Loading...
6.13. SR 07-08-1996ITEM 6.13. 'ty of iver TO: FROM: MEMORANDUM Mayor and City Council Lori Johnson Finance Director/Asst. City Administrator DATE: July 8, 1996 SUBJECT: Library Roof As the council is aware, the library roof is in need of repair. The city contracted with Inspec to perform an inspection and prepare a proposal on the repair or replacement options available. Attached for your review are a memo from Cliff Skogstad, Inspec's report, and a letter from Murray McNair of the Library Board. There are three items which the council needs to address on Monday night. · The first is selecting a type of roof system. Information on this issue can be found in the attached materials; · The second issue is the funding of this project; · The third is authorizing the advertisement for bids for replacement of the roof. The estimated cost of this project is in excess of $50,000 according to Inspec's report. Since this is an unanticipated expenditure, no funds were included in the 1996 budget for this project. Some of the funding sources available include the library fund balance, equipment reserve undesignated funds, an internal loan from the self insurance or liquor fund to be repaid with future library tax levies, or a combination of these and other sources. The council should discuss and at least identify preliminary funding with the knowledge that the final funding will be based on the actual cost of the project. Action Requested The council is asked to select a type of roof system, authorize the advertisement for bids, and identify ~t funding source(s) for the replacement of the library roof. 13065 Orono Parkway · P.O. Box 490 · Elk River, MN 55330 · (612) 441-7420 · Fax: (612) 441-7425 'ity of iver FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: MEMORANDUM Mayor & City Council Cliff Skogstad, Building Official June 21, 1996 Elk River Library Re-Roofing Project Provided for you with this memo is a copy of the letter submitted to me from Inspec, Inc. There are two issues in this memo that will need to be addressed by the council. The first is in regard to the opinions of the probable construction cost (see Page 2 of this memo). As you can see these prices have almost doubled from the original estimated cost Herzog Roofing quoted the library one year ago. There are many reasons for this price difference. For instance, from testing the material on the roof they have determined that this material must come off completely all the way to the roof boards and new insulation must be installed. Also, after talking to Shane Burns from Inspec, he indicated that these numbers may be high but he wanted to submit these numbers so when the bids come in it is easier to justify a lower bid than a higher bid. In addition, because it is such a busy construction year the bids will be coming in higher for this project. The second item is in regard to the different types of roof systems proposed (also on Page 2). One is the built-up roof system which we have at the Elk River Fire Station and the second is the single ply roof system. This single ply system is on the addition to the library. I met with the library board regarding these two types of roofing systems on June 18, 1996. The library board is recommending going with the single ply roof system. Mr. Murray McNair feels that this would be the appropriate roofing system being it is already on the addition. Also, he is concerned that the built-up roof system would cause an odor problem caused from heating of the tars, etc. and feels that the library would have to close down during construction. In comparing these two systems the built-up roof system appears to have a 25 year life expectancy versus the single ply system having a 15 year life expectancy. In comparison to the prices you will note that the built-up roof system will cost $2,060 for a 25 year cycle and the single ply roof system at a 15 year cycle averages out to be $3,467. As you can see there is quite a difference between the prices when you amortize out the life expectancy of these roof systems. Please keep in mind that these life expectancies are 13065 Orono Parkway · P.O. Box 490 · Elk River, MN 55330 · (612) 441-7420 · Fax: (612) 441-7425 Page 2 based on experience from Inspec's jobs and the roof life performances. Either one of these roof systems will work on the library since there is a parapet wall which divides the addition from the older part of the library. Both systems are an excellent roofing system and I would recommend either one of the systems for this project. Therefore at this time I am requesting that the Mayor and City Council recommend the system they prefer, either a 25 year built-up roof system or a 15 year single ply system. Once this recommendation is made construction plans can be completed for this project and the bidding process may continue. If you have any questions before the meeting please don't hesitate to call. s:\b&z\cliffX, cc6-21.doc "l 5801 Duluth Street, Minneapolis, MN 55422 · Ph. 612-546-3434 Fax 612-546-8669 555 West Layton Ave., Suite 420, Milwaukee, WI 53207 · Ph. 414-744-6962 Fax 414-744-6981 ~ngineering & ArcJ~'teCrural services ~or root~, pavements, exterior waJls, and outdoor sports Facilities. ,,4}NSPEC, INC. PROJECT: 1996 Reroofing the Elk River Public Library City of Elk River REPORTED TO: Mr. Clifford Skogstad City of Elk River P. O. Box 490 13065 Orono Parkway Elk River, MN 55330 DATE: May 29, 1996 FILE: M960507-03 COPIES TO: SCHEMATIC DESIGN SUMMARY As discussed on May 22, 1996, we are sending you information regarding roof system options and our opinion of probable construction cost for the above referenced project. EXISTING CONSTRUCTION On April 13 and 22, 1996, INSPEC, INC. conducted field verification of the existing roof system for the Elk River Public Library. During the field verification, test openings were made through the existing roof system to the existing structural deck. Test openings were also made at roof edges, expansion joint curbs, and an obsolete skylight curb. The existing roof system is a IRMA roof system consisting of 1-1/2" diameter aggregate ballast over a filter fabric laid loose over a 1" extruded polystyrene insulation laid loose over a 45-mil loose laid EPDM membrane over 1.7" extruded polystyrene insulation mopped to a two-ply organic asphalt underlayment mopped to a one-ply red rosin underlayment tack-nailed to the existing wood deck. At some of the test cuts taken, water was found in the system between the membrane and the underlayment. Because of the wet conditions of the existing roof system materials, it is not recommended that any of these materials be salvaged and used in the new system. The original construction documents show a conventional gravel surfaced built-up roof. The current IRMA roof system in place was installed approximately 8 years ago according to local personnel. Documentation of this system was not available for our use at this time. PROPOSED SYSTEMS It is our opinion, based on field verification of the existing conditions on this area along with an understanding of your needs and expectations, the viable roof system options include the following: As a mutual protection to clients, the public and ourselves, all reports are submitted as the confidential property of clients and our written authorization is necessary to publish any statements, conclusions or extracts from or regarding our reports. .j ,,4[NSPEC, INC. File No. 960507-03 May 29, 1996 Page Two Built-up Roof System - Four plies of fiberglass felts in asphalt moppings with an asphalt flood coat and aggregate surfacing. This system is resistant to puncture and abrasion and is a time-proven system. A drawback with this type of system is the asphaltic smell at the time of construction. With quality design and installation, this system should last approximately 25 years and will require minimum maintenance during the life of the roof. Adhered EPDM Single-ply Roof System (One ply of.060" EPDM membrane fully adhered to the new insulation with no surfacing) This system is less puncture resistant than the BUR roof system, it would not have the asphaltic smell at the time of installation, and would match the system installed on the new adjacent addition. With quality design and installation, and periodic walkovers, this system should perform satisfactorily for approximately 15 years with only minor maintenance required. An IRMA roof system (similar to the existing) could not be recommended with this system. If any leaks occur, it can be difficult in locating the water entry point due to the insulation and aggregate ballast over the membrane. This system also has a tendency to trap water between the top insulation and the membrane which could lead to premature failure of the glued seams (which has happened to the current system in place). Also, at the present time, there appears to be a slight deflection of the existing deck caused by the additional weight of the ballast. If a new IRMA system was installed, a complete structural analysis would need to be done. OPINION OF PROBABLE CONSTRUCTION COSTS The following cost estimates are based on a total of 67 roofing squares: Built-up Roof System 67 squares ~ $800/square = Adhered EPDM Single-ply System 67 squares ~ $780/square = $54,000.00 $52,000.00 LIFE CYCLE COSTS OF THE PROPOSED SYSTEMS Built-up Roof System Single-ply Roof System $54,000 + 25 years = $2,060/year $52,000 + 15 years = $3,467/year As a mutual protection to clients, the public and ourselves, all reports are submitted as the confidential property of clients and our written authorization is necessary to publish any statements, conclusions or extracts from or regarding our reports. .i ,, I'NSPEC, INC. File No. 960507-03 May 29, 1996 Page Three REMARKS We recommend reroofing with the built-up roof system from a life cycle cost standpoint plus it has better resistance to physical abuse. We are anxious to continue our design work and will do so once a roof system has been selected. If you have any questions or comments regarding this report, please feel free to call. INSPEC. INC. By Shane Bums SB/cs Gary,. Patrick As a mutual protection to clients, the public and ourselves, all reports are submitted as the confidential property of clients and our written authorization is necessary to publish any statements, conclusions or extracts from or regarding our reports. ,June 28,1e0~ City of ~l.k River ~ar Yr.Yavor and Elk~ver cJtv council me~bers, Cliff Skogstad presented Inspec's report and mecommendations to the Library Board, as he will likely discuss before tRe Council. As you will see, Inspec comes do~..~n in favor of the bui!t-uv roof system because, even tbou?h it would be more exvens~ve to instal, over time, the cost par year would he lower. ~tv experience with built-up f]at roofs tells me t.hat no p~thh and Era. vel roof wJ. ll last 25 years. I researched the lil~rary recor:ls and found a chan?e order dated Sept.7,197Z:, si~ned be Yerri]] .A. Birch BIA of YcEnary ~nd Yrm£t detai].Jn~ an IP,~'A system usin~ three ]avers(a Z:3f! and two-2~f felts mopped on with steer asphalt) The next letter was Pct. g,lOgl. (Edwards Sales,copy Attached) Tb~.s details the rep]acment that was needed six years after comvletion. The IJbrary Boardhas asked that I relay our feelin?s to the city. 1. The adhered EPDY system would match the membrane on the new addition, which is less tho. n two years old, and would not reouire rock ballast. 2. The stench from that "tar cooper" could be a problem for the library as well as for the nef?bbors. 3. ~:Tho will?ive you a 25 year ~uarantee on the b6ilt-up system? Thank you for your consideration of tb~s problem. Sinmerely, Murray Wc Nair CAMBRIDGE STREET. MINNEAPOus. MINNESOTA 55421] · PHONE 612/929-6794 ctober 6, 1981 CITY OF ELK RIVER Elk River, Minnesota 55330 Attn: Mr. Rick Breezee, Building Inspector Dear Mr. Breezee, We have solicited bids today for the installation of a new roof membrane on the Elk River City Library. This action was requested by Dow Chemical in accordance with the pro- vision of the IRMA 'warranty agreement on the building. The roof contractors will be contacting you or Ms. Bender to inspect ~he roof prior tq bidding. We wou~ appreciate your assistance in accomodating them. When the work is completed we will deliver to you a new warranty of at least 5 years duration from the manufacturer of the membrane system that was installed. In exchange we ask for release from further responsibility under the ori- ginal IRMA warranty. We cannot promise that the repair will be completed yet this fall. If it isn't, we naturally will continue to service the IRMA warranty. Very truly yours, EDWARDS SALES I~oger~~yber~ RN/jj cc: Ms. Mary Bender, Librarian STYROFOAM® INSULATION · GENERAL ELECTRIC SILICONE SEALANTS · MAMECO URETHANE SEALANTS & COATINGS