. Since a
particular region may not contain all the industries found at the national level, some
direct input requirements cannot be supplied by that region's industries. lnput
requirements that are not produced in a study region are identified using BEA's regional
economic accounts.
The RIMS ll method for estimating regional l-O multipliers can be viewed as a
three-step process. ln the first step, the producer portion of the national l-O table is
made region-specific by using six-digit NAICS location quotients (Las). The LQs
estimate the extent to which input requirements are supplied by firms within the region.
RIMS ll uses LQs based on two types of data: BEA's personal income data (by place of
residence) are used to calculate LQs in the service industries; and BEA's wage-and-
salary data (by place of work) are used to calculate LQs in the non-service industries.
ln the second step, the household row and the household column from the
national !-O table are made region-specific. The household row coefficients, which are
derived ftom the value-added row of the national l-O table, are adjusted to reflect
regional earnings leakages resulting from individuals uorking in the region but residing
outside the region. The household column coefficients, which are based on the persona!
consumption expenditure column of the national I-O table, are adjusted to account for
regional consumption leakages stemming from personal taxes and savings. ln the last
step, the Leontief inversion approach is used to estimate multipliers. This inverslon
approach produces output, earnings, and employment multipliers, which can be used to
trace the impacts of changes in fina! demand on and indirectly affected industries.
Advantages of RlllfS ll
There are numerous advantages to using RIMS ll. Flrst, the accessibility of the
main data sources makes it possible to estimate regional multipliers without conducting
relatively expensive surveys. Second, the level of industria! detail used in RIMS ll helps
16
avoid aggregation errors, which often occur when industries are combined. Third, RIMS
ll multipliers can be compared across areas because they are based on a consistent set
of estimating procedures nationwide. Fourth, RIMS ll multipliers are updated to reflect
the most recent local-area wage-and-salary and personal income data.
Overvlew of Dlfferent Multiplters
RIMS ll provides users with five types of multipliers: final demand multipliers for
output, for eamings, and for employment; and direct-effect multipliers for eamings and
for employment. These mullipliers measure the economic impact of a change in final
demand, in eamings, or in employment on a region's economy.
The final demand multipliers for output are the basic multipliers from which all
other RIMS ll multipliers are derived. ln this table, each column entry indicates the
change in output in each row industry that results from a $1 change in final demand in
the column industry. The impact on each row industry is calculated by multlplying the
final demand change in the column industry by the multiplier for each row. The total
impact on regional output is calculated by multiplying the final demand change in the
column industry by the sum of allthe multipliers for each row except the household row.
RIMS !l provides two types of multipliers for estimating the impacts of changes
on earnings: final demand multipliers and direct effect multipliers. These multipliers are
derived from the table of final demand output rnultipliers.
The final demand multipliers for eamings can be used if data on final demand
changes are available. !n the final demand earnings multiplier table, each column entry
indicates the change in earnings in each row industry that results from a $1 change in
final dernand in the column industry. The impact on each row industry is calculated by
multiplying the final demand change in the column industry by the multipliers for each
row. The total impact on regional earnings is calculated by multiplying the final demand
change in the column industry by the sum of the multipliers for each row.
Em ployment Mu ltlpllers
RIMS ll provides two types of multipliers for estimating the impacts of changes
on employment: finaldemand multipliers and direct effect multipliers. These multipliers
are derived from the table of finaldemand output multipliers.
The final demand multipliers for employment can be used if the data on final
demand changes are available. ln the final demand employment multiplier table, each
column entry indicates the change in employment in each row industry that results from
a $1 million change in final demand in the column industry. The impact on each row
industry is calculated by multiplying the final demand change in the column industry by
the multiplier for each row. The total impact on regional employment is calculated by
multiplying the final demand change in the column industry by the sum of the multipliers
for each row.
17
The direct effect multipliers for employment can be used if the data on the initial
changes in employment by industry are available. ln the direct effect employment
multiplier table, each entry indicates the total change in employment in the region that
results from a change of one job in the row industry. The total impact on regional
employment is calculated by multiplying the initial change in employment in the row
industry by the multiplier for the row.
Choosing a Multiplier
The choice of multiplier for estimating the impact of a project on output, eamings,
and employment depends on the availability of estimates of the initial changes in final
demand, earnings, and employment. lf the estimates of the initial changes in all three
measures are available, the RIMS ll user can select any of the RIMS !l multipliers. ln
theory, all the impact estimates should be consistent. lf the available estimates are
limited to initial dranges in final demand, the user can select a fina! demand multiplier
for impact estimation. lf the available estimates are limited to initial changes in eamings
or employment, the user can select a direct effect multiplier.
5. Explanatlon of How lndlrect Jobs are Calculated ln a Regional
lnpuUOutput Model
ln spite of the explanation of the RIMS ll model given directly above, some
USCIS adjudicators have asked for further clarification about how that model is used to
determine the increase in the number of indirect jobs. That is an important issue
because, unlike the direct job count, which can be verified by USCIS from various
payroll and withholding documents, the calculation of indirect jobs cannot be verified
directly but depends on mathematical calculations.
The general concept is based on the coefficients in the inpuUoutput model itself
(the same methodology applies to RIMS l!, IMPLAN, or any other generally recognized
and accepted inpuUoutput model). ln any given year, the government calculates how
much input is used for a given production of output. The detailed figures are taken from
the Economic Censuses taken once every five years; the figures are then updated from
various annual supplements.
Basically the process has two steps, each of which is described next in greater
detail. The first is to determine the amount of output, and hence the number of jobs,
required to produce a given amount (say $'t million) of the final product or service.
These are national coefficients. The second is to determine what proportion of those
goods and services are purchased within the local region (the regional purchase
coefficients, or RPCs).
ln the case of a manufacturing process, the national coefficients are based on
production functions: how much coke per ton of steel, how much steel per motor
vehicle, how much flour for a loat of bread, and so on. However, most of the jobs are
18
created in the servics sector, where Commerce Department data are used to determine,
for example, how much restaurants spend on laundry servlces, how much airlines
spend for attorneys, and so on. These figures are based on information contained in
the various Economic Censuses. The national coefficients would also determine, for
example, how many architects and engineers would be hired for a construction project
of a given scope and size, and how many new employees at flnancial institutions would
be required to handle the additiona! cash flow generated by the new business. Both of
these are discussed below in greater detail.
Even after these coefficients are determined, however, the regional purchase
coefficients (RPC) must still be estimated. lf, for example, a trucking firm spends 1% of
its revenue on accountants, how much of that money is spent on loca! firms, and how
much is spent outside the region?
That answer depends on various factors. The most important is the amount of
the good or service produced within the region. lf a trucking firm, for example, were
located in a small county with no accountants, obviously it would not spend any of that
money locally. That sets a lower limit but is not generally the case. lnstead, a
balancing algorithm is used.
Suppose, for example, that all the firms producing, distributing, or selling goods
and services in a given county spent $10 million on accounting services. Also,
suppose that total billings of all accountants in the county were $20 million. !n that
case, local accountants could handle all the local business, plus business from
neighboring counties. lf, on the other hand, total aerountant billings in the county were
only $5 million, local firms could not spend more than half of the money on local
accountants.
Of course it is possible that there are adequate resources in the county but local
firms choose to use companies outside the county; perhaps prices or service is better.
No inpuUoutput model can account for such anomalies. On the other hand, given
transportation costs, it would be highly unusual for a firm to be located in a given
location and not serve the nearby businesses, instead choosing only those clients who
were farther away.
The RIMS ll model - and other regional inpuUoutput models - assigns regional
purchase coefficients (RPCs) in all cases where the local industry purchases goods and
services from local firms. This matrix could have as many as 406 * 406 = 164,836
elements, although in practice many of them are zero. Large counties with a wide
variety of businesses have more non-zero elements than small counties with relatively
few businesses.
In general, the RPCs tend to be close to zero for most manufactured goods, and
close to unity for most services. While there are many exceptions to this rule, most
firms will use financial, professional, business, and health care services that are located
in that county or contiguous areas.
19
To take just one example of many, consider the number of new jobs created by
architects and engineers for a new construction project of any given size. Most
constructlon cost manuals, such as those published by R. S. Means, indicate that those
costs are usually about 5o/oto 9% of the totaljob. According to the national inpuUoutput
model files, the figures are g.ZYo for commercial constructlon and 4.5Yo for industrial
construction.
These figures can be compared with the proportions of architects and engineers
in the specific regional area, based on the RIMS ll data that are used to determine the
economic multipliers in the specific county group. For this three-county area, the
inpuUoutput model shows proportions of 7.60/o for commercial and 3.9o/o for industrial
construction, indicating that 81o/o of the architects and engineers for commercial jobs
and 90% for industrialjobs are hired locally. These figures are somewhat lower than in
other locations and regions. ln most cases, except for "signature" buildings designed by
famous names, most architects and engineers live in the same region as the buildings
that are being constructed, but because of the rural nature of these counties, the
percentages are lower than usual.
To summarize to this point, the number of indirect jobs as a proportion of direct
jobs depends on (a) the national relationships, and (b) the regional purchase
coefficients. ln our presentation for the businesses in this report, we provide further
discussion of those industries with the largest number of indirect jobs. However, there
are a few industries that produce relatively large numbers of jobs in almost all cases,
and these can be generally discussed at this stage in order to avoid repeating this
information several times. The industries discussed here include banking, real estate,
legal and accounting, architects and engineers, other professional services,
employment services, other business services, restaurants, and government. ln all of
these cases, the vast majority of workers are hired locally. Our comments for the rest of
this section are based on the assumption of a $10 million investment; the results are
linear.
Banking and credit: On an aggregate basis, for every $10 million in deposits,
very broadly defined (M3), there is about 1 new banking employee. As a rough rule of
thumb, the size of M3 is roughly equal to the size of GDP. Hence we would expect
about 1 new banking employee for every $10 million increase in output, as calculated
from the RIMS ll model.
Real estate: Additional real estate employees are based on two factors. One is
the leasing activity of the new building, and the other is the increase in residential rea!
estate activity as people get new jobs, either within the area or by moving into the area.
On a lease basis, a $10 million investment is likely to result in a building of 80,000
square feet. lf it leases for $40/square foot, that would be $3.2 million in annua! lease
payments, and with a 60/o commission would generate $192,000 in revenues, which
would account for about 2 new real estate employees (the figure would be less for
industrial buildings). The increase in employment would also result in some real estate
20
activity as workers moved into better housing in the same location, or moved in from
other areas. ln a normal year, there are about 7 million sales of new and existing
homes for a labor force of about 140 million , or 5o/o. Hence if the total increase in
employment were 200, that would imply 10 real estate transactions; if they average
$200,000 at a 60/o commission, that would be $12,000 per home or a total of $120,000,
which would support approximately 3 new realestate jobs.
Legal & Accounting: Each of these accounts for about 1o/o of total employment;
so if there were a total increase of 200 jobs, we would expect an average of 4 new
employees in this classification.
Architects & Engineers: almost all of these jobs stem from the new construction
activity. This category has already been discussed above; for a $10 million construction
project, which would create about 80 new construction jobs, we would expect about 7
new jobs in architects and engineers for a commercial project and 3 to 4 new jobs for an
industrial project.
Other professional services: This category includes employees in consulting,
scientific research and development, advertising, and management, as well as several
other smaller, specialized categories. ln general, consulting, management, and the all
other category each account for about 1o/o of total employment, and R&D and
advertising account for about Yzo/o ol total employment, for a total of about 4o/o ol total
employment. This figure wi!! vary widely depending on the degree to which consultants
and R&D are used by the new business.
Employment services: On a national average basis, 1 out of every 45 people is
employed by this industry. Here again, the figures will vary widely depending on (a) the
proportion of people who are hired through employment agencies, and (b) the
proportion of the work that is outsourced to employment services.
Business support services include office management, travel arrangement, security,
credit bureaus, telemarketing, and back-office jobs that are outsourced, such as direct
mail, copying, and duplicating services. The back-office services would vary widely
depending on the type of new business; retail stores, for example, would print and
distribute more advertising brochures than a manufacturing operation. On a national
average basis, these jobs account for about 2Yo of total employment.
Building support seryices, which includes janitorial seryices, lawn maintenance,
and waste management. For an office building of 80,000 square feet, the cost would be
approxirnately $2/sq ft per year for maintenance, or $160,000, which would support
about 4 new jobs; here again, the figure would be lower for industrial buildings.
Restaurants: This category reflects business meals. Of course the number of
business meals depends greatly on the type of business; lawyers, accountants, and
consultants will have more business meals than manufacturing plants or water
treatment facilities. On a national average basis, Commerce Department figures show
that total restaurant sales in 2007 were $580 blllion, while consumer expenditures at
21
restaurants were $500 billion. However, that figure also includes tips, which are not
included in restraurant sales. After subtracting 15% tor tips, that indicates about $425
billion in food and beverage purchases by consumers, indicating about $155 billion for
business expenses. With a labor force of approximately 140 million, that is equivalent
to about $1,100 per employee. Hence if 200 new jobs were created, business meal
expenses would rise an average of $221,000, which would imply about 4.5 new indirect
jobs in the restaurant industry. These figures are likely to be somewhat higher when
direct jobs are created for office buildings and hotels.
Government: The increase in public sector employees represents the amount
funded by increased real estate taxes. For a construction project with $10 million in
hard costs, the total value is likely to be between $15 and $20 million when one includes
furniture, fixtures, equipment, and land values. Using a national average property tax
rate of 1%, that would raise $150,000 to $200,000, which would create 3 to 4 new jobs
in the public sector.
6. Economic Parameters for Jefferson, Clallam, and Kitsap Counties
This section is organized as follows. Table 6-1 shows the detailed employment
and income figures for Jefferson County and compares them to the state of Washington
and the United States economy. Table 6-2 shows similar information for Clallam and
Kitsap counties. Table 6-3 shows labor market data over the past decade for the state
of Washington, these counties, and the sum (or average) of the three-county region.
Table 6-1. Key Economic Parameters for Jefferson County, and Comparlson wlth
Washington State and the Unlted States,2010 Data
Subject Jefferson Washington United States
Estimate Percent Estimate percent Estimate
EMPTOYMENT STATUS
Percent
Population 15 years and over
ln labor force
Civilian labor force
Employed
Unemployed
Armed Forces
Percent Unemployed
OCCUPATION
Civilian employed population 16 +
Management, business, science
Service occupations
Sales and office occupations
Construction and ma intenance
Production, transportation
INDUSTRY
Civilian employed population 16 +
25,836
13,023
72,967
12,053
9t4
56
100.0%
50.4%
50.ZYo
46.7%
3.5%
O.ZYo
7.O%
100.0%
38.2%
78.L%
24.4Yo
LO.7%
8.s%
5,342,973
3,489,O44
3,44O,495
3,O70,269
370,226
48,549
(x)
3,07O,269
1,183,135
538,418
715,533
295,145
337,937
100.0%
65.3%
64.4%
57.5%
6.9%
o.9%
to.8%
100.0%
38.s%
775%
23.3%
9.6%
It.o%
243,832,923
156,966,769
155,917,013
139,033,929
16,883,095
L,O49,756
139,033,929
49,975,520
25,059,153
34,711,455
!2,697,3U
16,590,396
100.0%
64.4%
63.9%
57.OYo
6.9%
0.4/o
10.87o
too.o%
35.9%
t8.0Yo
25.OYo
9.1%
IL,9YO
L2,O53 100.0% 3,070,269 L00.1Yo 139,033,928 100.0%
12,053
4,609
2,787
2,938
1,290
1,o29
Agriculture and mining
Construction
Manufacturing
Wholesale trade
Retailtrade
Transportation and utilities
lnformation
Finance, insurance, and real estate
Professional, scientific, management
Education and health care
Arts, entertaln, hotel and food svcs
Other services, except public admin
Public administration
INCOME AND BENEFITS
Total households
Less than 510,000
Slo,ooo to 514,999
s15,000 to s24,999
s2S,00o to s34,999
S35,00O to 549,999
s5O,000 to s74,999
575,000 to 599,999
Sloo,ooo to 5149,999
5150,000 to S199,999
S2oo,ooo or more
Median household income (dollars)
Mean household income (dollars)
Families
Less than S10,00O
slo,ooo to $14,999
S15,ooo to 524,999
525,000 to 534,999
s35,000 to s49,999
s50,000 to s74,999
S75,00O to 599,999
Sroo,ooo to 5149,999
S15o,ooo to 5199,999
5200,000 or more
Median family income (dollars)
Mean family income (dollars)
Per capita income (dollars)
PERCENTAGE BELOW POVERW
Allfamilies
Allpeople
22
334
1,109
655
7t
1,383
5t7
600
567
L,449
2,612
7,256
644
846
14,691
L,362
830
1,931
t,592
2,339
2,755
1,547
1,562
444
330
45,887
58,434
8,875
274
346
933
877
1,258
1,951
1,280
L,326
362
268
58,715
70,932
28,029
9.4%
73.9%
2.8Yo
9.ZYo
5.SYo
o.6Yo
L]-.5%
4.3yo
5.OTo
4.7%
72.O%
21.7%
70.4%
5.3Yo
7.0/o
100.0%
93%
5.6%
13.1%
10.8%
L5.9%
18.8%
10.5%
to.6%
3.0%
2.2%
9r.7%
85.6Yo
100.0%
3.t%
3.9%
10.s%
9.9%
L4.2%
22.O%
L4.4%
L4.9%
4.1%
3.W6
96.9%
89.4%
rc7.6Yo
83.2%
90.8%
81,390
188,012
326,L8!
94,602
363,(M9
L51,294
68,135
173,666
366,473
664,754
264,266
150,139
178,308
2,606,963
t7o,75t
L17,568
259,963
259,214
362,172
508,550
357,147
355,519
123,679
98,300
55,631
77,739
1,581,386
70,797
44,591
t24,553
136,628
273,O57
3118,061
256,080
289,001
103,991
u,627
67,328
83,679
28,364
2.7Yo
6.1%
tO.6Yo
3.1/o
7,-.8%
4.9%
2.2%
s.7%
LI,9YO
2t.7Yo
8.6%
4.9%
s.8%
100.0%
6.6%
4.5%
10.0%
9.9%
L3.9%
19.596
L35%
L3.6Yo
4.7%
3.8%
Ltt.2%
105.1%
100.0%
4.2%
2.7%
7.4%
8.!%
12.7%
20.7%
15.8%
17.2%
6.2%
5.O%
lLl.LYo
105.5%
108.8%
81.4%
87.6%
2,il6,975
8,686,813
14,439,69L
3,941,056
16,203,4O8
6,943,579
3,015,521
9,275,465
14,710,099
32,3!1,!07
12,859,572
6,gt3,Mg
7,tg7,lg3
!14,567,4L9
8,757,190
5,669,965
13,165,390
12,323,322
16,312,385
20,940,859
13,526,500
13,544,839
4,g0g,ggg
4,519,091
50,045
69,259
76,089,045
3,924,25L
2,660,79L
6,770,9t2
7,332,3t9
10,578,051
14,990,531
10,638,931
11,26L,766
4,130,959
3,900,635
50,609
79,339
26,059
t.9%
6.2%
to.4%
2.8%
Lt.7%
4.9%
2.2%
6.7%
LO.6%
23.2%
9.2%
5.0%
s.2%
100.0%
7.6Yo
5.8%
11.5%
10.8%
t4.2%
L8.3%
t7.8Yo
17.8%
4.2%
3.9%
LOO.OYo
5.O%
3.5%
8.9%
9.6Yo
13.9%
L9.7%
L4.O%
74.8%
5.4%
5.7/"
9.2%
L3.4%
tt3%
75.3Yo
Note: in this tablg the percentage figures in black are proportions of the total in that category, while
the percentage figures ln red are relative to the U.S' figures.
23
Jefferson County is a sparsely settled rural county in westem Washington. The
distribution of employment by industry is generally similar to Washington state and the
U. S. except in two areas: it has proportionately less workers in manufacturing, and
more in arts, entertainment, and leisure. Mean and median household and family
incomes are below average, ranging from 86% lo g7o/o of the U. S. figures, but per
capita income is actually above average al107o/o, and the poverty rates are well below
average.
Table 6-2. Key Economlc Parameters for Glallam and Kitsap Countles, and
Gomparlson wlth the Unlted States,2010 Data
Sublect
EMPLOYMET'IT STATUS
Population 16 years and over
ln labor force
Civilian labor force
Employed
Unemployed
Armed Forces
Percent Unemployed
OCCUPATION
Civilian employed poPulation 16 +
Management, business, science
Service occupations
Sales and office occupations
Construction and maintenance
P roduction, transportatio n
INDUSTRY
Civilian employed population 15 +
Agriculture and mining
Construction
Manufacturing
Wholesale trade
Retailtrade
Transportation and utilities
lnformation
Finance, insurance, and real estate
Professional, scientific, management
Education and health care
Arts, entertain, hotel and food
services
Other services, except public admin
Public admlnistration
INCOME ANO BENEF]TS
Clallam
Estlmate Percent
Kitsap
Estimate Percent
United States
Estimate
60,103
28,922
28,183
25,029
3,154
739
7m..O%
48.1%
46.9%
4t.6%
5.2%
7.2%
7L.2%
100.0%
33.9%
24.6Yo
20.4/o
72.2Yo
8.9Vo
202,749
129,775
719,697
1o5,492
14,205
10,078
100.0%
il.2%
59.2%
52.2/o
7.O%
5.O%
Ll.9%
243,932,923
155,965,769
155,917,013
139,033,929
16,883,085
1,0/l9,756
139,033,929
49,975,620
25,059,153
34,777,455
12,697,3O4
16,590,396
Percent
100.0%
64.4%
63.9%
57.O%
6.9%
o.4%
10.8%
100.0%
35.9Yo
L8.O%
2s.o%
9.tYo
tLs%
25,O29
8,475
6,163
5,106
3,062
2,223
25,O29
1,315
1,738
7,376
292
2,597
1,169
514
t,460
2,096
5,545
1o5,492
39,624
20,054
24,4t!
LL,259
to,!24
1O5,492
637
7,632
11,513
545
72,752
4,494
2,393
5,245
10,334
23,787
100.0%
37.6%
19.OYo
23.2%
70.7%
9.6%
100.0%
53%
6.9%
s.5%
7.2%
10.3%
4.7Yo
2.1%
5.8Yo
8.4Yo
22.5%
lAO.OYo
O.6Yo
7.ZYo
LO.9%
0.5%
72.1%
4.3Yo
2.3%
5.OYo
9.8Yo
22.s%
139,033,929
2,646,975
8,696,913
L4,439,697
3,941,066
L6,203,409
6,843,579
3,O75,52L
9,275,465
14,710,099
32,31!,107
100.0%
L.9%
6.2%
LO.4%
2.$Yo
7L.7Yo
4s%
2.2%
6.7%
LO.6%
23.2%
2,653
L,844
2,340
lO.6Yo
7.4Yo
93%
9,507
5,668
10,891
91%
5.47o
LO.3Yo
12,859,572
6,9L3,449
7,187,793
9.2Ys
5.OTo
5.2Yo
Totalhouseholds
Less than Sto,ooo
S1o,o@ to St4,999
s15,000 to s24,999
525,000 to 534,999
s31000 to s49,999
5s0,000 to Sz+,999
s71000 to 599,999
s100,000 to 5149,999
s150,000 to s199,999
5200,000 or more
Median household income (dollars)
Mean household income (dollars)
Families
Less than $10,0@
s1q00oto $14,999
515,0@to $24,999
s25,00o to s34,999
s35,000 to s49,999
Ss0,000 to 574999
575,000 to 599,999
Sroo,ooo to 5149,999
Slso,ooo to S199,999
5200,0@ or more
Median family income (dollars)
Mean family income (dollars)
Per capita income (dollars)
PERCENTAGE BELOW POVERTY
Allfamilies
Allpeople
30,430
2,779
1,540
4,536
4,432
4,879
5,242
3,468
2,764
s98
192
38,841
50,652
L8,392
759
238
2,413
2,49L
2,819
3,652
3,127
2,2t4
477
192
53,327
61,189
22,254
24
7.O%
L6.O%
100.0%
9.L/o
5.1%
14,9%
14.6/o
t6.o%
L7,ZYO
11.4%
9.1%
2.O%
o.6%
77.6Yo
74.zyo
100.0%
4.1%
L3%
t3.t%
t3.s%
153%
t9.wo
t7.w
72.ffi
2.6%
1.@6
88.O%
77.t%
85.4Yo
99,150
5,381
4,292
7,779
9,881
15,048
21,030
15,403
t2,366
4,665
3,306
56,303
70,756
66,47
2,L19
1,443
4,268
3,953
9,534
14,399
t2,328
10,879
4,066
3,049
68,800
83,257
28,808
100.0%
5.4%
4.3%
7.8%
t0.o%
15.2%
2t.2%
15.5%
12.SYo
4.7%
3.3%
112.5%
lO3.7Yo
100.0%
3.2%
2.2%
6.5%
6.0%
14.4%
27.8%
t8.7%
16.5%
6.2%
4.6%
LL3.SYo
t0/3%
110.5%
1L4,567,419
g,757,tgo
6,669,965
13,165,380
t2,323,322
16,312,385
20,940,859
13,526,500
13,544,839
4,809,998
4,519,091
50,046
59,259
76,099,045
3,824,25L
2,660,797
6,770,912
7,332,319
10,578,051
14,990,631
10,638,931
tt,261,766
4,130,969
3,900,636
60,509
79,339
26,059
100.o%
7.6%
s.8%
Lt.5%
10.8%
t4.2Yo
18.3Yo
7l.8To
LL.lYo
4.2Yo
3.9Yo
l00.OYo
5.O%
3.5Yo
8.9%
9.6Yo
13.9Yo
t9.7Yo
t4.OYo
14.8%
5.4%
5.7%
61.9%
1@.6%
8.3Yo
LL.3Yo
73.5%
73.9%
tt.3%
15.3Yo
Of these two counties, Kitsap is more affluent, with median and mean incomes
ranging trom 104o/o to 113o/o of the national average, while for Clallarn, the figures are
much lower, ranging from 74o/o to 78% of the average. The poverty rates for all people
are in line with these figures; they are 74o/o lor Kitsap and 105% for Clallam, although
the poverty rate for all families in Clallam is much lower. Essentially this discrepancy
arises because Clallam does not have any higher a proportion of poor people than
Kitsap, but it has hardly any rich people.
ln terms of employment distribution, Kitsap has a fairly robust manufacturing
sector, whereas Clallam does not; it has a higher proportion of the workforce in arts,
entertainment and leisure, similar to Jefferson County.
25
Table 0.3. Labor Market Statistics, 2000-2011, for Washlngton State, Three
Countles, and Sum of these Countles
labor Force Employed Unemployed Un Rate, %
2001
2ffi2
2003
2fi4
200s
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2001
2@2
2003
2004
2005
2005
2@7
2oo8
2009
2010
2071,
2001
2002
2003
2@4
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Clallam
Jefferson
25,777
26,745
27,268
28,L67
29,364
29,402
29,7L5
29,967
30,318
30,26L
29,591
2,953,705
2,877,O22
2,973,23O
2,999,526
3,O75,972
3,155,384
3,232,652
3,293,92!
3,793,293
3,167,398
3,165,349
23,759
24,427
24,92O
26,157
2?,465
27,696
27,989
27,854
27,272
27,128
26,699
!7,249
L7,5L4
11,966
12,553
12,772
12,84t
12,944
L2,925
11,980
11,677
11,355
189,009
227,676
232,924
199,708
179,555
163,868
t54,L23
L88,204
329,510
349,065
319,466
2,Ot8
2,318
2,348
2,010
1,899
1,706
1,726
2,L13
3,U6
3,133
2,982
764
974
960
832
757
674
639
755
1,168
1,252
1,197
Washington State
3,O52,7L4
3,104,698
3,746,L54
3,L99,234
3,255,527
3,3t9,252
3,386,775
3,472,127
3,522,8O3
3,516,463
3,484,8L4
6.2
7.3
7.4
6.2
5.5
4.9
4.6
5.4
9.4
9.9
9.2
12,013
L2,488
L2,926
13,385
L3,529
13,515
13,583
13,680
L3,748
L2,929
12,552
7.8
8.7
8.5
7.t
6.5
5.8
5.8
7.t
10.0
10.4
10.1
6.4
7.8
7.4
6.2
5.6
5.0
4.7
5.5
8.9
9.7
9.5
26
Kitsap
2001
2002
2003
2@4
2005
2@6
2007
2008
2009
2070
2011
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
20lL
99,223
1@,085
106,839
717,464
114,306
115,577
116,750
118,352
tts,6s4
115,210
112,390
t34,231
140,026
t43,725
L50,t74
154,543
155,114
157,683
159,131
154,906
154,015
150,434
6,326
7,508
7,703
6,820
6,L21
5,629
5,321
6,t84
9,555
9,847
9,337
9,108
10,900
11,011
9,662
8,777
8,009
7,696
9,052
13,869
74,232
13,516
105,549
111,593
114,542
718,284
LaO,427
t21.,206
722,07L
L24,536
125,309
125,057
tzt,7L7
3 counties
143,339
150,826
154,736
159,836
163,320
Lil,L23
155,369
158,183
768,775
168,247
163,860
6.0
6.7
6.7
5.8
5.1
4.6
4.4
5.0
7.7
7.9
7.7
6.4
7.2
7.1
6.0
5.4
4.9
4.6
5.4
8.2
8.5
8.2
Washington State, and this section of Washington, were relatively unscathed by
the recession, with a peak rate of only 8.5% in 2010, compared to 9.6% nationally;
however, the decline to 8.2o/o was much less impressive than the national decline to
8.9%. Kitsap County was the least hard-hit in the downturn; the unemployment rate in
Jefferson County was marginally higher than the U. S. in 2010, and the gap then
widened in 2011. Overall there were about 13,500 unemployed people in this three-
county area in 2011.
27
7. Location of Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort
Figure 7-1 shows the location of the Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort in
Brinnon, WA (denoted by A). Figure 7-2 shows the map of Jefferson County. Figure 7-
3 shows the site plan of the resort. Figure 7-4 shows the map of all counties in
Washington State.
Figure 7-1. Map of Brlnnon, WA and Slte of Resort
iJkrr -hthltrr
Q L -rr.O.-^.rr&66'&
+
r. lrl. "...,",,i" 9.
E
.,I
El_sl
qrnC,o glc
t+H
BdnM, lvA
r,:l
l'*r
,l
I
I
ro
r.)
v
,,t
T
.a {n
T
trl
..,:.
28
Figure 7-2.Map of Jefferson Gounty, WA
Q - tiknr'ffide''f,MddRu' 'e' {' oqr ,rtG
&C4grhr6tlt
tllL tr.ra. t Lf f,r. -trllE!.t{fiEl.sr|E -t Dt ldll.D
ffD
f.d th lrn
GrtA<rato
Cd.ilra rtpt i
tl.E q/ lre La9a
lo.Darll5.ryl
ClEABi&t-ir
o3orE(ltrrrqrgfi a&6lY,frr, $ra rfttnilull.mnffrgilrr.
@
PrrrlrtrItr
rnd hDqt,Rffiti a lfoqfi. a Oi ll|.ltr o
Yd l*rd Todayr
*oJH.
.- -l'*&", o
-r
F$-.E-l
@
:
Gt dt 1....,,* "o
i,
Flgure 7-3. Site Plan of Resort
rH
- -:. -t
ott
N)(o
$z
:
iE
1E
IE
oa3
iri
E
t
!
!o
flil
E
I
E
I
a
Tl-
m
a
z{
Ftron
r
EE
I
!
E
E
t#
Eq
ai
r
I
e
III
EEIE
E
E
EEryT
Ti
Er
?
5iF
E
s
z
I;
t,
I
!'* ff!HEIto
F
o.E
FIi
Ei
I
T62
E
?
EIa
E
T
I
$}firff
ii ii ai!E
!I
E
'Eiit
I7tIi
I
T
Il
itii
EI
r
3{
IE
EE
o
\
n \
\
til
\
L--
F
2Ii
r
I
f;
ts
7I
30
Figure 7-4. County Map of Washlngton State
rtfialcom
S8n Juan
Fnda, Hr: :
I sland
'j'orlPae'l l '
-::A^;r ir) . :r lqr.'rro.t,
Clall.rn
sod5ka9ilOkrnogrn
'.rlllE,tofi,
R.flnk.
. ,l
;erry -d, ..
Slayan!
bc
q"
Snot'omirh
:. €I(l:
Jcffcruon
Groyt HSroof
p .lrrlr
'r,rCr; ::titilr g,rO
Ul6o'l
slttoo. ' ll(;'ri
Ch!len
.rrik_ ., Oouelot
:- ' !'1.
5r:rII.
L rcolr Spokano
K[01.r
Ef{{hxe .
Graot rrUt i.!.l,or,tiiso,_.i:. ptfrcA
Thurrton Adorrs Whrlman
-glir.
S*J:i !ir:. ihalLll.P.citac Lcrlr
..*Hlfin, co*rrrz.tatO
Fr.nllln
Yak,.1!Be,'lon ^ G.rrirld.q. .t:nFro,
-r4:at.ua1^. rtd .
tryblls -o Asorin
Slemanra -it': ' v$lla
Cl!il
Vffia'er.
Klich'l.l 7
i:lt"a'!m.r cou*y 8r5i. .lr.'..1- .
31
8. Economlc lmpact of Constructlon Costs
The construction and total development budget supplied by the owners is shown
in Table 8-1. For our calculations, we use all hard costs plus EB-S eligible soft costs,
which include professional fees. On this basis, the total construction cost number
entered into the RIMS ll model is $250.3 million. Figure 8-2 shows the e,onstruction
timeline.
Table E-1. Summary of Gonstruction and Development Budget
Part of Project Construction Costs Total Development Budget
Stage 1, Phases 1, 2, and 3 $19,320,000 $36,928,000
Stage 2, Phase 1 $47,740,000 $72,604,000
Stage 2, Phases 2 &3 $148,942,400 $200,299,400
The economic impact for each of these three time periods is calculated using the
RIMS lt final demand construction multiplier for the three-county area described above.
Each of the three time periods listed above spans more than two years, as shown in
Tables 8-2 through 8-4, so direct as well as indirect and induced jobs generated by
construction activity can be counted. On that basis, the multiplier is 12.09. Hence
construction activity would create 233 jobs in Stage 1: 577 jobs in Stage 2, Phase 1;
and 1,800 jobs in Stage 2, Phases 2 &3.
Table 8-2. Detailed Gonstruction and Development Budget for Stage 1, All Phases
Prol.ct Nam.
RESORT
Jrnutry
20t3 MaY 2013 Juna 2013
Octob.,
2013
Jlnurry
2011
set
LandCost: S21.000.000
Prcllm.
Budqrt
P.ellm.
BudoctDESCRIPTION
THE LAND
3.780.000 2.730.000RawLand(as%oftot l)
120.000 65,000 220.offiFces for Plannino-D,cvclopmcnt €uildlnc
800,000Ofl-Site Cosb
230,000 200.000 200.000 200.o00StrioElino. Gredim end Demolition
75,000 75,000 600.000On-Site Costs
100.000 600_000Tcmoorarv Cost3. Sionaoe, & Land Devolopnent
100,000 120,000 65.000Landscaolno, lmeafion E RGt.nton
75,000 120,000 130.000Stre.t Pavcment & Surface Parking
90.000lntarcsl br Limilod Panrre6hlp
300.000Contnooncy
TOTAL 4,130,000 250,000 1,670,000
32
3,750,000 265,000 930,000 1.960,000
Table 8.3. Detailed Constructlon and Development Budget for Stage 2, Phase 1
41
500_000 500.000 1.800.000 3.250.000 3.250_000
nle 1.140.000
135.000 200.000 200.000 200.000
250.000 200.000 200.000 65.000 85.000 85,000
Dereloomcnt iranaoer Fees
250.000 700.000 835.000 2.085.000 3,53s.000 4.675.m0TOTAL
75_O0065,000 112,000
230.000125.000
98.000 121.000ProoertY Taxes
210.000 0 305.000190,000 'r21.000
IHE IIIARKETING COSTS
195.000 50.000 50.000 50.000All tvLdia Exoosure
D€corauno Costs
112.000 212.000 312.000Ooeratlons
195.000 162,m0 262,000 362,000TOTAL
IHE EROKERAGE COSTS
50.000 100.000 100.000ln House Commissions
60.000 60.000MLS Conttibution to Sales
70.m0 70.000 70.000AdrninEtration
120.000 230.000 230,000TOTAL
GENERAL & ADtr{UglE IvE_
50.@0 50.000 50,000 100.000 100.000 100.moofice stafi & supglt€s &
50.o00 100.(m50,000 50,000 100,000 100.000
cor{fl!GEr{qY
1m_000 100.00{)r00_000100,000 100,000 100.000Furds for Overaoes
4s,000
100.m0 145.000 100.000 100.000100,000 100,000TOTAL
]rot{.rn^otiloN4! cQqrs
275.000Fumrtrre. Flxlur€s & EqulPmert
275,000TOTAL
't.720.000 r.3r0.000 3.170.000 6.602,000 4.492.000 6,518,000TOTAL OF COSTE
PHASE 1COMMENCE
Jun.20l4 Octob€r 2014 Aprll 20{5 Deccmbrr 2015
Staoe 2LandCost $21,000,000
Phsse 1
PrGllm. BudoetDESCRIPTIOT{
Proract Naflr.
THE
ftifft C6nstmlion - Buildinq
Ditrt Conslruclion = Perkade
ln.ilrmt Constn clion
prafesslonel Fees- Enoineers & Consultrants
THE FINANCINO
I mal Ccls- lnsurencr. Plan Rsislration
TOTAL
TOTAL
33
THE LAND
Rrw Land (ae % of total)26o/c 5.t160.000
FcG3 lor Plannino-Dcvcloorncnt'Bullding 220.000
Oft-Sit6 Costs r20.000
StriDoino. Gradins and Dcmolition 250,000 250.000 250.000 250,000
On.sltc Cosls 4.600.000 .rc0.m0 400.000 400,m0
TcfllporaryCeB, Signage, & Land
O€vdopmant
t"andscaDinq. lrriqation & Retenlion 200,000 200.000 200.000 200,000
Street Psvcmcnt & Surfacc Parking 300-0m 5m,000
lnterest for Limitad Partn€rshlP 770.000
Continoency 600.000
TOTAL 10.850.000 850.000 1.150.m0 2.720.000
I}IE CONSTRUCTION
DlrEci Construction - Building 3,300.000 12.000.0m ,l6.000.000 10,720.000
oiract Con$rucdon : Parkade 3.300.000
lndlr.cl Const uclion 265.000 265,m0 265,000 265.000
Profcsslonal Fees, Englnccrs & Congultants 310,000 150.000 65.000 35.000
D€velooment Manae6r Fsas 400.000 4S,000
TOTAL 3.875,000 16. t'15.000 16.330.000 11.420.000
THE FINANCING
LGoal Costs. lnsu.ance, Plan Rlgiglqlign 1 12.000
lnt€re3t ll Fecs on Construdbn Loan 320.000
Prooarlv Taxes 320.000
TOTAL 432.000 320,m0
THE T'ARKETING COSTT
70.000 70.o00 70.0o0 70.000
D.coretino Co6ls s00,000 1.200.000
Operations 212.O00 295,000 395.000 395.000
TOTAL 282.000 355,000 965,000 1.665.000
THE BROKERAGE COSTS
ln House Commisslons r20.000 120,000 120,000 1 20.000
MLS Contribution to Sales (367o)75,000 75.000 75.m0
Administration 265.000 265_000 265.000 365.000
TOTAL 385,000 .160,000 450.000 560,000
GENERAL & ADMINISTRATIVE
Officc Staff & Suoolics & Facilities 200.000 2m.000 200,000 200.000
TOTAL 200.@0 200.000 200_000 200,000
CONTINOENCY
Funds lor Ov€raqes 125.000 125.000 125,000 125.000
Wananty & Serviceg 200.000
TOTAL 1 25.000 125,000 125,000 325,000
NON.TRADTnONAL COSTS
Fumlture. Finures & EauiDmGnl 1.9m.000
TOTAL
All lt edie Exoosure
34
1.900.000
TOTAL OF CO3T9 16.1€.000 18.1 15.000 19.550.0m 18,790,000
Table 84. Detailed Constructlon and Development Budget for Stage 2,
Phases 2 and 3
Projrct Nlrnc COMMENCE PHASE2 COMMENCE
P}IASE
3
ilav 20lG
Scptember
2016 M.y 2017 l/lav 2017
Srptambcr
2017 Mav 2018
Drcombcr
20tE
LandCost S2r.000.000
Prcllm.
Budo.t
Prslim.
BudqetDESCRIPTION
THE LAND
4.620.0004,410.000R.rv Land (as % ot tottl)
360.000 n7.000EcsT;FEnd ng-cb'relopment -
Buildlns
60.0m 110.000I,1 20,000Ofr-Srte Costs
50.000 20,m0 20,000 20,000 200,000Stripping, G.ading and S rne!!lio!-
1 50.000 250.000 250.0(x)250.000On€itcCosls
300.000 3(n,000 300,000 300,000 300.000
-ffiporarvCots, Stgn6gc, & tand
Devcloom€nt
260.000 260.000 260.000 400.000 400.000 400,000Landscaping. lnigtuon LBqlqn'len
460.000 300.000 200.il)o sfl).000 500.000Slre€l Pavcmcnt & Surfacc Pa4<!09
1.1m.mo 840.000lnt r.st for Lirnild Partncrship
500.000Conllnoancv 500,000
1.290.000 2.750.fiO 5.227.ffiO 600.o006,390,000 830,000 1.200.000 2.240.OO0rOTAL
THE CONSIRUCIION
6.200.000 14.000.000 28,000,000 :1i1,000,000 7,000,000 '16.000.000 20.000.000 9,800,000Dirod Constnrtion:R,rildi6d
2.000.000 2.000.000 2.s00.000 422.400Oi,lct Consttuctioo = Parkadc
450_000 450.000 450,m0 464_000 564_OO0450,000 564,000 564.000lndirect Construction
364.m0 200.000 200.000 200.000 2s0.000 150.000 150_000 1 50,000
Profcssiooal Fece, Engin.ets E
Co.rsufEnts
600.000 600.m0 600,000 600.m0Dcrvelooment Manaoer Fcos
7.014.000 17.250.000 30.650.000 36.750.000 7.714.N0 17.736.400 20.71 4.000 1 1.1 14.000TOTAL
THE FIiIA'IICING
270.000 270.000 270,000 270.000 270,000 270.000 270.m0 270,000
TcaiEoor,lnEureniE. Pten
Registraton
350.000 350.000 350.000 3so.m0 300.000 3m.000 300,m0 300.000lnter.st & F€o3 on ConstructioQ 19!n
350,000 700.000Prooerw Taxls
620.000 620.000 970.000 620.000 570.000 570.000 1.270.000 570,000TOTAL
THE T'ARKETING COSTS
70,000 70,000 70,000 70,000 80,000 80,000 80.000 80.000All M€dia Exgosure
1.000.000 1.300.000 1.400.000 1.000.000 1,200,000Dccoratino Costs
410.000 5'10.000 510.000 610.000 650.000 650_000 650,000 650.000Oo€ratons
TOTAL 480,000 1,580,000 1,880,000 2.080,000 730,000 730,000 't.730.000 r,s30.000
35
Tables 8-5 8-6, and 8-7 show the detailed industry impacts of construction
expenditures for each of the three phases enumerated above. Each stage of the project
is expected to last more lhan 24 months.
TI{E BROTERAGE COSTS
ln Houss Co.nml$lons 250.000 250.000 250.000 250.000 250.000 250.000 250,@0 250.000
MLS Contributlon to Salel (96%)100.000 100_000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100.000
Admlnistration 4r0.m0 510_000 510,0{n 610,000 650,000 650.000 750.000 750,000
TOTAL 660.000 860.000 860.m0 960.000 gfi).000 1,000,000 I,100.000 1.100.m0
GENERAL & ADIUINIgTRATIVE
Offica Stetf E Suooli€s & Facillties 250,000 250.000 250.000 250.000 250.000 250_000 250,000 250.000
TOTAL 250,000 250,000 250,000 2so.000 250,000 250,m0 250.mo 250.000
CONTIN6ENCY
Funds for Ovrragos 250.(x)0 250.000 250,000 250,000 250.000 250,000 250.000 250,000
Wananty & ScrMccs
TOTAL 250.000 2s0.000 250.000 250.000 250,000 250,000 250.000 250,000
NON.TRAOITIONAL COSTS
Fumitu.o, Flxturrs & Equipmenl 300,000 400.000 500,000 300.000 400.000 500.m0
TOTAL 300.000 fio.000 500,000 300,000 400.000 500,000
TOTALOF COETg 15,664,000 21940m0 36550000 44200000 15641000 211364N 289140m 17954000
lndustry group
Agriculture, forestry fi shing
Mining
Utilities
Construction
Manufacturing
Wholesale trade
Retail trade
Transportation and warehousing
lnformatlon
Finance and insurance
Real estate and rental and leasing
Professional, scientific, services
Management of companies
Administrative and waste mgmt
Educationa! services
Employment
0.9
0.9
0.5
L42.5
6.7
1.6
23.2
2.5
1.3
2.2
5.5
8.6
0.2
4.6
1.8
Output
189
129
207
L9,426
L,426
338
2,0(x)
32s
348
64L
L,756
1,408
50
295
93
Earnings
4L
31
43
6,691
278
100
657
104
77
L47
100
522
27
ttz
35
Table 8-5. !ncrease in Employment, Output, and Earnings, Construction Activity
Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort, Stage 1, All Phases
36
Table 8-5 shows there would be about 233 total new jobs created from
construction activity for all phases of Stage 1. Total output would rise about $31.2
million, and household earnings would increase about $9.9 million.
Health care and socialassistance
Arts, entertainment, and recreation
Accommodation
Food services and drinking Places
Other services
Households
t2.L
2.3
0.9
7.9
4.7
1.5
7,240
Lt4
83
452
680
0
s49
39
25
139
193
74
907Total233.6 3
lndustry group
Agriculture, forestry, fi shing
Mining
Utilities
Construction
Manufacturing
Wholesale trade
Retailtrade
Transportation and warehousing
lnformation
Finance and insurance
Real estate and rental and leasing
Professional, scientific, services
Management of comPanies
Administrative and waste mgmt
Educational services
Health care and social assistance
Arts, entertainment, and recreation
Accommodation
Food services and drinking Places
Other services
Households
Total
Employment
2.3
2.3
1.2
352.1
16.5
4.O
57.2
6.3
3.3
5.4
16.3
21.3
0.6
11.3
4.3
30.0
5.8
2.2
19.6
71.7
3.8
Output
468
320
511
4&003
3,523
835
4,941
802
859
1,585
4,34O
3,480
t24
730
229
3,055
282
205
7,717
1,680
0
Earnings
100
76
105
15,509
687
248
1,623
258
191
363
248
1,299
53
277
85
1,356
95
62
344
477
33
577.3 77
Table 8-6. Output and Earnings per New Employee, Construction Activity
Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort, Stage 2, Phase 1
37
Table 8-6 shows there would be about 577 total new jobs created from
construction activity for Stage 2, Phase 1. Tota! output would rise about $77.1 million,
and household earnings would increase about $24.5 million.
Table 8-7 shows there would be about 1,801 total new jobs created from
construction activity for Stage 2, Phases 2 and 3. Total output would rise about $240.5
million, and household earnings would increase about $76.4 million.
lndustry group
Agriculture, forestry, fishing
Mining
t tilities
Construction
Manufacturing
Wholesale trade
Retailtrade
Transpo rtation and warehousing
lnformation
Finance and insurance
Real estate and rental and leasing
Professionaf , scientific, services
Management of comPanles
Administratlve and waste mgmt
Educational services
Health care and social assistance
Arts, entertainment, and recreation
Accommodation
Food services and drinking Places
Other services
Households
Total
Employment
7.2
7.0
3.8
1098.6
51.6
L2.3
178.6
19.5
to.2
16.8
s0.7
66.5
1.8
35.1
13.5
93.5
18.1
7.0
61.1
36.4
tL.7
Output
1,450
998
1,594
t4g,76t
10,992
2,606
15,415
2,5O2
2,681
4,945
13,539
10,858
387
2,279
715
9,562
879
640
3,495
5,243
0
Earnings
313
238
328
51,504
2,t45
774
5,064
804
595
1,132
774
4,O21
t64
864
268
4,23O
298
194
1,o72
1,499
104
1801.2
Table 8-7. Output and Earnings per New Employee, Construction Activity,
Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort, Stage 2, Phases 2 and 3
2@,54L
38
9. Economic lmpact of Operations in Stage 1, All Phases
The developer has provided the following summary of the ernployment-creating
activities in al! phases of Stage 1.
STAGE 1: PHASES 1*2-3: EMPLOYMENTCREATION:
a) The Forester will layout healthy trees and shrubs that need to be reloceled fol futuro re-planting.
b) Heavy Equipment operators for moving materlals on-site, aew€ll as stablishlrB a Gravel Crushing Plant hr
the constructlon materlals and roads lncluding dralnage matarialg for the GolICourse. and supplying gravel for
an on-aite @ncrete Batch Plant.
o) The sile has ernrnense amounts of natural sands available for gralnscreening for the Golf Course, palhways.
and the manufacture ofooncrele.
d) lnsbllation of a Waste Wbter Reclamathn Plant and the 13 acre Pit linerbr the containment of 120 millon
gallons ol Class A recycled waler.
e) Rough gradlng br roads and pathways at the Marina Park, and the rehab of the exisling struclures and lhe
marlna dock8.
f) Proteclion of the Natural and Conssrvataon Eas€ment areag from the regrading and detenllon techniques for
preventing waler from leaving the site and while redkeot ing towards lhe Reservolr.
g) Constructlon of the Maritime Mllage, the Reunion House and HarborMew House for oocupancy and Relail
uses.
h) Provlding 4 COGEN unfts for ercrgy for the Lift Stations and Elec{rlcal, as well ag t\laste Heat utilizaUon.
The buildings in Stage 1 are expected to include 66 rooms for accommodation
and 12,000 square feet of retail space. The average daily rate for the accommodations
is expected to be about $100, with an assumption of a 60% occupancy rate, which was
the national average in 2011 according to Smith Travel Research. On that basis,
annual hotel revenues would be $1.44 million, which would create 21 totaljobs.
Using unweighted averages because the tenants are not yet known, retail sates
average about $469 per square foot on a national basis, as shown in Table 9-1, but we
have reduced this figure to $400 to take into account the rural nature of this resort.
Assuming an 80% occupancy rate, which is somewhat below the 2011 figure of 860/o for
retail stores nationally, total revenue would be $3.84 million; that would create 26 total
jobs. The detailed industry figures are shown in Tables g-2 and g-3.
Clothing and accessories ex warehouse
Hobbies and crafts
Electronics
General Merchandise
Groceries
Home lmprovement
Home Furnishings
Jewelry ex Tiffany's
Pharmacies
Shoe stores
331
147
769
548
559
281
243
783
911
354
234
Table 9-1. Retail S=!g: 1"r Square Foot by Selected Categories, Bizminer Survey
39
lndustry group
Agriculture, forestry, fishing
Mining
Utilities
Construction
Manufacturing
Wholesale trade
Retail trade
Transportation a nd warehousing
lnformation
Finance and insurance
Realestate and rental and ieasing
Professio na l, scientifi c, services
Management of companies
Administrative and waste mtmt
Educational services
Health care and social assistance
Arts, entertainment, and recreation
Accomrnodation
Food services and drinking places
Other services
Households
Total
Employment
0.0
0.0
0,1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.8
0.3
o.2
0.1
0.5
0.3
0.1
0.5
0.1
0.8
o.2
15.7
0.8
0.3
0.1
Output
3
0
34
16
75
11
70
28
37
41,
t?t
37
13
39
6
78
t2
L,446
46
46
0
2,l1.o
Earnings
21.3
1
0
7
6
5
3
23
13
9
10
7
16
5
74
2
34
4
440
74
13
1
627
Table 9-2. lncrease in Employment, Output, and Earnings, 66 Hotel Rooms
lndustry group
Agriculture, forestry, fishing
Mining
Utilities
Construction
Manufacturing
Wholesale trade
Retail trade
Transportation and warehousing
lnformation
Finance and insurance
Employment
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
21.0
0.4
o.2
0.2
Output
4
0
26
13
26
19
1,817
38
43
60
ings
1
0
6
4
5
6
597
15
10
74
Earn
Table 9-3. lncrease in Employment, output, and Earnings, 12,000 Square Feetof
Retail Space
Real estate and rental and leasing
Professional, scientifi c, services
Ma nagement of companies
Adminlstrative and waste mgmt
Educatlonal services
Health care and social assistance
Arts, entertainment, and recreation
Accommodation
Food services and drinking Places
Other services
Households
t.t
0.3
0.0
0.5
0.2
0.9
0.2
0.1
0.7
0.3
0.1
26.7
186
37
5
35
8
97
11
6
38
49
0
L4
16
3
13
3
43
3
2
t2
14
1
78LTotal
40
10. Economic lmpact of Operatlng Jobs ln Stage 2, Phase I
The developer summary of the operations that will be activated in this stage of
the project is given first, followed by the economic irnpact tables for each activity.
Stage 2 Phase 1 is the construction and grading for the Golf Course, ae vrell as the Mairr Resort Complex
exhibited ae T1.
The consbuction for the golf course requires Tree Movers, Foreslers, Heavy Equipment Operalors, and lhe
consultants to appove and supervise all aspects ol the development of a World Claes Croll Resort.
The Condo-Tel encompasses our largest footprlnt and totals +/- 140,000 s.f. for Patrons and Guests as well as a
Restaurant, Lounge, and Bar, including the Gotto and Spa and Health and Wellness Center; a Commercial
Kitchen. a Wedding Chapel, and 3 Conference Centers; Managernent Offhes, Retail Sundry Sales; and The Golf
Pro€hop.
Vehicle Parking for Patrons and Guests is belour grade.
The developer has not supplied precise information about the breakdown of the
140,000 square foot Condo-Tel project. Based on material that has been supplied by
the developer, we have estimated the following square footage:
24 guest rooms, 18,000 square feet
Spa/fitness center, 15,000 square feet
Retail space, 20,000 square feet
Office administration space, 5,000 square feet
Conference centers, 30,000 square feet
Wedding chapel, 5,000 square feet
Restaurant, 7,000 square feet
Common area space, 50,000 square feet (no additionaljobs)
The developer has also identified 104 full{ime positions for operations and
maintenance of the properties, including the golf course, so those are treated
separately. Since most of these jobs will be keeping the golf @urse in shape, we have
41
The employment effects in this section are calculated based on the following
metrics:
Guest rooms. The 24 rooms are more luxurious accommodations that are expected to
have an average daily rate of $200. The same 60% occupancy rate is assumed. Total
annual revenues would be $'1.05 million, which would create 15 new jobs.
Spa/fitness center. Average revenue, as explained below, is expected to be $180 per
square foot, for total revenue of $2.7 million, which would create 89 new jobs.
Retail space. The same metrics would apply as described in the previous section:
sales of $400 per square foot and an 80% occupancy rate, which would create 44 new
jobs.
Office administration space. Assume an average of 4 direct jobs per 1,000 square feet,
or 20 direct jobs, times the employment multiplier of 1.517, which would be 30 jobs.
Conference center space will be rented out, so we use the rental income multiptier.
Expected average rental income is $864,000, which would produce about 12 totaljobs.
Wedding chapel, no full-time jobs assumed.
Restaurant, sales of $550 per square foot for total annual revenue of $3.85 times finat
demand multiplier of 21.38, which would be 82 new jobs.
Finally, the 104 direct jobs in building and grounds maintenance would be multiplied by
the employment multiplier of 1.22, for a total of 127 iobs.
Hence there would be an estimated 423 operating jobs from the activities in
Stage 2, Phase 1.
The detailed industry results are shown in 6 tables given below; Table 10-7 then
provides a summary of all operating jobs for Stage 2, Phase 1.
lndustry group
Agricultu re, forestry, fishi ng
Mining
Utilities
Employment
0.0
0.0
0.1
Output
2
0
25
ings
1
o
5
Earn
Table 10-1. Increase in Employment, Output, and Earnings, 24 Luxury Hotels and
Guest Rooms
not further identified specific jobs related to the operations of the golf course itself.
Separate housing will be constructed for these 104 employees, which has already been
included in the construction figures. All these people will be employees of the Pleasant
Harbor Marina and Golf Resort.
Construction
Manufacturing
Wholesale trade
Retailtrade
Transportation and warehousing
lnformation
Finance and insurance
Real estate and rental and leasing
Professiona l, scientifi c, services
Management of companies
Adminlstrptive and waste mgmt
Educational services
Health care and social assistance
Arts, entertainment, and recreation
Accommodation
Food services and drinking Places
Other services
Households
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.6
0.2
0.1
0.1
o.4
o.2
0.0
0.4
0.1
0.6
0.2
Lt-4
0.6
o.2
0.1
72
18
8
51
2t
27
30
88
27
9
28
4
57
9
1,055
33
34
0
4
4
3
t7
10
6
7
5
72
4
10
2
25
3
32L
10
9
1
Total 15.5 457
42
We next turn to the economic impact of spa operations. According to reports
prepared by the International Spa Association (ISPA), there were 14,600 spas in the
U.S. in 2007, with tota! revenues of $9.4 billion. There were 111 million visitors to spas
last year, indicating that the average visitor spent slightly more than $84 per visit. The
total size of all spas in the U.S. was slightly more than 56 million square feet, so
revenue averaged $165/square foot. The industry employed a total of 232,700 people,
of which 113,100 were full-time, 73,100 were part-time, and 42,500 were contract
employees. All these figures are taken from various ISPA press releases and the
Executive Summary of their 2007 report.
While these figures serve as a useful starting point, in many ways they conceal
more than they reveal. The spa industry is quite diverse. First, it can be divided into
several segments: day spas, resort spas, health spas, club spas, and destination spas.
To the extent that all but the first category provides ovemight accommodations, for
purposes of this study we can consider (a) day spas, and (b) all other, which will be
called resort spas here.
Second, as is usually the case for retail or service businesses, the size varies
widely within each category. Many day spas are little more than renamed beauty
parlors; others contain full-service treatrnent facilities and contain up to 30,000 square
feet of space devoted to spa activities. Similarly, resort spas vary widely in size and
function, ranging from bed and breakfasts and small inns where spa activity is
incidental, to major accommodations constructed primarily for spa activities. ln some
43
cases, highly priced spas are found in luxury hotels, which offer highly priced and
intensive services, but are small.
The services offered by most spas cost about $8O/hour. While there are almost
100 different services offered, they can generally be grouped into two major categories,
Less intensive services usually take about Yzhour and cost $40; these include nail care,
electrolysis, waxing, and baths. At most spas, the average cost for more intensive
services such as massages and facials is about $8O/hour. However, at luxury spas,
these are more likely to be priced at $120/hour. We take the extra value added into
account when determining the overal! revenue estimates,
These figures can be used to generate an average figure for revenue per square
foot for the spa. According to the ISPA data, the average day spa visitor spends about
$60 per visit, which is equivalent to 1 % ol the less intensive services. At resort spas,
however, the average visitor spends $180, which consists of 1% of the less intensive
and 1 of the more intensive services.
ISPA data quoted above indicate that the average amount spent on spa facilities
per visitor is equal to $9.4 billion divided by 111 million, or slightly more than $84 per
person. Day spas account for 8Oo/o of the visits, according to ISPA. Using the figures in
the previous paragraph, we find that the $84 per average spa visit is equal to 0.8 times
$60 plus 0.2 times $180.
ln most cases, the application of more intensive services requires approximately
the same amount of space as the low intensive services. Hence the ratios given above
can be used to determine the revenue per square foot at the spa. Based on these
ratios, revenue per square foot at day spas would average $159, while revenue per
square foot at resort spas would average $190. For this facility, we estimate that sales
would average $180 per square foot. When that figure is multiplied by the estimated
size of 15,000 square feet, that would generate revenue of about $2.7 million.
lndustry group
Agriculture, forestry fishing
Mining
Utilitles
Construction
Manufacturing
Wholesale trade
Retailtrade
Transportation and warehousing
lnformation
Employment
0.0
0.0
o.2
0.2
0.2
0.1
1.6
0.4
0.3
5
1
72
28
40
24
139
47
59
ings
1
0
15
9
8
7
45
18
16
Output Earn
Table 10-2. lncrease in Employment, Output, and Earnings, 15,000 Square Foot
Spa and Fitness Center
44
The retail parameters were discussed in the previous section; these calculations
are based on the assumption of an additional 20,000 square feet of retail space in this
phase of the project.
Finance and insurance
Real estate and rental and leasing
Professiona l, scientific, services
Management of companies
Administrative and waste mgmt
Educational services
Health care and social assistance
Arts, entertainment, and recreation
Accommodation
Food services and drlnking places
Other services
Households
o.4
2.6
o.7
0.1
1.0
0.2
1,5
77.2
0.1
1.1
0.6
o.2
114
372
74
19
69
11
152
2,7L6
L4
61
103
0
28
33
32
8
26
4
67
8s4
4
19
28
2
Total 88.8 128
lndustry group
Agriculture, forestry, fishing
Mining
Utilities
Construction
Manufacturing
Wholesale trade
Retailtrade
Transportation and warehousing
lnformation
Finance and insurance
Real estate and rental and leasing
Professional, scientifi c, services
Management of compa nies
Administratlve and waste mgmt
Educational services
Health care and social assistance
Arts, entertainment, and recreation
Accommodation
Food services and drinking places
Other services
Employment
0.0
0.0
0.1
o.2
o.2
0.1
35.1
0.6
0.3
0.3
1.8
0.5
0.0
0.9
0.3
1.6
0.4
0.1
1.1
0.6
3,029
64
71
100
310
62
10
58
t4
t62
18
10
63
82
10
994
26
L7
23
23
27
4
22
5
7t
6
3
19
23
1
0
9
7
9
o utput
7
1
44
21
43
32
Table 10-3. lncrease in Employment, output, and Earnings,20,000 Square Feetof
Additional Retail Space
Earnings
45
Households 0.2 0 2
Total 44.4 1,3O2
Table 10-4 shows average and recommended space for various types of offfce
jobs, as prepared by the GSA. We use the figure of 250 square feet per person, very
close to, but slightly higher than, the average figure of 239 square feet shown in this
table. Slnce there are an estimated 5,000 square feet, there would be 20 direct office
ad m inistration em Ployees.
Table {0-4. Summary Office Space Use
lnsurance comPan
lnsurance company - actual 215 usable square feet per
Consulting company - actual 320 qsable square feet per person
Software enginee ring firm - actual 220 usable square feet per person
Telecommunications company I - actual w/hoteling LSZ-174 usable square feet per person
Telecommunications company ll - actual 325 usable square feet per person
Energy firm - actual "best i er peJsoll
Range of benchmark averages 152 to 321 l1qble square feet per person
Mid-polnt of range 238 usable square feet per person
"Average" ofthe benchmark aretages 2
Recommended Governmentwide standard 200 re feet per person
Output
4
0
23
t2
26
19
131
33
61
95
227
100
10
1,953
lndustry Sroup
Agricultu re, forestry, fi shi ng
Mining
Utilities
Construction
Manufacturing
Wholesale trade
Retail trade
Tra nsportation and warehousing
lnformation
Finance and insurance
Real estate and rental and leasing
Professiona l, scie ntifi c, services
Management of comPanies
Administrative and waste mgmt
L
0
5
4
5
6
43
72
t4
22
13
42
4
915
EarningsEmployment
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
1.5
0.3
0.2
0.3
1.0
0.9
0.0
2t.t
Table 10-5. lncrease in Employment, Output. and Earnings,5,000 Square Feetof
Office Admi nistration Space
46
The figures for the conference center are based on rental income only, since the
space will presumably be rented out to groups who are not affiliated with the resort.
Rental rates for conference centers vary widely by location, but a review of 8 websites
as of April 19, 2O'12 tor conference centers not in major metropolitan areas shows a
cluster of rates around $1.60 per person per day, and about 10 square feet per person.
Hence 30,000 square feet of conference room space would be able to hold 3,000
people, or about $4,800 per day. We estimate a 50o/o occupancy rate, or 180 days per
year, which would equal rental revenue of $864,000.
Educational services
Health care and social assistance
Arts, entertainment, and recreation
Accommodation
Food services and drinking Places
Other services
Households
o.2
1.5
0.5
0.2
1.4
0.5
0.2
30.3
11
151
2L
t4
82
74
0
4
67
7
4
25
2L
2
278Total
lndustry group
Agriculture, forestry, fishing
Mining
Utilities
Construction
Manufacturing
Wholesale trade
Retailtrade
Transportation and warehousing
lnformation
Finance and insurance
Real estate and rental and leasing
Professional, scientific, services
Management of comPanies
Administrative and waste mgmt
Educational services
Health care and social assistance
Arts, entertainment, and recreation
Accommodation
Food services and drinking Places
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
o,2
0.0
0.0
0.1
10.1
0.1
0.0
0.3
0.0
o.2
0.1
0.0
o.2
utput
1
0
13
13
5
3
20
4
7
24
925
15
1
24
2
22
3
2
10
Employment
0
0
3
4
L
1
7
1
1
5
6
1
8
7
1
1
3
o Earnings
723
10
Table 10-6. lncrease in Employment, Output, and Earnings,30,000 Square Feetof
Conference Room Space, Rental lncome Only
47
The average sales per square foot for major chain restaurants is taken from
figures provided by Retail Traffic Magazine at:
http://retailtrafficmao,com/rnaq/retail settino menu/ and reproduced below as Table
10-7. That figure is $550 per square foot.
Table 10-7. Sales Foot for M Chains
Other services
Households
0.1
0,0
13 3
00
Total 11.6 180
Chain
Cheesecake Factory
P.F. Chang's
Cracker Barrel
Olive Garden
Red Lobster
Outback Steakhouse
MacaroniGrill
Carraba's
Joe's Crab Shack
Chili's
California Pizza Kitchen
Red Robin
O'Charley's
Longhorn Steakhouse
Applebee's
Ruby Tuesday
Units
76
90
4U
532
680
66s
198
133
138
7tt
135
110
206
180
372
449
Average
Sq. Ft.
11,(X)O
6,700
10,000
8,000
6,600
6,20O
7,100
6,550
8,000
5,40O
5,000
5,400
6,750
5,100
4,950
5,100
Seats
340
275
L87
235
190
247
26s
255
215
2LO
150
200
255
190
185
205
(Smillions)
Su
Ss.zo
s4.10
Sg.go
Sr.zo
Sg.4o
Sg.so
53.r0
$s.ro
Sg
sz.go
Sz.go
S2.80
sz.oo
$2.2O
5z.zo
60
s1,000
Sesr
Sqro
Sasg
Ssor
5s48
s45s
s466
Ssss
sss6
Ssao
s4s3
541s
Sslo
s4s4
5431
AnnualSales
lndustry group
Agriculture, forestry, fishing
Mining
Utilities
Construction
Manufacturing
Wholesale trade
0.1
0.0
0.2
0.2
0.6
0.3
ings
4
0
16
10
23
18
15
1
78
30
129
50
Employment Output Earn
Table 10-8. lncrease in Employment, Output, and Earnings, 7,000 Square Feet of
Restaurant Space
Retail trade
Transportation a nd wa rehousing
lnformation
Finance and insurance
Real estate and rental and leasing
Professional, scientific, se rvices
Management of comPanies
Administrative and waste mgmt
Educational services
Health care and social assistance
Arts, entertainment, and recreation
Accommodation
Food services and drinking Places
Other services
Households
Total
2.3
0.8
0.4
0.4
2.3
o.7
o.2
0.9
0.3
2.0
0.6
o.2
68.9
0.8
0.3
82.3
202
85
83
105
402
83
33
53
15
208
26
18
3,942
116
0
66
39
20
25
30
35
13
23
6
92
9
5
1,204
33
2
2
48
The developer has stated that it will build housing tor 104 maintenance workers.
Most of those will be employed at the golf course and marina, so employment for those
two sectors are not counted separately in this report. All maintenance workers will be
employees of the resort.
utput
15
7
49
29
79
59
339
67
180
794
548
L79
19
Industry group
Agriculture, forestry, fi shing
Mining
Utilities
Construction
Manufacturing
Wholesale trade
Retai! trade
Transportation and warehousing
lnformation
Finance and insurance
Real estate and rental and leasing
Professiona l, scientifi c, services
Management of comPanies
Adrninistrative and waste mgmt
Educational services
Health care and social assistance
0.1
0.0
0.1
o.2
0.4
0.3
3.9
0.6
0.6
o.7
2.7
1.5
0.1
106.3
0.5
3.3
3
o
10
10
L7
18
111
23
39
45
39
78
8
1,959
11
147
oEmployment Earnings
5,551
30
333
Table 10-9. lncrease in Employment, Output, and Earnings, 104 Direct Building
and Grounds Maintenance Employees
49
Finally, Table 10-10 shows the economic impact of all of the jobs stemming from
operations opened during Stage 1, Phase 1.
Arts, entertainment, and recreation
Accommodation
Food services and drinking Places
Other services
Households
o.7
0.3
2.4
1.6
0.4
37
27
138
239
0
72
8
42
67
4
lndustry group
Agrlcuhu re, forestry, fishing
Mining
Utilities
Construction
Manufacturing
Wholesale trade
Retailtrade
Transportation and warehousing
lnformation
Finance and insurance
Real estate and rental and leasing
Professional, scientific, services
Management of companies
Administrative and waste mgmt
Educational services
Health care and social assistance
Arts, entertainment, and recreation
Accommodation
Food services and drinking Places
Other services
Households
Total
Employment
0.3
0.0
o.7
1.1
L.7
1.0
45.3
2.9
2.O
2.3
20.8
4.6
0.5
131.0
L.7
10.6
79.6
12.3
75.7
4.4
1.3
0.0
399.9
Output
49
3
toz
744
341
2U
3,910
320
497
661
2,873
540
101
7,746
88
L,OU
2,829
1,139
4,329
661
0
0
27,824
Earnings
11
0
63
49
66
51
L,294
728
115
155
266
23L
42
2,972
33
480
891
346
L,322
184
t2
0
8,714
Table 10-10. lncrease in Employment, Output, and Earnings, Al! Operations in
Sta e 2, Phase 1
50
11. Economic lmpact of Operating Jobs in Stage 2, Phases 2 and 3
For this final stage of the project, the developer has stated that:
Stage 2 Phases 2 and 3 encompasses_the balance of lhe structures, wherethe multi-levelTERRACE RESORT
buiEings are designed for Shorl Term Stays ( epproxlmately 545 TERRACE RESORTS); and the Sea-View
Villas ahd Alpine Vistas are deslgned lo accommodate lhose wishing to enjoy Longer Stays, and most likely
second homet.(approximately 293 VILLAS and VISTAS),
The additional employment from operations in these final stages of the project
are confined to the jobs created from the short-term and long-term stays as defined
above. As also noted, some of the villas will be second homes, in which case no
additionaljobs r,rrould be created from an EB-S perspective. Without further information,
then, we have not included any of the Sea-View and Alpine Vistas in our EB-S job
count. The number of new jobs created by the operation of the terrace resort buildings,
designed for short-term stays, are based on the same metrics as discussed above: an
average daily rate of $100 and an occupancy rate of 60%. On this basis, annual
revenues for 545 units would be $11.93 million, which would create 176 new jobs. The
detailed industry results are given in Table 11-1.
lndustry Sroup
Agriculture, forestry fishing
Mining
Utilities
Construction
Manufacturing
Wholesale trade
Retail trade
Tra nsportation and warehousing
lnformation
Finance and insurance
Real estate and rental and leasing
Professional, scientific, services
Management of com panies
Administrative and waste mgmt
Educational services
Health care and social assistance
Arts, entertainment, and recreation
Accommodation
Food services and drinking Places
Other services
0.2
0.0
o.7
1.0
1.0
o.4
6.7
2.3
1.4
t.2
4.5
2.6
0.5
4.8
0.9
6.3
1.9
Output
26
2
285
13s
26
94
581
234
303
335
1,003
309
104
32t
48
645
99
11,982
379
383
Earnings
5
0
60
47
4t
29
191
109
73
79
61
L34
43
115
18
285
32
3,642
116
L07
Employment
6.5
2.5
129.9
Table 11-1. lncrease in Employment, Output, and Earnings for 545 Short-Term
Stay Units
51
Households
Total
0.8
776.2
0 7
t7 77
12. Summary Statistics by Phase
Table 12-1 shows the combined impacts of the construction expenditures in
Stage 1 plus the operations from the hotel rooms and retail space at the Pleasant
Harbor Marina and Golf Resort. The entries in each cell are simply the summation of
these tables in sections (8) and (9) and are presented here for ease of exposition.
Once again, figures for output and eamings are in thousands of dollars.
Table 12-1 shows there would be about 281 new jobs created from the
construction of Stage 1 and the operation of the hotel rooms and retail space included in
that phase of the project. Total output would rise about $35.8 million, and household
lndustry group
Agriculture, forestry, fi shing
Mining
Utilities
Construction
Manufacturing
Wholesale trade
Retail trade
Transportation a nd warehousing
lnformation
Finance and insurance
Real estate and rental and leasing
Professiona l, scientific, services
Management of companies
Administrative and waste mgmt
Educational services
Health care and socialassistance
Arts, entertainment, and recreation
Accommodation
Food services and drinking Places
Other services
Households
Total
Employment
1.0
0.9
0.6
742.7
7.O
t.7
45.0
3.2
1.7
2.5
8.2
9.3
0.3
5.7
2.O
13.8
2.8
16.6
9,4
5.4
L,7
281.5
Output
196
130
267
19,455
L,477
368
3,996
391
427
742
2,063
1,483
69
369
to7
1,415
135
1,535
536
776
0
Earnings
42
31
55
6,591
288
110
!,277
133
96
t70
722
554
29
139
40
626
46
466
165
220
15
35,830 11,315
Table 12-1. lncrease in Employment, Output, and Earnings, Construction and
rations of the Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort, Stage 1, All Phasesope
52
earnings would increase about $11.3 million. Table 12-2 shows that output per new
employee for all jobs would be about $127,300, and average annual earnings would be
about $40,200.
Table 12-3 shows the combined impacts of construction of Stage 2, Phase 1, and
the operating jobs from the hotel, retail space, spa and fitness center, office
administration space, rental of the conference room space, restaurants, and building
and maintenance personnel in this stage of the project at the Pleasant Harbor Marina
and Golf Resort. The entries in each cell are simply the summation of these tables in
the sections (8) and (10).
lndustry grouP
Agriculture, forestry, fishing
Mining
Utilitaes
Constructaon
Manufacturing
Wholesale trade
Retailtrade
Transportation and warehousing
lnformation
Finance and insurance
Real estate and rental and leasing
Professiona l, scientifl c, services
Management of comPanies
Administrative and waste mgmt
Educational services
Health care and socialassistance
Arts, entertainment, and recreation
Accommodation
Food services and drinking Places
Other services
Households
Total
Employment
1.0
0.9
0.5
142.7
7.O
1.7
45.0
3.2
1.7
2.5
8.2
9.3
0.3
5.7
2.0
13.8
2.8
16.6
9.4
5.4
1.7
OutpuVEmpl
199.4
141.8
425.O
136.3
2L2.5
2LL.4
86.3
123.9
253.0
294.s
251.9
150.0
210.9
65.2
52.9
toz.2
48.8
92.2
57.7
14/.5
0.0
Earnings/Empl
42.8
33.7
87.8
46.9
41.5
62.9
28.4
42.L
57.2
67.5
14.8
59.8
89.0
24.5
19.8
45.2
16,5
28.0
77.6
41.0
8.9
281.5 727.3 40.2
Table 12-2. Output and Earnings Per New Worker, Construction and Operations
of the Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort, Stage 1, All Phases
lndustry group
Agriculture, forestry, f ishing
Mining
Utilities
t!2
77
168
2.6
2.3
1.9
Output
5L7
323
813
Employment Earnings
Table 12'3. lncrease in Employment, Output, and Earnings, Construction and
Operations of the Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort, Sta ge 2, Phase 1
Construction
Manufacturing
Wholesale trade
Retailtrade
Transportation and warehousing
lnformation
Finance and insurance
Real estate and rental and leasing
Professional, scientifi c, se rvices
Management of comPanies
Administrative and waste mgmt
Educational services
Health care and socialassistance
Arts, entertainment, and recreation
Accommodation
Food services and drinking Places
Other services
Households
Total
353.2
18.2
4.9
102.5
9.2
5.3
7.7
37.1,
25.9
1.1
742.3
6.0
40.6
85.4
14.6
9s.3
16.1
5.1
48,747
3,964
1,039
9,951
L,122
L,357
2,246
7,213
4,O20
226
8,477
377
4,749
3,111
1,345
5,447
2,341
0
15,559
754
309
2,907
385
306
518
514
1,520
94
3,249
118
1,935
987
408
1,556
662
45
977.2
53
Table 12-3 shows there would be about 977 new jobs created from the
construction and operation of the Stage 2, Phase 1 of the project. Total output would
rise about $104.9 million, and household earnings would increase about $33.2 million.
Table 12-4 shows that output per new employee for all jobs would be about $107,400,
and average annua! earnings would be about $34,000.
lndustry group
Agricu lture, fo restry, fish i ng
Mining
Utilities
Construction
Manufacturing
Wholesale trade
Retail trade
Transportation and warehousing
lnformation
Finance and insurance
Real estate and rental and leasing
Professiona l, scientifi c, services
Employment
2.6
2.3
1.9
353.2
18.2
4.9
102.5
9.2
5.3
7.7
37.1
25.9
L,L
Output/Empl
195.8
741.6
425.0
136.3
211.8
2t1.4
85.3
722.3
255.5
291.8
194.7
155.1
210.8
Earnings/Empl
42.2
33.7
87.9
46.9
41.3
62.9
28.4
42.1
57.7
67.3
13.9
58.6
88.3Management of
Table f 2-4. Output and Earnings Per New Worker, Gonstruction and Operations
of the Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort, Stage 2, Phase 1
54
Table 12-5 shows the combined impacts of construction of Stage 2, Phase 2 and
3, and the operating jobs from the additional hotel rooms opened in this stage of the
project at the Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort. The entries in each cell are
simply the summation of these tables in the sections (8) and (11).
Administrative and waste mgmt
Educational services
Health care and social assistance
Arts, entertainment, and recreation
Accommodation
Food services and drinking Places
Other services
Households
t42.3
5.0
40.5
85.4
14.6
9s.3
16.1
5.1
59.6
52.9
LO2.2
36.4
92.1
57.2
145.7
0.0
22.8
19.7
45.2
11.6
28.0
77.5
4t.2
8.9
Total 1o7.4 34.0
lndustry grouP
Agriculture, fo restry, fishing
Mining
Utilities
Construction
Manufacturing
Wholesale trade
Retailtrade
Transportation and warehousing
lnformation
Finance and insurance
Real estate and rentaland leasing
Professiona l, scie ntifi c, services
Management of comPa nies
Administratlve and waste mgmt
Educational services
Health care and socialassistance
Arts, entertainment, and recreation
Accommodation
Food services and drinking Places
Other services
Households
Total
Employment
7.4
7.7
4.4
1099.6
52.6
12.8
185.3
21.8
11.6
17.9
55.2
69.1
2.3
39.9
14.4
99.8
20.0
136,9
67.7
39.0
L2.5
Output
1,486
1,000
L,g7g
149,995
11,198
2,7OL
15,996
2,736
2,984
5,281
L4,542
71,167
49L
2,600
763
LO,207
978
L2,623
3,855
5,626
0
Earnings
319
238
387
51,551
2,195
803
5,255
913
569
l,2l!
835
4,155
207
978
286
4,515
330
3,836
1,199
1,597
111
1977.4 81,559
Table 12-5. lncrease in Employment, Output, and Earnings, Construction and
Operations of the Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort, Stage 2, Phase 2 and 3
977.2
258,019
Hlfi{+itr#,,.
2200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 707
Seattle, WA 98121
www.eaest.com
Apri! 6,2015
GENERAL GUIDE FOR HOW TO PREPARE FINAL SEIS COMMENT RESPONSES
Pleasant Harbor Final SEIS
Following is a general guide for how to prepare responses to comments on the Pleasant Harbor
Draft SEIS. All comment letters are numbered for ease of reference, and each individual
comment in each of the letters has been numbered and assigned to a team member to craft a
response. For some comments, multiple team members have been identified to respond to
comments - in such cases, the first person/consultant identified is assumed to take the lead in
responding to the comment.
lf copies of Draft SEIS Sections or EIS Appendices are needed in order to respond to
comments, please contact Kristy Hollinger at EA Engineering (khollinqer@eaest.com)
1. Determine if a response to the comment is necessary. For example, if a comment is a
statement of like/dislike of a project or preference for one alternative over another, "your
comment is acknowledged for the record" is a sufficient response.
2. Determine if the Draft SEIS (Chapter or Technical Appendix) contains information or
analvsis that adequatelv responds to the comment. lf so, refer to the page(s)/section(s)
of the text and technical analysis where the information/analysis is presented and briefly
summarize. For example, "As described on page 3-5 of the DEIS, the height of the
proposed building is within the 125-foot maximum height allowed by COR zoning."
3. lf the comment points out an error. omission or necessary clarification to the DEIS that is
valid, acknowledge the error/omission/clarification, correct or amend the appropriate
section of the Draft SEIS, and refer to the Section of the Final SEIS where this
information has been corrected.
For the Final SE/S we will reprint the Draft, and highlight or underline new text that is
added to show what has changed between the Draft and the Final.
4. When there are several comments on the same topic, rather than providing a similar
response to each comment that shares the theme, provide a more complete response,
and then refer to this response in subsequent comments (be careful to address all
aspects of each comment, though). For example, "See the response to Comment 4 in
Letter 10 regarding the adequacy of the proposed water quality treatment facilities."
Hlili#ffffi,,.
2200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 707
Seattle, WA 98121
www.eaest.com
5. When updated information/analvsis has been included in the Final SEIS, summarize the
information/analysis contained in a separate chapter of the Final SEIS and, as
appropriate, hit the high points in the responses to comments and direct the commentor
to this chapter and the appropriate technical appendices for the complete response to
their comment.