Highland Center Roof

[peakbagger]

Probably on the periphery of this forum, but does anyone know why the Highland Center has what looks to be the entire north roof stripped?. They had installed a environmentally "green" standing seam roof system that normally is a 100 year roof, and it looks like they have stripped it all off. Its not super obvious due to tree cover on the north side but right now it is open to the weather with what looks like new EPDM (a black roll on rubber like product) underlayment.

Initially I thought they might be doing a solar retrofit, but given that the roof is facing north, it wouldnt be very effective except for PR. The alternative is they went cheap on the original install and didnt install the underlayment which most builders recomend under standing seam due to the inevitable leaks that occur.

 

[miehoff]

Leak?

Using my builder guessing skills, I am willing to be that you are correct. There was a leak, and it had to do with poor install or a lack of underlayment.

Expensive fix!

 

[Maddy]

Using my builder guessing skills, I am willing to be that you are correct. There was a leak, and it had to do with poor install or a lack of underlayment.

Expensive fix!

If it's poor construction could they not go after the people who did the job and make them fix it or pay up?

 

[Hillwalker]

Amc cc

AMC has its own construction crew, but this particular project may have been too large for it to tackle. So it may or may not have been an outside contractor that did that roof.

I worked with the AMC CC back in the mid-eighties but then it was very small. I don't know if it has gotten bigger, but I doubt it.

 

[ChrisB]

A Few Problems

Dennis,

I was working up there last month and talked to some of the folks. The roof problems are manifold.

1. It leaks in high wind-driven rain events. Water gets under and up into the seams between the panels.

2. There is a general moisture problem with the entire building. It does not beath out moisture and as a result rotten wood has been discovered under the roof. (Can mold be far behind???)

I guess the fix is to try a new roof from scratch.
cb

 

[miehoff]

Roof and Moisture

Moisture that gathers on the roof sheathing (plywood, etc) can be caused by several things. Some overlooked but common issues are poor insulation, a lack of vapor control and possible air pockets or leaks that cause the warm moist air to condensate on the roof during certain times of the year. Most understand that insulation is just as simple as jamming fiberglass into a space, but it is much more than that. It is very tricky to try to control the dew point and pinpoint exactly where it is going to occur, but it is very important to do so.

It might end up being VERY costly for the AMC if there are problems all over the building with moisture. If that is the case, I would think that it would be for the same reason (moisture and air movement), and if so, they will have to go through the whole building to properly fix the issue.

I wonder if they used foam for the insulation or fiberglass (or both)? I think, in many ways, fiberglass is useless. I will BET that they didn't spray foam due to the the cost.

I have a hard time believing that wind driven rain would cause such an issue unless the standing seam roof was installed by a total moron, but knowing what I know about some trades-members, that is entirely possible.

I guess my response has little to do with hiking, but compare it to sweating your ass off with a down jacket and a waterproof shell. Pretty soon that down jacket will get wet and become useless and mold with begin to appear all over your body!

 

[sardog1]

Blood in the water

Having been involved in construction litigation, I can tell you that the sharks are undoubtedly circling.

Such situations are often three-ring circuses featuring the building owner, the general contractor, the roofing subcontractor, the architect, the engineer, and their respective insurers. The claims and counterclaims over liability, amount of damage, insurance coverage, etc., have a way of incestuously breeding that makes rabbits look like chaste nuns.

Stay tuned.

 

[Jay H]

So, shall I expect a letter from the AMC wanting me to join twice a week, as opposed to once a week now?

Jay

 

[Stan]

I was a builder for many years and also involved in several major energy conservation and generation projects. I've always been skeptical of buildings that are too tight for moisture issues will certainly be aggravated, as convincing as the economic argument may be.

Chances are it is a combination of factors that lead to moisture (and related mildew and rot) problems, not just one major glaring error (those are usually caught). Here's my speculation as to some additional factors that may be contributing:

1. Quality control in sealing to prevent moisture penetration whether from the ambient humidity inside or the weather outside.
2. Inadequacy of mechanical ventilation due to a) design, perhaps the most difficult factor to control in my mind, b) operational problems with the system due to subsequent placement of furniture, fixture or use of space, c) underestimate of moisture generation by the occupancy of the building (for example, using standard design air handling rules of thumb for a hotel would understate the moisture generated by occupants returning with wet gear, taking longer hot showers etc.)
3. Use of wood products that were inadequately seasoned/dried or got wet and were sealed in sometime during the construction process.

A building like this can easily become a "sick building" which would be unfortunate for the AMC because it would lose buiness, cost a lot to remediate and tarnish the reputation of "green" or sustainable building. That is the reality and it'll be interesting to see how the AMC handles this. The lessons learned should be well publicized because commitment to energy efficiency, sustainability and all that must be accompanied by the competencies to do it right ... and that clearly was not the case.

 

[miehoff]

Very true Stan!

The "Green" movement has created somewhat sudden and radical changes in the building world. Some of these practices are implemented just so everything stays "green." A good honest builder is hard to find, and I am sure a knowledgeable and responsible "green" builder is even more difficult to come across. It is easy to get excited and motivated to develop this kind of building, but the builder and client need to realize that science is now part of the equation...not just engineering and nail guns. Question now becomes, "will it work?"

 

[The Hikers]

So, shall I expect a letter from the AMC wanting me to join twice a week, as opposed to once a week now?

Jay

This I love, Jay, but the letters come even more frequently AFTER you have joined

 

[Maddy]

What a mess...
Will this translate into higher rates at the "Hilton"?
Someone has to pay for it.
Even with their own construction crew, this has to be a costly project.

 

[Mike P.]

Its been a while since I was up there, about the time they had notcied the leaks. If I recall correctly the whole roof did not need replacing.

If due to a missing barrier of some sort, they will have to replace the whole thing. (there call on all at once & closing while it's done or section by section.)

Who will pay & when? I suspect they are considering a construction defect claim & thet the job had a GC, contratcors and subcontractors. Did a Sub cut corners? Was the materials used up to the specs in the plans? Were the plans suitable for a building in C-Notch as opposed to say in Tampa? Did AMC not like the initial cost of the building & tell the GC to cut corners? Any answers to these questions may change who's repsonsible? It's possible the responsible party is bankrupt & their insurance may pick up the cost, providing that company is still solvent?

The answers are likely many months or years away from getting answered. Socking members for costs you may recover from a responsible party is bad business & they know it. I will be shocked to see this mentioned in any price increase. In fact raising membership dues while the membership knows this repair is being done would be a poor business decision.

 

[frytz]

Roof - letters!

This I love, Jay, but the letters come even more frequently AFTER you have joined

As a lifetime member, I get a lifetime of letters!

Fred

 

[Lou Hale]

Having been involved in construction litigation, I can tell you that the sharks are undoubtedly circling.

Such situations are often three-ring circuses featuring the building owner, the general contractor, the roofing subcontractor, the architect, the engineer, and their respective insurers. The claims and counterclaims over liability, amount of damage, insurance coverage, etc., have a way of incestuously breeding that makes rabbits look like chaste nuns.

Stay tuned.

Hopefully ( for all parties involved) they used a well litigated contract like the AIA or AGC standard! I hope for the low man (roofing subcontractor) that he followed the spec and has a change order for any deviation from that spec. Although it always seems like these situations manage to cost everybody something. When your paying $200+/hour for legal fees even a win is a loss

Its not at all uncommon for engineers to proved BS specs and for the general and the sub to not follow them, and use the " or equal" clause. I am guilty of that one my self and hope it never comes back to bite me in the hind side.

 

[Lou Hale]

Dennis,

I was working up there last month and talked to some of the folks. The roof problems are manifold.

1. It leaks in high wind-driven rain events. Water gets under and up into the seams between the panels.

wow that's hard to imagine, not saying its not so just saying its really hard to imagine unless the panels were not properly installed or manufactured. Most standing seem roofs ( if that's what it actually is) use a double lock water would have to go up hill, sideways, downhill the back uphill. Wind blowing rain between the seems sounds much more like a rib panel issue.

2. There is a general moisture problem with the entire building. It does not beath out moisture and as a result rotten wood has been discovered under the roof. (Can mold be far behind???)

I guess the fix is to try a new roof from scratch.
cb

Two things.
1) Houses do not need to breath, if they do something else is wrong. Venting is only a work around for poor construction details. This is not a place to debate proper building practice but I would be glad to explain this to anybody via a PM

2) mold is a rot fungus if there is rot there is mold

 

[Stan]

Two things.
1) Houses do not need to breath, if they do something else is wrong. Venting is only a work around for poor construction details. This is not a place to debate proper building practice but I would be glad to explain this to anybody via a PM

2) mold is a rot fungus if there is rot there is mold

I disagree with the first assertion. Air tight buildings are an invitation to moisture problems from the inside. That is why vapor barriers are essential where the possibility exists that warm moist air collides with cool surfaces ... which results in the formation of condensation and as much damage as if the moisture had penetrated from the outside. That is why mechanical ventilation must be installed in newer more airtight buildings.

As tight as they may be, most older buildings have natural ventilation in dozens of places, foremost of which are windows, doors, sills and attics. The more these "leaks" are sealed, the greater the possibility of moisture problems. There is a happy medium between sealing and the resulting energy savings and the cost of long term damage from moisture.

Newer buildings are more airtight because sealing and vapor barriers are more effectively installed during construction than retrofitted in existing buildings.

Another problem with airtight buildings is air quality. Without sufficient air changes stale air can carry airborne contaminents and pathogens and unhealthy levels of carbon dioxide and sometimes carbon monoxide. I do believe that a significant cause behind the rise in childhood asthma and related respiratory problems is indoor air quality and that relates to the ability of a home to breath.

My advice to homeowners wishing to avoid moisture and air quality problems is: 1) be cautious not to get the home too airtight in the quest for energy conservation unless accompanied by mechanical ventilation, 2) install ventilation to the outside in kitchens and bathrooms, 3) avoid construction materials and furnishings containing substances which are unhealthy (such as formaldehyde, certain adhesives etc.) for these will likely outgas, and 4) in newer homes, give as much attention to air quality as structural integrity (the latter being more universally understood and inherent in good building practices, the former still being a mystery to some).

 

[Kevin Rooney]

It's my understanding that rust was noticed on an area of the roof, and upon inspection it appeared the rust had progressed to creating pinholes. Apparently it's not clear why the rust began, except that the roofing system was built during the winter, and that the roof system did not have a chance to dry out, at least to the same extent it might have if it had been built during milder weather.

 

[Lou Hale]

It's my understanding that rust was noticed on an area of the roof, and upon inspection it appeared the rust had progressed to creating pinholes. Apparently it's not clear why the rust began, except that the roofing system was built during the winter, and that the roof system did not have a chance to dry out, at least to the same extent it might have if it had been built during milder weather.

sounds like a manufacturing issue, or they speced/used a cheaper the cheap panels. All the panels I have seen are zinc coated then painted or painted both sides just so condensation under the panel won't rust it from below. Time of year it was installed should not matter

 

[Lou Hale]

I disagree with the first assertion. Air tight buildings are an invitation to moisture problems from the inside. That is why vapor barriers are essential where the possibility exists that warm moist air collides with cool surfaces ... which results in the formation of condensation and as much damage as if the moisture had penetrated from the outside. That is why mechanical ventilation must be installed in newer more airtight buildings.

As tight as they may be, most older buildings have natural ventilation in dozens of places, foremost of which are windows, doors, sills and attics. The more these "leaks" are sealed, the greater the possibility of moisture problems. There is a happy medium between sealing and the resulting energy savings and the cost of long term damage from moisture.

Newer buildings are more airtight because sealing and vapor barriers are more effectively installed during construction than retrofitted in existing buildings.

Another problem with airtight buildings is air quality. Without sufficient air changes stale air can carry airborne contaminents and pathogens and unhealthy levels of carbon dioxide and sometimes carbon monoxide. I do believe that a significant cause behind the rise in childhood asthma and related respiratory problems is indoor air quality and that relates to the ability of a home to breath.

My advice to homeowners wishing to avoid moisture and air quality problems is: 1) be cautious not to get the home too airtight in the quest for energy conservation unless accompanied by mechanical ventilation, 2) install ventilation to the outside in kitchens and bathrooms, 3) avoid construction materials and furnishings containing substances which are unhealthy (such as formaldehyde, certain adhesives etc.) for these will likely outgas, and 4) in newer homes, give as much attention to air quality as structural integrity (the latter being more universally understood and inherent in good building practices, the former still being a mystery to some).

I agree with the need for mechanical ventilation in tight buildings, and to avoid things that off gas but like I said before this isn't a forum to debate building practices and techniques