Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Water Reservoir topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
St. Helens staff recommend RFP to pick site for new reservoir after decades of leaks and failed mitigation
Summary
City staff presented a request for proposals to select and design a replacement reservoir, saying consultants will evaluate four master-plan sites and recommend a preferred location for a 5,000,000-gallon facility; city leaders and a resident raised costs, land-purchase and geotechnical risks.
Mohammed Zeller, the city’s public works director, told the St. Helens City Council on Feb. 19 that staff plan to issue a request for proposals to select a site and later design and build a replacement reservoir to serve future growth.
Zeller said the city has exhausted options to rehabilitate the existing, roughly 100-year-old reservoir and is leaning toward building a new 5,000,000-gallon tank that would avoid recurring leaks and capacity limits. The RFP will task consultants with evaluating four candidate sites identified in the city’s updated master plan; the selected consultant will also assemble geotechnical, soils and other specialty studies needed to recommend a final location and support a subsequent design-and-construction procurement.
The move follows years of public concern about leaks, past repairs and litigation related to an older 2,000,000-gallon tank. A member of the public who identified himself as Ron recited a timeline of earlier leaks, contracts and core sampling dating from 2016 through 2022 and said testing showed delamination before design work. Zeller acknowledged the city has pursued extensive study and said the new RFP will probe subsurface and site constraints so the city can make an informed land-purchase and design decision.
Councilors pressed staff on key risks: land acquisition (Zeller said most candidate parcels are privately held and purchase is required), geotechnical stability near the existing reservoir, and the potential for contractor or design uncertainty if a firm cannot demonstrate confidence in a proposed rehabilitation. Zeller said the master-plan sites carry different tradeoffs and that the consultant selection committee will evaluate firms’ teams and subcontractors, including geotechnical specialists and soils engineers.
Zeller described the procurement as a two-step approach: first the site-selection study; then a separate RFP for design and construction once a location is selected and land issues are resolved. He said staff will bring committee findings to the council and invited council participation in the selection process.
Council members and staff also cited the need for outside funding to keep the project affordable, and noted core-sampling and earlier reports will inform the consultant’s work. No binding authorization to purchase land or start construction was recorded in the work session minutes; staff said any major spending steps will return for council review.
The council scheduled the RFP and related materials for final consideration at upcoming meetings, with staff promising to present committee scoring, geotechnical findings and recommended next steps.
