Sources
- Historic Structure Report (HSR) 7/03; prepared by Historic Resources Group, incl. structural system assessment by John A. Martin and Associates
- Property Condition Report (PCR) 1/8/19; prepared by Partner Engineering and Science
- Field Inspection Report (FIR) [on water intrusion] 10/5/20, prepared by Spiegel Property Damage Consulting and Forensics
- Assessment by Chuck Jewett, President, Hull Bros. Roofing 2/24/21
- Synopsis (photos with captions) by Rich Radenbaugh, Bilt-Well Roofing and Solar 3/15/21
Basic Description
“The [sanctuary’s] arched roof [approx. 8,500 sq. ft.] is covered with a built-up roofing (BUR) membrane with granular-surface cap sheet. The roofing membrane terminates under metal coping along the top of perimeter parapets, and under sheet metal counterflashing at roof-wall intersection for the mechanical penthouse” (PCR).
In this drawing from the HSR, the arrows show the direction of water flow: from the center axis toward the long walls; and toward the drains in each corner.
“A low-slope roof [approx. 4,500 sq. ft.] is provided on the preschool. The roofing system is a gravel-surfaced BUR system. The roofing membrane terminates over metal edge flashing at open perimeters for the low-slope roof, and under metal counterflashing at roof-wall intersections with the Synagogue” (PCR).
Condition
Overall
“The roofing systems appear to be in poor overall condition. The BUR membranes were observed with worn surfaces and appear to be at the end of their service life.… Replacing the roofing membranes is recommended early in the [12-year] evaluation period [starting with Jan. 2019]” (PCR).
“Observations of the [sanctuary] roof revealed it was nearing the end of its useful life” (FIR).
“The sanctuary roof is showing its age: a loss of the protective surfacing granules, and a loss of waterproofing oils in the asphalt material (soaked due to clogged drains). It is nearing the end of its useful life.… That being said, the present roof can still be repaired and maintained, in order to last for another two or three years. The office/school building’s roof is also in need of certain maintenance.” (Jewett). His opinion is relatively sanguine perhaps because, as he noted at the time, he was not made aware of any history of leaks.
Radenbaugh’s opinion is less optimistic. His synopsis for the sanctuary shows ample evidence of degradation, water intrusion, and roof leaks since this roof membrane was installed. Considerable damage has been done. A lack of regular maintenance (see expenditure records below; normally one would expect to find small annual amounts for patching) was evidently a factor in allowing those leaks to develop and worsen, before being fixed.
Roof-Related Expenditures 2012–2021
Additionally, the 2019 PCR noted that their sources at Mishkon had provided them, for reference, with a “Work order for roof repairs by Ramey Roofing, Inc, dated August 3, 2017,” but {the following was revised on 8/16/22} that description seems to have been misleading. Jon Ramey has told me (via email) that “I remember providing an estimate [to resurface the entire roof, and we do have that quote]. I don’t believe we did any actual work.” Indeed, there is no record of payment under the expected budget line of #9100 Maintenance & Repairs, and no evidence on the roof of repairs made.
Happily, it appears that the most recent maintenance and repairs, performed in May 2021, have succeeded in keeping the interior dry during three heavy winter rains. With one glaring exception — which has since been addressed under warranty — no leaks that are traceable to the roofs have been reported to me. (However, it must be noted that our most careful monitor, Ruben, was away during two of those rains.)
Drainage
A plumbing engineer verbally confirmed to me that the size of the sanctuary roof drains is “more than enough” to remove rainwater from the roof.
A camera inspection by Padilla Plumbing of those cast iron drains (8/21) has shown that they are all in excellent condition. This confirmed the PCR opinion that “roof drains, internal leaders, gutters and downspouts appeared in good overall condition.” Padilla's finding prompted me to question statements in the FIR and by Jewett; they had inferred from the water stains in the roof corners (see brown discoloration in the photo) that the drains must have become clogged — causing a backup that forced the water to pool in the corners. The FIR attributed some of the observed interior water damage to this cause.
However, such an inference is not plausible. Those drain pipes are 4 inches in diameter. There’s simply nothing available to have clogged them. The roof is high above, and away from, nearby trees that might drop leaves and branches onto a roof. There’s only the white roof granules that, with age, continue to detach and roll downstream — but as they pile up, they get washed away.
A few months ago, I concluded that the corner water stains are instead the result of a previously undiagnosed construction defect. For the drain openings are higher than the farthest corners of the roof’s surface. The reason why water ponds in those corners is because it has no way to drain from there! Thus a puddle of water is almost always present, given the usual overnight condensation of dew.
A couple of expert observers have cautioned that such ponded water would eventually leak through the membrane. The FIR explains why:
“When rainwater collects/ponds on the surface of a porous asphaltic rolled roofing material, the water infiltrates into the asphalt itself. The waterproofing oils dissipate out of the material readily. The water then continues to absorb by capillary action and saturates other portions of the roof assembly material and flows into and affects other building materials within the interior of the building.”
Similarly, the HSR noted with concern, “The drains at the roof level still caused ponding adjacent at the date of the [site] visit.”
In 2021, a roofer applied a patching compound around the drains, although not enough to cover the entire area of ponding. (Ruben periodically goes up on the roof to sweep the puddles away, but that’s not an elegant solution, to say the least.) When I questioned the roofer about this situation (April 2022), he largely dismissed the concern, explaining that the present roofing material is of a newer, different type:
The cap sheet membrane on the sanctuary is not porous. The water does not infiltrate into the asphalt and the waterproofing oils (light asphaltenes) do not dissipate out of the material. Old porous cap sheets were made with asphalt saturated organic (cloth) mats, and they did wick water. Then came the upgrade to asphalt saturated fiberglass mats, and they wicked much less water. However, to get damages and/or a leak, the water would have to also get past the additional roof plies and individual moppings of asphalt beneath the cap sheet. To do this, the asphalt moppings would have to have voids and/or be defective workmanship. As someone who has stood on a roof five to seven days a week for the last 30.5 years, I have seen only two to three of these conditions where standing water actually caused a leak.… This all being said, my bid includes applying an asphalt emulsion at areas with standing water as a sacrificial surfacing.
Water is meanwhile also ponding in low areas of the School/Office roof (Radenbaugh; and Ruben).
Damage to Structural Wood
“Water damage was observed at numerous locations throughout the wood framing. Replacing water-damaged members is recommended with roof replacement work” (PCR).
“Unfortunately there is no way to see what needs replacing until the roof is off.… Leaks come from specific areas and the damage is usually confined to those” (Radenbaugh 3/15/21).
Seismic Performance (Ability to Withstand a Quake)
“The Temple structure … appears inadequate to maintain a minimum life safety level of performance. The wood sheathing diaphragm and connections to the walls are not likely to have adequate capacity to distribute seismic loads into the vertical shear walls.… Recommended mitigation:… It is important to sheath the entire roof with a thin layer of plywood over the wood sheathing before re-roofing” (HSR).
However, Radenbaugh cites evidence that the desired plywood is already in place:
“It looks like you already have plywood installed above [the sheathing].… In between the cracks, you would see black felt if there were no plywood. You can see in the picture it is light tan (the color of plywood). Also, the long nails coming through the 1x4 wood are not roofing felt nails. These two things have me thinking there is already plywood up there. We won’t know 100% until the roof is off. We can also cut out a small patch of roofing to be sure.”
Happily, since the 2003 engineering report, the roof has been replaced (see below), and apparently plywood was added at that time.
When Was the Sanctuary Roof Last Replaced?
{Revised 4-6-25} The answer is: during the summer of 2004.
The 2019 PCR looked for evidence, including building permits, of any significant work done to the premises in this century; nothing was found except for a building permit filed by Economy Roofing with the city in August 2001, to replace a roof membrane for the school building ($10K contract = $15K in 2021). Indeed, when I was later perusing some office records, I ran across a bid from the same roofer, dated 2-8-97, to replace the membrane atop the school building’s roof for precisely $10K.
At that time, in 1997, Mishkon collected pairs of bids (which were still in the B&G files in 2025) from a total of 8 roofing companies, for the replacement of both the sanctuary roof and the school roof. Yet no comprehensive sanctuary roof work was performed prior to 2004, given the photographic evidence of condition from the 2002 Getty Grant application, and the 2003 HSR declaration of poor condition (see below).
By the way, Rabbi Dan tells me that the late Bill and Adrienne Frumovitz donated funds for major roofing work in 2001. Rabbi Dan thought it was for the sanctuary, but it must have been for the school building. A plaque that memorialized their donation is on the back wall of the sanctuary, on the north side (5761 A.M. = 2001 C.E.). Rabbi Dan says that he composed the featured saying (in the style of a proverb).
Anyway, here are the observations two years later in the 2003 HSR:
The composition roofing [above the sanctuary] has reached its useful lifetime and has been patched in numerous locations. We understand from the visit that recent repairs have been performed this fall.… The partial second floor [i.e., mezzanine storage area] at the southwest corner had garbage receptacles catching water from the roof.
Yet the pattern of the BUR sheets covering the barrel of the roof in polaroid photos in a 1997 bid, and in the 2003 HSR photos, is in the form of horizontal strips, whereas by 2021 (Radenbaugh’s Bilt-Well photos) the strips are laid out vertically (as today). Similarly, the 2003 parapets have no metal flashing capping them, whereas now they do.
Which implies that at some point since 2003 a new membrane was applied. And that would also explain a lot of related things:
- how the HSR found that there was no plywood on the roof (whereas at present there is);
- how the HSR could know that “the [roof] sheathing is supported by nominal 2”x12” joists at 24 inches on center” above the trusses (whereas the sheathing is now obscured by the plywood);
- why the drain openings look different;
- why the western drain pipes are in such good condition, whereas the 2003 HSR had said they needed replacing; and
- how the NE overflow drain opening was moved.
Meanwhile, the 2019 PCA shows the same roofing system as at present (reported to be in poor condition), which was based on a site visit on December 26, 2018.
I.e., sometime between July 2003 and the end of 2018—presumably near the start of that period, and without a building permit, a lot of work was done: the roof membrane was removed, plywood was installed, drains were moved and drain pipes replaced, a new membrane was laid down, and metal flashing was installed.
The key clue comes from the draft (but not final!) minutes of the B&G Committee from 8/6/04 as it reports on an informal announcement made during the meeting:
“A new roof, some of the money came from donation, some from reserve fund.”Who paid for this? Who did the work? How much did it cost? I don’t know.
No comments:
Post a Comment