Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout7.a. Authorization for Roof Repair at City HallCITY OF ROSEMOUNT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: May 5, 1992 AGENDA ITEM: Authorize Roof Repair at AGENDA SECTION: City Hall New Business PREPARED BY: Public Works Ron Wasmund Director/Building Official AGENDAn. +'T TEtFl # ATTACMUMS: MEMO, Proposal, Info Sheets APP ED B . Letters (2) from Specialty Services This item is brought before Council for authorization toe end an amount of $10,860.00 from C.I.P. reserves for the repair of the City Hall roof and cosmetic ancillary repairs on the interiorofCity Hall. A We have performed stop gap measurers since last August to find and fix leaks, however those attempts have not held. The attached background material provides information of what we have pursued. The least cost and most viable solution I feel is to have Specialty Systems remove the existing architectural standing seam roofing, repair any damaged substrate sheathing, install a self -adhering ice and weathershield material and reinstall the standing seam material. This work would be performed on the west side of the main roof only. The cosmetic repairs to the inside of the Council Chambers would then be subsequently made by Acoustical Supply Inc. All the work can start within two weeks of Council authorization. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to approve expenditure of $10,860.00 from Account Number 202-49002-01-538 for the roof and ancillary repairs to City Hall. COUNCIL ACTION: 4 MEMO TO: MAYOR McMENOMY COUNCIL MEMBERS: KLASSEN STARTS WILLCOX WIPPERMANN FROM: RON WASMUND, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR DATE: MAY 1, 1992 RE: CITY HALL ROOF REPAIRS In an attempt to find the best solution to a long lasting repair or replacement of the leaky roof on City Hall, I have explored several different methods. The methods explored included removal of the existing materials and replacement with standard style asphalt shingles, single ply membrane roofing materials, a true standing seam metal roof, and repair of the existing architectural standing seam roof with new underlayment. Asphalt shingles at first glance seemed to be a viable alternative for longevity. Most quality shingles carry a twenty year guarantee and we could expect a reasonable trouble free roof. This approach would be aesthetically appealing but had other inherent problems. First problem encountered was the need to reconstruct all of the fascia on both the east and west sides of the building. This was verbally estimated to me to be between 55,000-$10,000 depending on the design and materials used to reconstruct them. The cost to tear off the existing roofing material and replace with a 240 lb shingle was estimated to be $12,240. This seemed reasonable until we measured the pitch on the east side and determined that it was too flat to install conventional shingles. This method was then discarded. The single ply membrane approach proved to be expensive, ($32,000 estimated) aesthetically unappealing since the membrane is black in color and textureless, and we would have to also reconstruct the fascia the same as with shingles. The quote for a true standing seam roof has never come in but the benefit to cost is believed to be very low. We have a similar material and some of the same treatments to the substrate would have to be done to insure water tightness. Memo -City Hall Roof Page 2 I have had extensive contact with the company that originally installed our present roof system and have received a quote from them to remove and save the existing material on the west side, install an ice and weathershield material after replacing any bad substrate and reinstall the existing metal material The cost to repair with this method is $9,559.00. Through my discussions with them I am convinced that this method is least costly and will work very effectively. This method was used on the east side of the roof and has not given us any problems. I have requested an estimate of life expectancy but as of this writing do not have an answer. I have researched the original specification for City Hall fora warranty on the roof. The only warranty offered for the roof was a five year period for color fastness. I have also conferred with Eric Short of Hertog, Fluegel, et al to see if there was any legal action we could take to recover the repair cost. Since there was no warranty specified or granted and the roof was installed according to the plans and specs, there is very little hope to recover any costs. It doesn't appear to be worth the legal costs to pursue a lawsuit. It is my recommendation to allow Specialty Systems, Inc. to perform the repairs as per the attached proposal. Since they originally installed the roof they are equipped and familiar enough to do the work in an expedient manner. The cost to do the cosmetic repairs to the interior is not included in the $9,559.00 estimate. This work would need to be performed by Acoustic Supply Inc. at a cost estimated by me to not exceed $1,300. This estimate is based on previous repair work they have performed for us. The total cost of the repairs would be $10,860.00. This expenditure would be made from C.I.P. reserves identified by Account Number 202-49002-01-538. SPECIALTY SYSTEMS Innovative Exterior Specialists October 9, 1991 City of Rosemount P.O. Box 510 Rosemount, MN 55068-0510 Attn: Ron Wasmund Re: City Hall Roof Leaks Dear Ron: OCT 17 1991 CITY OR ROSEMOL':: .; In August of 1991, Specialty Systems, Inc. (SSI) was contacted by Paul Hemke, with the City of Rosemount, concerning leaks at the above mentioned project. Upon investigation by SSI, it was determined that the ridge may have been the problem. SSI was then directed to make the ridge totally tight by closing it with a foam closure. This work was done on August 28, 1991, but heavy rains the following week proved the roof was still leaking. On September 17th, SSI water tested the west side of the roof and found that the roof was leaking in several areas. While testing, we found that leaking occurred by spraying the standing seam roof three-fourths of the way up the slope. This method indicated that the slope of the roof may not be sufficient to shed water fast enough, there by giving the seams a chance to take on water "capillary action". The water test also proved that there was a large breakdown in the underlayment due to the amount of water entering the building. SSI then returned on October 3rd to remove a portion of the panels to check the underlayment. After removing a 5 foot wide by 30 foot long section in an area where the leaks were most prominent, SSI found that the rosin paper slip sheet and the 30 pound felt had deteriorated towards the end of the roof. Pictures were taken and are available for your use. After looking through our records, we found that there was a change order to use an ice and water shield on the west elevations instead of the 30 pound felt. Although we have never experienced a problem similar to these circumstances, it is my opinion that an ice and water shield should have also been installed on the east elevation, eliminating the problem. Attached is a proposal for panel removal of the west elevation, adding Polyken 640 ice and water shield, replacing any damaged plywood and reinstallation of the panels. 11901 Riverwood Drive, Burnsville, MN 55337 •612/894-5111 • FAX 612/894-0687 t Page 2 If there is any further assistance needed, please contact our office. Sincerely, SPECIALTY SYSTEMS, INC. lk-,-- �L� Steven Cerise Field Foreman SC: kw cc: Kevin Bendt/Field Superintendent encl. P R O P O S A L Page 1 of 2 SPECIALTY SYSTEMS, INC. INNOVATIVE E%TERIOR SPECIALISTS 11901 RIVERMOOD DRIVE SURNSVILLE. MINNESOTA 55337 612-894-5111 FAX 612-894-0687 DATE October 16, 1991 PROPOSAL SUBMITTED TO STREET P.O. Box 510 CITY, STATE & ZIP CODE PHONE 423-4411 FAX Ron Wasmund City of Rosemount Rosemount, MN 55068-0510 JOB NAME City of Rosemount JOB LOCATION Rosemount, Minnesota ARCHITECT DATE OF PLANS BID NUMBER W-1811 JOB PHONE P R O P O S A L Page 2 of 2 Materials, equipment and labor for the following: - Remove all standing seam panels on "west side main roof". - Check plywood substrate and replace any sheets damaged. - Install Polyken 640 ice and water shield on the roof. - Surface to replace #30 lb. felt. - Reinstall standing seam panel system. Total Cost - $9,559.00 WE PROPOSE hereby to furnish material and labor - complete in accordance with above specifications, for thesumof: Nine Thousand Five Hundred Fifty Nine and 00/100 Dollars ($9,559.00) Payment to be made as follows: Net 30 All contracts subject to credit approval. All material is guaranteed to be as specified. All work to be completed in a workmanlike manner according to standard practices. Any alteration or deviation from above specifications involving extra costs will be executed only upon written orders, and will become an extra charge over and above the estimate. All agreements contingent upon strikes, accidents or delays beyond our control. Owner to carry fire, tornado and other necessary insurance. Our workers fully covered by Workmen's Compensation Insurance. Authorized signature, Note: This proposal may be withdrawn by us if not accepted within 30 days. ACCEPTANCE OF PROPOSAL The above prices, specifications and conditions are satisfactory and are hereby accepted. You are authorized to do the work as specified. Payment will be made as outlined above. Signature Date of Acceptance (Pity of Rosemount PHONE (61121423-4411 FAX 161121 423-5203 October 24, 1991 Specialty Systems Inc Steven Cerise 11901 Riverwood Dr. Burnsville, Mn 55337 Dear Steve: 2875 - 145th Street West, Rosemount, Minnesota Mailing Address: P. O. Box 510, Rosemount, Minnesota 55068-0510 MAYOR Vernon Napper COUNCILMEMBERS Sheila Klassen John Oxborough Harry Willcox Dennis Wippermann ADMINISTRATOR Stephan Jilk Thank you for your letter and proposal of October 9, 1991. I have reviewed it and taken it under consideration. I have some questions regarding your findings and approach to repair. Since the pitch of the roof is sufficient by code to allow shingle application, would it not then be sufficient to allow a standing seam application without experiencing "capillary action"? Is capillary action a common occurrence of standing seam roofs? Do you feel that it is the resulting infiltration of water which has caused the deterioration or disintegration of the 30 lb. underlayment, or does the standing seam covering have an ability to move as a diaphragm in wind pressure, causing fiction to wear the underlayment? The west side is where we seem to be having the problem. In your letter you've indicated that a change order was written for an ice and water shield alternate on the west side, and perhaps the same thing should be done to the east side. Is this leak occurring on the east side and transposing to the west side? In your professional opinion, will placing an ice and water shield and new underlayment plywood where rotted, correct the problem permanently or simply act as a band-aid until whatever caused the deterioration of the 30 lb. felt has the same effect on the ice and water shield? I, sincerely appreciate that action you've taken to date. I have a strong interest in making a full repair to the roof, however, I feel we must discuss in more detail the questions I've written, before a $10,000 expenditure can be made for repairs. Please contact me at your earliest convenience to arrange a convenient time to meet. I may be reached at 322-2024 from 8:00 to 4:00 pm., Monday through Friday. Sincerely, ,Ron Wasmund Director of Public Works/Building Official cc: Steve Jilk Paul Heimkes 6verylkings (Pom.ing cup Rosem.ounlY `j* '(KAY SPECIALTY SYSTEMS Innovative Exterior Specialists December 5, 1991 City of Rosemount P.O. Box 510 Rosemount, MY 55058-0510 ATTN: Ron Wasmund RE: City Hall Roof Leaks Dear Ron: In response to your October 24, 1991 letter, Specialty Systems, Inc. (SSI) has done further research to investigate the nature of the roof leaks on the above referenced building and offers the following information to address your questions. Regarding your question whether code requirements for minimum roof slopes for shingle roofing applications have any correlation to the minimum roof slopes for standing seam metal roofing applications, this is not necessarily true. SSI looks to panel manufacturers' recommendations for minimum roof slopes for their products since it is the manufacturers expertise, product performance history and testing which would dictate these design parameters, In this case, the manufacturer of the roof panel system, Peterson Aluminum Corporation, recommends that the Snap-On panel system is to be installed over a solid substrate and underlayment of 30# roofing felt, with the minimum roof slope for such an application to be 3:12. This is precisely the parameters used to evaluate the design and construction the roof system on the west side of your building, which is now experiencing leaks. Therefore, all of the manufacturers recommendations were followed. Furthermore, shingle roof design and standing seam roof design utilize uniquely different concepts in acting as watersheds or moisture barriers, so it is not prudent to assume that the products are interchangeable for any design. However, both do utilize the 30# felt underlayment as a secondary moisture barrier or fabric type flashing, partly to direct moisture which may infiltrate beneath the primary barrier through capillary action or condensation out through flashings and trim. In this respect, the roofing systems are similar. 11901 Riverwood Drive, Burnsville, MN 55337 • 6121894-5111 • FAX 612/894-0687 Cn t.1iw pY+_ ieCt, the rn: f e ,there the leaky c:r" CC-'L'rr=n'1 ; c; c the rianufciCtu.,z�r�: recommendations -and,the substrate Is constructed as per the ufact:.lrer guidelinel,, but th7 S C'i�Slgn i5 Vf_'rjT close to the .lividing lire between "acceptable" and "not acceptable All t}:ings conSi �ered, the S,'sterr: should function as a whole, that. we have disc_.over` thctt the essenti_..l second_.' -l' barr.Jer of un!erls!yment felt and rosin paper "i -s �Ieyraded to a point where it does not function properly. Therefore. ani moisture that inFilt_ ted the roof in; system has direct access into the building. IST _s ssJng th-- i -sue of the degradation f the rosin sl i �- sheet and the felt un6erlc.ymen`. with the respective -`roduct manufacturers on an ongoing basis. It is unlikely, though, that this research will yield an- quick or Yeac?=..answers to your present problem. It is SSI's opinion that the felt and rosin paper method of secondary roof protection, although used within the roofing industry in general, has inherent drawbacks in concept and the realities of field application that make it inappropriate for use in a "prime roof" situation -,,Ir?, ,s this (that is roofing over �:reas where lea]:s• can lead to Grater penetrating directly into occupied/finished s -aces of a building) . Our opinion has been formulated through the �_�ears based upon the following observations: the 30# felt underlayment acts as a secondary moisture '-,='--ier b, applying it 4....n consecutive overlapped layers, from roof eav to ridge. _zPrlier' in this r:,anner, theoretically any F Moisture- that gets b"It_ath the roofing! materia.t.ls is +��-p�. <.n I- from entering the building envelope and eventually drained to the ;wilding exterior. However, in reality the two flaws which ^,-event this system from functi_ni ,g "perfectly" are thatthe fasteners used to secure the felt to the substrate ( usually nails or staples) puncture holes in the felt paper, and the overlapped sheets do not securely bond together to form a continuous membrane. Using standard practices, it is not Possible to completely seal this secondary barrier. - when metal roofing is installed over felt underlayments, the two materials have a. tendency to stick to each other when the metal roofing heats up from exposure tn. the sun. If the two stick: tor?ther, then t.? _ felt under yment is prc e to ti ai _.;g as it is forced to expand and c-ontr�:ct :::s the metal panel system heats up and cools down. For this reason , a red rosin paper (or sli,r, sheet) is inserted ,`.)etween the .etal panel. roof and the felt to prevent these materials from adhering t,- one a.1,l0V_4 ncr them t,o mo..,� nciPpenAaAnt 1 , . RE: '"itv Hall Roof Le:c-:) s F' � r. '1 c' .f: -_ring our moat _-recent investigations, it is evident that the red rosin paper had been degraded in some areas, to the point that there is no isolation between the metal roofing and the felt ayment. In these areas, the felt shot -is signs of decrradation that we would attribute to the above scenario whereby the felt sticks to the metal panel and nets damaged. With the felt damaged, there is nothing to stop moisture from entering the b,.ilding envelope. The ice and water guard that we are recommending as a solution to your problem is designed with inherent characteristics and performance to overcome the short comings of the felt, and rosin paper Eystem outlined above. Specifically, the ice and 4aater guard membrane is self -healing, so that where fasteners puncture the material to secure it to the substrate will not leak, and each consecutive sheet overlapped from eave to ridge adheres itself to adjacent sheets, providing a continuous waterproofing membrane. For these reasons, the material was suggested for use on the low sloped east roof, where it apparently it is functioning as required, and should prove to be a viable solution to the leak problems on the west roof, not just a band-aid solution. And to clarify one mis-statement made in our 14/09/91 letter, the chF.nne order references applied only to the east side of buil ling, not to the west as previously stated. We apologize for any confusion this may have caused. I have enclosed some technical information on the ice and water guard for yot;r reviFt; : and SSI maintGi ns; t.l?at apt liCat.ion of the material in place of the existing felt and rosin paper is the best _available solution to the pr=s-�nt- problem. SSI t7i11. continue to investigate the problem with our sources in an a:tt.empt to provide as complete answers as possible to the gTvestions Vou have raised. in the meantime, should you have any questions or require any additional information, please so not hesitate to contact this office. Sincerely, SPECIALTY SYSTEI S, IINC. a4/c'�'X�� Philip Leonard Construction Manager CC: Kevin Bendt Steve Cerise T'H ; th Reinhardt F�)Aorecm wMr, JIFFY SEAL ICE &WATER GUARD Protecto Wrap's Answer To The Roof Ice Dam Problem. An important new Protecto Wrap product, ICE & WATER GUARD, is a tough, pliable sheet membrane designed to prevent moisture penetration and interior damage from water back up caused by roof ice dam buildup during the winter season or by wind driven rain. Protecto Wrap ICE & WATER GUARD can be installed in new contruction or during reroofing under shingles, tile, slate, metal and shakes and is compatible with accepted roofing materials. Cold applied ICE & WATER GUARD is easy to apply and provides an effective, concealed system without detracting from the roof or building design. Product Description ICE & WATER GUARD consists of bituminous resin modified with synthetic resins. This formulation is reinforced with an exceptionally strong inert reinforcement to withstand puncture and severe stress. The preformed membrane provides effective waterproofing over a wide temperature range. The membrane is tacky on both sides to provide good bonding characteristics. ICE & WATER GUARD is provided in rolls interwound with a release film to prevent self adhesion of the material and to protect the surface of the membrane until the application of the shingle is ready to begin. Installation errors can be corrected ~after application; an advantage riot found in adhesive applied or liquid waterproofing membranes. Rolls are supplied in 30" and 60" width and are 75' in length. A unique "Zip Strip" along both edges of the rolls provides a built-in seam guide and provides a self -adhering overlap, eliminating the need for a joint seal tape or compound process. ICE & WATER GUARD can be applied without the use of primer to clean, dry plywood surface when temperatures are 35 'F. and rising. Snow 3. Fully bonded, totally cold applied ICE & WATER GUARD gives assurance of a waterproof system. 4. The reinforcement in the membrane gives the integrity and mechanical strength required. The tar will seal around the nails used to secure the roofing material. 5. The membrane retains its pliability and will not rot, decay or crack. It is resistant to fungus and bacteria growth. . 6. Installation errors can be corrected after application. 7. Labor savings are achieved when 60" widths are used. 8. Removal of release film exposes Advantages tacky surface which adds to footing safety. 1, ICRQEvaluation Service,_Inc._ Approved Report No. 4252. 9. Can be left exposed up to 4 months without any immediate ultra violet 2. Protecto Wrap's years of experience. degradation. kpplication After removal of the old shingles and rooting ielt, or completion of the new roof, ready to •eceive shingles, remove any old nails, dust jr dirt so that you have a dry, clean smooth surface. ICE & WATER GUARD is applied directly to the plywood surface and rolled to obtain maximum contact. When the second course of the membrane is ready to be placed remove the "Zip Strip" from the first course and continue this process until sufficient number of courses have been placed to reach beyond the point of the highest expected level of the ice dam. Side laps with the "Zip Strip" removed are approximately 21/2" and end laps should be no less than 4". Soffit and fascia areas should be inspected for possible leaks and should be repaired by caulking or other accepted practices. Metal drip edges on flashing around protrusion must be over ICE & WATER GUARD. When applying the membrane in the valley start at the low point and work to the high point rolling the membrane from the center outward in both directions. For ridge application center the membrane and roll from the center outward also in both directions. When application of the membrane has been completed check for any damaged areas, fishmouths, etc. and repair as necessary. If the membrane has been applied the same day and is clean and free of dust or other contaminants cut a piece of the membrane so that the patch extends a minimum of 2" beyond any point of the area that was damaged and roll firmly. it is recommended that the entire surface of the applied membrane be rolled so as to have maximum contact to the surface and special attention to the overlapped areas. Note 1. Application of ICE & WATER GUARD should be made when temperatures are 35 °F or higher and apply only to a dry sur- face. No primer is required on a clean plywood surface. 2. Since ICE & WATER GUARD is a moisture and vapor barrier, spaces under the area covered must be properly vented. 3. Shingles can be placed immediately after application of the membrane and all ap- plied membrane must be covered and not left permanently exposed. 4. After application of the membrame and before removal of the release film the surface is slippery souse care during application. 5. Remove polyethylene release film before final roof installation. 4 6. When ICE & WATER GUARD is applied to concrete or metal surfaces priming with Protecto Wrap's No. 100 Primer at the rate of 150-300 sq. It. per gallon is required. DISCLAIMER: The application instructions set forth above should not be construed so as to create any type of express or implied warranty in products sold by Protecto Wrap Company, or in the application of such products. Product Warranty Provisions: Protecto Wrap Company expressly warrants, subject to the Exclusion Of Warranties provi- sion set forth below, that its products shall be fit for the ordinary purposes for which such products are used. NO OTHER EX- PRESS WARRANTIES AND NO IMPLIED WARRANTIES, including implied warranties of MERCHANTABILITY and/or fitness for a particular purpose shall be applicable to any product(s) of Protecto Wrap Company, except to the extent that any of such products are specifically covered by an ex- press warranty that is provided in writing to a particular purchaser by an authorized em- ployee of Protecto Wrap Company. In the event of a breach of any product warranty extended by Protecto Wrap Com- pany, Protecto Wrap Company's liability, and the associated claimant's sole and EX- CLUSIVE REMEDY is EXPRESSLY LIMITED to the repair or replacement of the defective product(s) FOB Denver on a pro rata basis according to the original sale price, so that the claimant will effectively be charged only for that portion of the normal useful life of the defective product(s) which has elapsed since the purchase date of the productfsl. Under no circumstances shall Protecto Wrap Company be liable for any consequential damages, including any labor costs, that may be associated with a breach of any product warranty extended by Protecto Wrap Company. Exclusion of Warranties: Protecto Wrap Company assumes no warranty regarding the installation of its products. In addition, if Protecto Wrap Com- pany's products are not properly installed, then no product warranties, express or im- plied, shall apply to the products that have been improperly installed. f 300 * Protecto Wrap Company, 2255 S. Delaware St., Denver, CO..80223 (303) 777.3001 Telex 201117 4/87