Introduction
The project in question is the demolition of the Seattle Kingdome, a 24-year-old concrete domed structure recognized as one of the world’s most robust and significant. The Maryland-based Controlled Demolition Inc. was commissioned for the task, which involved about three months of preparation and incurred a total cost of $9 million (Seattle Times, 2000). The demolition involved drilling nearly 1,000 holes and packing them with high-velocity gelatin explosives. The demolition was successful, with the entire structure being reduced to rubble in less than 20 seconds.
Application of Risk Management Process
Risk Identification
Applying the risk management process for the Seattle Kingdom demolition project begins with risk identification. This initial phase is a creative and exhaustive process where all potential risks associated with the project are highlighted. This could be accomplished through extensive brainstorming sessions, invoking expert opinions, and scrutinizing past experiences on similar projects. Particular attention is paid to the unique attributes of this project, such as the size and structural strength of the Kingdom and its location within an urban setting.
Risk Assessment
Following risk identification, the assessment phase is undertaken. Each identified risk is scrutinized for its potential impact on the project. This involves detailed analysis to understand the severity of the risk and its potential repercussions. In this case, evaluating how the explosion could affect the surrounding infrastructure, the safety of nearby residents, and the environment is paramount.
Risk Mitigation
Post-assessment, risk mitigation plans are developed. These plans involve creating strategies and taking proactive steps to lessen the likelihood of the risk materializing and reducing its impact should it occur (Hillson & Simon, 2020). For the Kingdome project, these measures included implementing protective measures around the Kingdome and neighboring buildings, devising a detailed plan for the placement and detonation of explosives, and preparing an extensive post-demolition cleanup operation.
Risk Monitoring
The final part of the risk management process involves risk monitoring. This step is ongoing throughout the project and involves continually tracking the identified risks and checking for any changes in their probability or impact. For instance, weather conditions on the implosion day might affect dust and debris dispersion, requiring adjustments in the cleanup and containment plans. The risk management process is a dynamic and integral part of the Kingdome demolition project, guiding strategic decisions from inception to completion and ensuring the project’s ultimate success while minimizing possible detrimental consequences.
Potential Risks
Due to its substantial scale and complexity, the Kingdome demolition project bore several potential risks. Each risk had its unique dynamics and potential to significantly impact the project’s success.
Damage to Surrounding Infrastructure
Given the Kingdom’s enormous size and robust structure, one of the critical risks was the potential damage to surrounding buildings and other infrastructure. The detonation’s force could result in the wide-ranging dispersal of concrete and steel debris. This could lead to severe physical damage to adjacent structures, potentially incurring substantial repair costs and legal disputes with affected property owners.
Safety of Nearby Residents
A critical safety risk associated with the project was the potential harm to nearby residents due to the explosives’ detonation. The demolition process could produce flying debris, shock waves, and sound intensities that might have posed health and safety hazards for people near the Kingdome. Furthermore, residents’ immediate evacuation and subsequent return needed careful planning to ensure their safety.
Explosive Malfunction
Given the project’s reliance on explosives, there was a significant risk related to explosive malfunction. This could include the partial detonation of explosives, which might leave parts of the structure undemolished or cause an accidental directional fall, resulting in unintended damage.
Environmental Impact
The demolition process carried potential environmental risks. The explosion would generate large amounts of dust, which could impact air quality immediately and potentially for several days after the implosion. Additionally, the improper disposal of debris could contribute to environmental degradation and contravene local waste management regulations.
Logistical Challenges
Given the complexity and scale of the operation, logistical difficulties represented a significant risk. Managing large crowds of spectators, coordinating traffic closures, timely evacuation and return of residents, and executing post-implosion cleanup operations all required intricate planning and effective communication. Any lapse in these areas could lead to chaos, delay, or potential safety hazards.
Risk Assessment Form
Table 1. Risk Assessment Form
- The risk of Damage to Surrounding Infrastructure is relatively high, with a likelihood of 8 and an impact of 9 out of 10, signifying potential severe financial and legal repercussions. It has the highest risk score of 72.
- The Safety of Nearby Residents risk has a likelihood of 7 and a maximum impact score of 10, hinting at significant safety, legal, and reputational concerns. The overall risk score is 70, making it the second-highest risk.
- Explosive Malfunction has a likelihood of 6 and an impact of 9, indicating potential project delays and additional costs. Despite a lower probability, its overall risk score of 54 calls for serious consideration.
- Environmental Impact has a reasonable likelihood of 7 and an impact of 8 due to possible harm to local ecosystems or regulatory violations—the risk score of 56 places it in the mid-range of risks.
- Logistical Challenges have a high likelihood of 8 but a slightly lower impact score of 7, pointing to potential delays and additional costs. With a risk score equal to Environmental Impact at 56, it represents the third-highest project risk.
Risk Response Matrix
Table 2. Risk Response Matrix
A risk response matrix is a valuable tool that provides a structured and organized process for responding to potential risks. For the Kingdome demolition project, this matrix would specify pre-defined actions for each identified risk. The risk response could involve detailed surveys and structural assessments of the neighboring buildings for the risk of Damage to Surrounding Infrastructure. Based on these, protective measures could be implemented, such as shielding vulnerable parts of buildings, using chain-link fencing, and geotextile fabric. Controversial plans could include allocating funds for repairs and having legal counsel prepared for possible disputes if damage occurs despite these precautions.
A robust evacuation plan could be implemented regarding the Safety of Nearby Residents. This would involve close cooperation with local law enforcement to enforce a temporarily restricted zone around the Kingdom during the demolition (Hubbard, 2020). Emergency medical services would be on standby, and a public communication plan would be executed to keep residents informed.
In an Explosive Malfunction, safety measures include using high-quality explosives, rigorous testing, double-checking connections, and planning for a controlled partial detonation. A contingency plan could include having a second detonation team on standby if the first attempt fails to demolish the structure.
The Environmental Impact risk response would involve dust containment strategies, such as deploying water trucks immediately after the explosion to minimize dust. Debris would be responsibly disposed of and recycled, adhering to local regulations. If unexpected environmental damage occurs, a rapid response cleanup team would be on standby, and potential penalties for environmental damage could be accounted for in the project budget.
Finally, detailed planning for crowd control, traffic management, and post-demolition cleanup would be essential for Logistical Challenges. The primary responsibilities would be partnering with local law enforcement for crowd control, developing clear and extensive traffic diversion plans, and coordinating with a dedicated cleanup crew. Contingency plans could include having backup personnel and resources in case of unanticipated logistical problems. Each response in the matrix is a product of careful deliberation and planning aimed at ensuring the smooth execution of the project, even in the face of uncertainties.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the Kingdome demolition project exemplifies the importance of integrated and comprehensive risk management. The project’s success is a testament to the power of effective planning, stakeholder collaboration, and constant monitoring. It underscores the value of adopting a proactive approach to risk management, demonstrating that even in a project surrounded by many potential risks, thorough preparation and a detailed risk management plan can ensure success. The insights and lessons from this project can be a guiding beacon for similar large-scale projects in the future, reinforcing the essential role of risk management in achieving project objectives safely and efficiently.
References
Hillson, D., & Simon, P. (2020). Practical project risk management: The ATOM methodology. Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
Hubbard, D. W. (2020). The failure of risk management: Why it’s broken and how to fix it. John Wiley & Sons.
Seattle Times. (2000). From dome to dust. The Seattle Times. Web.