When we broke the story on Monday night of hundreds of leaks requiring the waterproofing membranes to be dug up, removed and reinstalled at Myrtle Reservoir in West Seattle and Beacon Hill Reservoir, our story was cited and linked to by more than half a dozen citywide media sources, including SeattleTimes.com (almost 4,000 people clicked from there to come see the story here). Now today, three days later, the Times has done its own followup, also appearing in the print edition – which (thank you!) again credits WSB for breaking the story – read the new Times story here. The reporter, Susan Kelleher, is the same one who just last weekend broke the story of SDOT do-overs (including ramps along Fauntleroy Way) – she also was unable, however, as were we, to pin anybody down on specifics of cost/blame re: the reservoir membranes – but SPU has promised some cost information next week, so we’ll bring that to you as soon as it’s available. Meantime, we had asked SPU’s Andy Ryan some other followup questions — read on for the answers:
It was clear, during the course of checking into the story, that more than a few months passed between the discovery of the leaks and the work that’s happening now, removing the membrane so a new one (which will involve a “hot asphalt” process) can be applied. Why the lag? Ryan answered: “Figuring out what was causing the drips inside the reservoir, the extent of the problem, discussions with the designer and contractor about what the fix should be and how it should be undertaken, was a very involved process. And our decision to have the waterproofing torn up–with all the problems that would involve–was not taken lightly. We followed a methodical, deliberate process, and it was time-consuming.”
We also asked how the membrane is being removed – is it a scraping process, a chemical process, or what – and will it require any removal of the concrete that forms the actual reservoir cover. Ryan says, “No redoing of the concrete. The product is proving a little difficult to remove, so we’re using high-pressure water, ‘hydro-blasting,’ on the tough spots.”
We also learned that the change in waterproofing could make a difference in what happens with the dirt/sod that will be replaced over the new “membrane” once it’s in. According to Ryan, the “thicker” process that will be used now “might make the installation of real grass (vs. synthetic grass) more
viable.”
Again, we will continue to follow this story, particularly to find out how much the digging up and replacement of the membranes is costing – the city has stressed it believes that “ratepayers” will not ultimately have to foot the bill (the situation may wind up being worked out in court), and it also has stressed that there are no health risks because of the leaks in the reservoir covers resulting from the waterproofing problems.
| 11 COMMENTS