THOMPSON’S TAKE: Why It’s Expensive to Replace a Roof Within the SUNY System
Many institutional-type buildings on college and university campuses have flat roofs. While there are a variety of designs and roof types, this post will focus primarily on replacing a flat roof.
Let’s assume that a particular building or group of buildings have had several roof leaks and subsequent repairs. We can also assume that these buildings have exceeded the expected life of the roofing system, which is generally about twenty years, and that these roofs may have known issues that have been added to a long list of maintenance repair needs, sometimes referred to as the Deferred Maintenance backlog. A very important first step is to determine the scope of the problems that exist. This can be done most effectively by an infrared roof scan – a service EagleHawk’s expert team of certified drone pilots and thermal image analysts can provide. The detailed inspection report developed by the EagleHawk staff is a valuable tool to aide Facility Managers in making the best decisions about where to spend ‘critical maintenance’ funds. It is a well-known fact that the maintenance/repair needs far exceed the available critical maintenance funding from SUNY. The detailed inspection report is particularly handy when developing a list of Capital Renewal projects for SUNY. Campus decision makers need to determine whether a roof can be saved with an extensive repair or is a complete tear-off and replacement required.
Let’s examine some of the issues that impact the cost of replacing a roof on a SUNY campus building. The following factors play a large role in the cost of roof repairs and/or roof replacements:
SUNY typically hires an Architect to design the new roof. The Architect would use a detailed inspection report to recommend either a repair project or a complete replacement. Often, they recommend a complete tear-off and replacement as their fee is determined as a percentage of the project cost estimate.
Testing for asbestos by a certified testing firm is a required next step. Often, asbestos is found in flashings, the base sheet of built up roofs, and roof tar from repairs. If asbestos is found, it must be abated by certified persons and disposed of properly and the abatement cost is generally very expensive.
In some circumstances, buildings have spray-on fireproofing on the underside of a metal roof deck. In these cases, it must be determined if the fireproofing is stable and will not be dislodged during the roof tear-off. Since many buildings use the space between the roof deck and ceiling of the top floor as a return air plenum, dislodged asbestos would be placed in the building air stream and dispersed throughout the building. Obviously, this would expose building occupants to asbestos and create an unacceptable health hazard.
The above situation would require the occupants of the top floor of the building to be relocated so an asbestos abatement of fireproofing could be performed. This is a rare occurrence, but I have experienced this firsthand.
New York State requires contractors to pay workers the Department of Labor prevailing wage rate.
The height of the building impacts how materials are moved on and off the roof. The higher the roof of a building, the more time consuming and expensive the project.
Roof-top mechanical equipment presents another obstacle a roofing contractor must deal with when replacing a flat roof. Many times, the equipment must be raised in order to accommodate thicker insulation due to energy code requirements.
Access to campus buildings is usually an issue. Dormitories are especially sensitive with restrictions on work hours. It’s important to ensure the highest levels of student safety and minimize the disruptions to their education experience.
In conclusion, verifying the condition of your roofs and identifying the approximate location of roof leaking, wetness, and other issues is imperative because a small investment in routine proactive inspections can help reduce your campus expenses in the long run. During my tenure at UB, we identified that 66% of the roofs inspected were showing signs of significant wetness. We prioritized these repairs and saw a return-on-investment immediately. And, in one instance, we were able to have the contractor repair a roof that was only a few months away from being out of warranty.
This blog is part of a series in which I’ll provide my take about a variety of subjects regarding facility management, maintenance and repairs to help provide insight into common challenges that facilities managers face and how to hopefully best resolve them.
