PALM COLONY AT PELICAN LANDING CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC.

Transcription

1 June 29, 2017 PALM COLONY AT PELICAN LANDING CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC. c/o Mr. Jim Pasko, Board Member Palm Colony at Pelican Landing Canary Island Court & Ivory Cane Drive Bonita Springs, Florida Phone: Subject: ROOF CONSULTING SERVICES Palm Colony at Pelican Landing Canary Island Court & Ivory Cane Drive Bonita Springs, Lee County, Florida Forge Engineering Project Number Forge Engineering Inc. (FORGE) is pleased to present this report summarizing our engineering consulting services at the subject site. This report was completed in general accordance with the services outlined in our proposal No PR dated June 19, 2017 and authorized by Bruce Gilmore on June 20, This report presents the project information provided to us, together with our observations and findings. FORGE has endeavored to conduct the services identified herein in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of the profession currently practicing in the same locality and under similar conditions as this project. No other representation, express or implied, is included or intended in this document. Project Information Our understanding of your needs for this project is based on the information provided by you, along with some assumptions that we have made based on our experience. We understand the subject development includes 23 condominium buildings and several pool facility structures. We understand the Association is in the process of having their roofs replaced and several leaks have occurred after the completion of several roofs. Currently, some of the new roofs have been partially installed and the underlayment

2 system is exposed for our observations. Therefore, you have retained FORGE to perform a cursory roof inspection to verify if the roofs are in accordance with the contract documents and good roofing practices. The new roofs are to be installed per the 2014 Florida Building Code (FBC) requirements. In Chapter 15 of the FBC for a tile roof application, the code refers to the FRSA/TRI Florida High Wind Concrete and Clay Roof Tile Installation Manual, Fifth Edition (FRSA/TRI Manual) for specific requirements for installing a tile roof system. Site Observations Engineering personnel from our office visited the subject property on June 21, 2017 to observe and document the condition of the subject roofs. Our observations were made at the following buildings: 24627, 24623, 24619, 24651, 24655, 24661, 24675, The roof system installed at the subject site is constructed with a single layer of Polystick TU Plus membrane adhered directly to the wood sheathing. The existing L flashing was left in-place and the bottom flange is installed on top of the TU Plus membrane and stripped in with an additional layer of TU Plus membrane. The valley metal has a raised center water diverter and is installed on top of the TU Plus membrane. The valley metal flanges are stripped in with an additional layer of TU Plus membrane. In most locations, the crickets and dead valleys have an Elastoflex SA P cap sheet installed. The roof tile are attached with a single component adhesive. Canisters of Touch n Seal StormBond Roof Tile Adhesive and ICP Adhesive Polyset RTA-1 were observed on the partially completed roofs. During our site visit, we observed several roofing items that are not installed in accordance to the FBC, roof material manufacturers recommendations or are not generally considered good roofing practices. Listed below is a summary of the deficiencies observed during our site visit. Page 2 of 25

3 Building 24627: Tile install in progress The TU Plus membrane was observed to be installed without modified flashing cement between some of the laps. The observed installation is not in accordance with the manufacturer s recommendations. The Elastoflex SA P cap sheet appeared to be installed without modified flashing cement between some of the laps. The observed installation is not in accordance with the manufacturer s recommendations. The Elastoflex SA P cap sheet is installed up the face of the stucco wall and is adhered directly to the painted stucco. It appears the walls have not been primed. In addition, exposed edges of the membrane were observed at termination details. The observed installation is not in accordance with the manufacturer s recommendations. The sealant detail at the surface mount counter flashing was observed to be of poor quality at locations. The TU Plus membrane utilized to strip-in the flashing metal was observed to contain fishmouths and gaps. Two roof tiles were removed and the roof tile adhesive was not installed in accordance to the manufacturer s recommendations. A section of the Elastoflex SA P cap sheet contained an exposed salvage edge. The salvage edge is not UV stable. Tile was observed to be installed at a wall abutment where the gap between the tile and wall exceeded 1-inch. The FRSA/TRI Manual requires tile to fit within 1-inch of a finished wall. Due to the gap, the TU Plus membrane is exposed and the membrane is not UV stable. Building 24623: Tile loaded At a cricket location, the existing roof membrane was not replaced. At locations, the TU Plus membrane was observed to be back-nailed with cap nails spaced greater than 12-inches O.C. The observed installation is not in accordance with the manufacturer s recommendations. The Elastoflex SA P cap sheet is installed up the face of the stucco wall and is adhered directly to the painted stucco. It appears the walls have not been primed. In addition, exposed edges of the membrane were observed at termination details. The observed installation is not in accordance with the manufacturer s recommendations. The valley metal was observed not to be primed. The observed installation is not in accordance with the manufacturer s recommendations. The drip edge metal was observed not to be primed. The observed installation is not in accordance with the manufacturer s recommendations. The TU Plus membrane utilized to strip-in the flashing metal was observed to contain fishmouths and gaps. A drip edge was observed to be installed without a separator sheet installed over the plywood sheathing. The FRSA/TRI Manual requires a separator sheet be installed. The TU Plus membrane was observed to be installed without modified flashing Page 3 of 25

4 cement between some of the laps. The observed installation is not in accordance with the manufacturer s recommendations. The TU Plus membrane was terminated short of the roof edge at a few locations leaving the drip edge flange exposed. The Elastoflex SA P cap sheet appeared to be installed without modified flashing cement between some of the laps. The observed installation is not in accordance with the manufacturer s recommendations. The sealant detail at the surface mount counter flashing was observed to be of poor quality at locations. The metal hip and ridge anchors appear to be manufactured by Dan s Custom Sheet Metal. The nail spacing of the metal anchors at locations was observed to exceed 6- inches O.C. as required by the manufacturer. Building 24619: Roof is partially torn off The TU Plus membrane was observed to be installed without modified flashing cement between some of the laps. The observed installation is not in accordance with the manufacturer s recommendations. The Elastoflex SA P cap sheet appeared to be installed without modified flashing cement between some of the laps. The observed installation is not in accordance with the manufacturer s recommendations. The drip edge metal was observed not to be primed. The observed installation is not in accordance with the manufacturer s recommendations. At a location where flashing cement had been installed at a TU Plus membrane lap, a 4-inch width of sealant had been applied. The manufacturer requires a minimum 6-inch width of sealant between the laps. At two sidewall locations, the existing roof membrane was not replaced. The roof membrane at the flat roof location at the rear of the building appeared not to have been replaced. The TU Plus membrane was terminated short of the roof edge leaving the drip edge flange exposed. The TU Plus membrane utilized to strip-in the flashing metal was observed to contain fishmouths and gaps. Building 24651: Tile Installed At a cricket location, the existing roof membrane appears not to have been replaced. A gap was observed in the mortar installed at an off-ridge vent. A section of replaced fascia board was observed not to be painted. Building 24655: Tile Installed At a cricket and a dead valley location, the existing roof membrane appears not to have been replaced. Tile was observed to be installed at wall abutments where the gap between the tile and wall exceeded 1-inch. The FRSA/TRI Manual requires tile to fit within 1-inch of a finished wall. Due to the gap, the TU Plus membrane is exposed and the membrane Page 4 of 25

5 is not UV stable. A few broken tiles were observed. At a sidewall location, the existing roof membrane appears not to have been replaced. The roof membrane at the flat roof location at the rear of the building appears not to have been replaced. The Elastoflex SA P cap sheet is installed up the face of the stucco wall and is adhered directly to the painted stucco. It appears the walls have not been primed. The observed installation is not in accordance with the manufacturer s recommendations. Some of the surface mount counter flashing has not been painted. The cricket and dead valley installation details appeared to be inconsistent. The Elastoflex SA P cap sheet appeared to be installed without modified flashing cement between some of the laps. The observed installation is not in accordance with the manufacturer s recommendations. A gap was observed in the mortar installed at an off-ridge vent. The top edge of the valley flashing appeared not to be sealed at some locations. Building 24661: Tile Installed Damaged and cracked stucco was observed at a wall abutment directly above the roofline. The Elastoflex SA P cap sheet is installed up the face of the stucco wall and is adhered directly to the painted stucco. It appears the walls have not been primed. The observed installation is not in accordance with the manufacturer s recommendations. Tile was observed to be installed at wall abutments where the gap between the tile and wall exceeded 1-inch. The FRSA/TRI Manual requires tile to fit within 1-inch of a finished wall. Due to the gap, the TU Plus membrane is exposed and the membrane is not UV stable. A few broken tiles were observed. The cricket and dead valley installation details appeared to be inconsistent. At a sidewall and cricket location, the existing roof membrane appeared not to have been replaced. The gutter was observed to be filled with roofing debris. A couple ridge tiles were observed not to be attached to the ridge anchor. The top edge of the valley flashing appeared not to be sealed at some locations. Building 24675: Tile Installed The Elastoflex SA P cap sheet is installed up the face of the stucco wall and is adhered directly to the painted stucco. It appears the walls have not been primed. In addition, exposed edges of the membrane were observed at termination details. The observed installation is not in accordance with the manufacturer s recommendations. A few broken tiles were observed. Page 5 of 25

6 At two locations, a section of the Elastoflex SA P cap sheet contained an exposed salvage edge. The salvage edge is not UV stable. The sealant detail at the surface mount counter flashing was observed to be of poor quality at locations. The valley metal was observed not to be primed. The observed installation is not in accordance with the manufacturer s recommendations. Tile was observed to be installed at wall abutments where the gap between the tile and wall exceeded 1-inch. The FRSA/TRI Manual requires tile to fit within 1-inch of a finished wall. Due to the gap, the TU Plus membrane is exposed and the membrane is not UV stable. The top edge of the valley flashing appeared not to be sealed at some locations. Building 24637: Tile Installed Water staining was observed on the ceiling of unit 203, which was reported to be caused by a roof leak. Substantial water staining was observed on the ceiling of unit 202, which was reported to be caused by a roof leak. Tile was observed to be installed at wall abutments where the gap between the tile and wall exceeded 1-inch. The FRSA/TRI Manual requires tile to fit within 1-inch of a finished wall. Due to the gap, the TU Plus membrane is exposed and the membrane is not UV stable. The roof membrane at the flat roof location at the rear of the building appeared not to have been replaced. The gutters were observed to be filled with roofing debris. The TU Plus membrane utilized to strip-in the flashing metal was observed to contain fishmouths and gaps. Five roof tiles were removed and the roof tile adhesive was not installed in accordance to the manufacturer s recommendations. Excess mortar and adhesive was observed on the face of several installed tiles. TU Plus membrane was installed at the dead valleys at the garage roofs. Valley metal was not installed at the valleys and the TU Plus membrane is exposed. This type of installation does not meet the requirements of the FRSA/TRI Manual or the roof membrane manufacturer s installation requirements. At a cricket location, the existing roof membrane appears not to have been replaced. The TU Plus membrane is exposed and has been installed without modified flashing cement at the overlap. Moisture was observed underneath the TU Plus membrane. At a wall abutment, the existing roof membrane appeared not to have been replaced. An unsealed gap was observed at the top of the membrane. A downspout was observed to have been removed and was not reinstalled. The following photos represent the site conditions observed at the time of our site visit. Page 6 of 25

7 Building 24627: View of unsealed membrane lap. Building 24627: View of improper application of tile adhesive. Page 7 of 25

8 Building 24627: View of improperly installed Elastoflex SA P membrane. Building 24627: View of fishmouths at TU Plus membrane. Page 8 of 25

9 Building 24623: View of old roof membrane not replaced at cricket. Building 24623: View of fasteners spaced greater than 12-inches O.C. Page 9 of 25

10 Exposed nail Building 24623: View of membrane not extended to edge of roof. Building 24623: View of drip edge metal without primer. Page 10 of 25

11 Building 24623: View of unsealed membrane lap. Building 24619: View of unsealed membrane lap. Page 11 of 25

12 Building 24619: View of unsealed membrane lap. Building 24619: View of flashing cement not applied at a 6-inch wide strip. Page 12 of 25

13 Building 24619: View of old roof membrane not replaced at sidewall. Building 24619: View of old roof membrane not replaced. Page 13 of 25

14 Building 24655: View of gap at tile / wall interface greater than 1-inch. Building 24655: View of old roof membrane not replaced. Page 14 of 25

15 Building 24655: View of unsealed membrane lap. Building 24661: View of damaged and cracked stucco. Page 15 of 25

16 Building 24661: View of gap at tile / wall interface greater than 1-inch. Building 24675: View of open gap at membrane termination detail. Page 16 of 25

17 Building 24675: View of exposed salvage edge. Building 24675: View of failed sealant. Page 17 of 25

18 Building 24675: View of valley metal without primer. Building 24637: View of water staining on ceiling of Unit 203. Page 18 of 25

19 Building 24637: View of water staining on ceiling of Unit 202 Building 24637: View of debris in gutter and mortar on screen enclosure. Page 19 of 25

20 Building 24637: View of adhesive on tile face. Building 24637: View of gap at tile / wall interface greater than 1-inch. Page 20 of 25

21 Building 24637: View of exposed TU Plus membrane. Building 24637: View of unsealed membrane lap and evidence of moisture below the membrane. Page 21 of 25

22 Building 24637: View of membrane installed without primer. Building 24637: View of old membrane not replaced and an open gap. Page 22 of 25

23 Building 24637: View of old membrane not replaced and an open lap. Building 24637: View of old membrane not replaced. Page 23 of 25

24 Building 24637: View of improper application of tile adhesive. Evaluation Our evaluation is based on the project information provided to us, our limited field observations, and our experience in the area. Please contact us if new or different information is available so we may evaluate the new information. In general, it is our opinion there are items with the current installation of the subject roofs that are in direct violation of the FBC, roof material manufacturers recommendations or are not generally considered good roofing practices. The roofing issues noted in our report can lead to premature failure of the roofing systems and in some instances could void the roof underlayment manufacturer s warranty. During a high wind event (i.e. tropical storm or hurricane), improperly attached roof tiles may be dislodged from the roofs. It is our opinion the roof issues noted in this report need to be addressed. The roofs that are in progress of being installed might be able to be repaired; however, the roof manufacturer (Polyglass) would need to assess the current installation details to determine if the required repairs would still qualify to be warranted. The installation of the roof membrane at the completed roofs was limited due to the installation of the tile. Page 24 of 25

25 Due to the type of issues observed with the roof membrane installation at the roofs that are in progress of being installed, destructive testing should be performed to evaluate the roof membrane installation at the completed roofs. At Buildings and 24637, seven total roof tiles were removed and the roof tile adhesive was observed not to be installed in accordance to the manufacturer s recommendations. We recommend destructive testing be performed to further evaluate the roof tile attachment. If improper installation of the roof membrane and/or roof tile attachment is determined on completed roofs, complete replacement of the roofs may be required. Closing We trust the information contained herein is suitable for your needs and appreciate the opportunity to have been of service to you. Should you have any questions or if we can be of further assistance, please call us. Sincerely, Forge Engineering, Inc. Cert. of Auth. No.: 7544 Casey M. Ward, P.E. Senior Engineer Florida Registration No: Distribution: 1 Addressee (via ), 1 File THIS ITEM HAS BEEN ELECTRONICALLY SIGNED AND SEALED BY CASEY M WARD, P.E. ON JUNE 29, 2017 USING A DIGITAL SIGNATURE. PRINTED COPIES OF THIS DOCUMENT ARE NOT CONSIDERED SIGNED AND SEALED AND THE SIGNATURE MUST BE VERIFIED ON ANY ELECTRONIC COPIES Page 25 of 25