THESE ARE SOME OF THE PICTURES THAT
BETTY "You Can Trust Me" STERNBERG
AND THE GREENWICH
BOARD OF EDUCATION
DON'T WANT YOU TO SEE
Some Public School Parents Say That These Are Some Of The "Better" Pictures
Tell Betty that you want to see the pictures of the water drainage, as well as, the crawl space pictures of the contaminated modular classrooms.
The Cover Up Continues
Betty "You Can Trust Me" Sternberg's And Her Failed Administrators Have Pulled Down The Link To The Final Report On The Contaminated Modular Classrooms
Concerned Grenville Parents Have Raised Serious Questions About This Report Prepared By Hoffman Architects.
Hoffman Architects Falsely Claims That The Report Has A Copyright.
Some Concerned Parents Are Suggesting That They May Use This So Called "Final Report" To Bring A Lawsuit Against Hoffman Architects, Betty "You Can Trust Me" Sternberg And The Greenwich Board Of Education.
No Wonder The Link To This Key Document Doesn't Work At The Board Of Education Website.
BETTY "You Can Trust Me" STERNBERG
AND THE GREENWICH
BOARD OF EDUCATION
DON'T WANT YOU TO SEE
Some Public School Parents Say That These Are Some Of The "Better" Pictures
Tell Betty that you want to see the pictures of the water drainage, as well as, the crawl space pictures of the contaminated modular classrooms.
The Cover Up Continues
Betty "You Can Trust Me" Sternberg's And Her Failed Administrators Have Pulled Down The Link To The Final Report On The Contaminated Modular Classrooms
Concerned Grenville Parents Have Raised Serious Questions About This Report Prepared By Hoffman Architects.
Hoffman Architects Falsely Claims That The Report Has A Copyright.
Some Concerned Parents Are Suggesting That They May Use This So Called "Final Report" To Bring A Lawsuit Against Hoffman Architects, Betty "You Can Trust Me" Sternberg And The Greenwich Board Of Education.
No Wonder The Link To This Key Document Doesn't Work At The Board Of Education Website.
KEY DOCUMENTS
April 24, 2008
Board of Education approves motion to remediate the modular facility on the Western Middle School site. This facility will be used as the elementary relocation site for Hamilton Avenue School and/or Glenville School for the 2008-09 School Year.
Board of Education approves motion to remediate the modular facility on the Western Middle School site. This facility will be used as the elementary relocation site for Hamilton Avenue School and/or Glenville School for the 2008-09 School Year.
April 2008 - Overview of Two Remaining Relocation Options: After due research and consideration, the Board of Education has narrowed down the elementary relocation options to two: 1.) Remediation of the modular unit at Western Middle School and 2.) using Western Greenwich Civic Center with 1-3 modular units and 1-2 other school locations. This chart summarizes the two options.
April 2008 - Pros and Cons of the Western Greenwich Civic Center Option
April 2008 - Pros and Cons of the Remediated Modulars Option
April 2008 - Building Envelope Investigation by Hoffman Associates
Go See Betty "You Can Trust Me" Sternberg's Cover-up And The Link That Doesn't Work:
http://www.greenwichschools.org/page.cfm?p=5782
Here Is The Missing Public Document That Some Idiots Are Falsely Claiming Has Copyright Protection.
Duh, Public Documents Can't Have A Copyright.
Nor Can Public Documents Be Unreasonably Withheld Form The School Parents
And Taxpayers Of Greenwich.
By The Way, The Same Idiots That Are Claiming That These Documents Have Copyright Protection Are The Same Idiots That Are saying That It Is Safe For Glenville Parents To Put Their Small Children In Contaminated Modular Classrooms.
If you want to see all of the 41 pictures
you are going to have to tell
Betty "You Can Trust Me" Sternberg
To Make The Link To This Public Document A Working Link At The Public School Website.
Here Is What
Betty "You Can Trust Me" Sternberg
And The
Greenwich Board Of Education
Are Trying To Hide From You:
Go See Betty "You Can Trust Me" Sternberg's Cover-up And The Link That Doesn't Work:
http://www.greenwichschools.org/page.cfm?p=5782
Here Is The Missing Public Document That Some Idiots Are Falsely Claiming Has Copyright Protection.
Duh, Public Documents Can't Have A Copyright.
Nor Can Public Documents Be Unreasonably Withheld Form The School Parents
And Taxpayers Of Greenwich.
By The Way, The Same Idiots That Are Claiming That These Documents Have Copyright Protection Are The Same Idiots That Are saying That It Is Safe For Glenville Parents To Put Their Small Children In Contaminated Modular Classrooms.
If you want to see all of the 41 pictures
you are going to have to tell
Betty "You Can Trust Me" Sternberg
To Make The Link To This Public Document A Working Link At The Public School Website.
Here Is What
Betty "You Can Trust Me" Sternberg
And The
Greenwich Board Of Education
Are Trying To Hide From You:
==============================
Building Envelope Investigation
Hamilton Avenue School Modular Classrooms
Greenwich, CT
Architect’s Project No. 208019
25 April 2008
Town of Greenwich
101 Field Point Avenue
Greenwich, CT 06836
Hoffmann Architects, Inc.
2321 Whitney Avenue
Hamden, CT 06518
203/239-6660
Photo 1: Hamilton Avenue School Modular Classrooms
Copyright Hoffmann Architects, Inc. 2008
Contents
Executive Summary 1
Introduction 2
Observations 3
Evaluations 4
Recommendations 5
Drawings 6
General Information 7
Appendix A 8
Appendix B 9
Appendix C 10
Copyright Hoffmann Architects, Inc. 2008
208019 Building Envelope Investigation
Hamilton Avenue School Modular Classrooms Greenwich, CT
Executive Summary
In February of this year, a roof leak was reported in Room 7of the Hamilton Avenue School
General
Modular Classrooms. Observations of the water damage in this room caused by the leak
revealed considerable mold issues in the soffit and moisture in the exterior wall assembly.
This prompted a series of investigations throughout the building.
Hoffmann Architects’ activities included destructive investigations into the walls, soffits and
ceilings as well as visual observations of the exterior walls, crawl space under the building
and the roofing system.
The majority of the moisture infiltration issues that are occurring in this building are
Soffits
confined to the soffits. The severity of the moisture infiltration varies greatly throughout the
building. The most severe infiltration was noted in the soffits at the northwest portion of the
building.
The moisture can be attributed to the poor insulation/vapor retarder issues in the soffits
resulting in condensation along the uninsulated face of the soffits, infiltration through the
roof membrane and, to a lesser degree, absorption through the T1-11siding. Without any
ventilation in the soffits, the moisture cannot escape, thereby creating conditions where
mold can grow.
The walls of the units are constructed of wood studs with kraft backed fiberglass batt
Walls
insulation. A weather barrier is secured to the outside face of the studs. Texture1-11
plywood acts as both the sheathing and the exterior building siding. Probes into the wall
spaces revealed that the vast majority of the walls are dry with no evidence of moisture
infiltration beyond the weather barrier.
The roof of the buildings is in good overall condition. However splicing and termination
Roof
details of the roofing membrane provide many places where water can enter below the
membrane and travel down the slope of the roof deck into the soffit.
The ground on which the buildings were constructed is damp, thereby creating an extremely
Crawl Space
humid space which will allow mold to grow. Considerable condensation was observed on
the foil faced insulation under the building floor. Additionally, the skirt that surrounds the
building, to visually conceal this space, is inadequately vented. This plywood skirt is also
embedded into the ground, which allows moisture to wick upward.
Overall, the condition of the building is good. The units were constructed and assembled on
site in accordance with the stamped drawings. With the exception of the soffit detail, we
believe that the units were designed and constructed in general conformance with accepted
standards and practice for use as a temporary facility housing classrooms and office space.
It is our opinion that the structure can be renovated to remove the issues that promoted the
mold growth and to prevent future similar mold issues.
In order to eliminate the issues related to moisture infiltration that are being experienced at
the Hamilton Avenue School Modular Classrooms and create a dry and safe classroom
environment, a comprehensive rehabilitation program should be initiated. This program is
outlined in the Recommendations section of this report. Our opinion of probable cost of
construction for this work is $375,000. We estimate that the renovations/repairs should take
3-4 months to complete. We estimate that under an accelerated schedule, the recommended
program of repairs can be completed in 2-1/2 months. This would increase the cost of
construction by approximately 25 percent. Additional costs associated with the
rehabilitation of the modular units, including site work, remediation and mitigation of
existing mold and other environmental issues are outlined in Appendix B.
Copyright Hoffmann Architects, Inc. 2008 Page - 3
208019 Building Envelope Investigation
Hamilton Avenue School Modular Classrooms Greenwich, CT
Introduction
On 5 March 2008, Mr. Arthur L. Sanders, AIA, Director, Architecture of Hoffmann
Architect Retained
Architects, received a telephone call from Mr. Alan Monelli, Facilities for the Town of
Greenwich on behalf of the Greenwich Board of Education to discuss issues related to
moisture infiltration at the Hamilton Avenue School modular buildings in Greenwich,
Connecticut. Mr. Monelli requested that Hoffmann Architects perform a building envelope
investigation to determine the cause or causes of the infiltration.
On 5 March 2008, Hoffmann Architects submitted a proposal to the Town of Greenwich to
perform the work.
The modular classrooms at the Hamilton Avenue Schools consist of 30 pre-fabricated units,
Building Description
each 68 feet long with widths varying from 8 to 14 feet. Each unit is constructed of
dimensional lumber framing with laminated veneer lumber structural beams and
prefabricated trusses comprising the roof structure. The exterior walls are constructed of
Texture 1-11 plywood over wood studs with batt insulation. The units were transported by
truck from Pennsylvania and assembled on site to create one large building.
Mr. Monelli stated that water leaks were recently discovered in one of the classrooms.
Owner’s Concerns
Investigation into the cause of the water leaks revealed some mold growth in the exterior
soffits of the building. This discovery prompted a more thorough investigation into the
building with regard to weather tightness and air quality issues. Results of the investigation
revealed that the mold growth appears to occur throughout the exterior of the building.
Moderate to heavy mold growth was discovered in several areas of the soffit. Additionally
some areas of wet insulation were found in the exterior wall assembly.
The Town of Greenwich is concerned with the mold growth and would like to determine the
root cause. Additionally, they wish to determine if the modular classrooms can be repaired
and renovated to provide a dry, clean and safe learning environment. To that end, the Town
of Greenwich requested that Hoffmann Architects locate sources of water infiltration, review
the construction of the units, and provide recommendations regarding appropriate
rehabilitative efforts to correct deficient conditions.
On Wednesday 12 March 2008, Mr. Steven Susca, P.E. Senior Engineer visited the site to
History of Investigation
observe general site conditions. During this site visit, Mr. Susca met with Mr. Al Monelli,
Director of Facilities, Town of Greenwich, Ms Leslie Moriarty, Board of Education, and Mr.
Anthony Byrne, Director of Facilities, Greenwich Public Schools to tour the modular
classrooms and observe the current condition of the structure.
Mr. Susca returned to the site on Tuesday, 8 April to select locations for invasive probes to
be made in the exterior wall assemblies. A total of 15 locations were chosen to Many of the
invasive probes spanned the joint between two adjacent units. Mr. Susca returned to the site
on Wednesday, 9 April to perform the investigation. Also present during the investigation
were Mr. Michael Scharff, Director, Navigant Consulting, and Mr. Robert Brown, of
Hygenix, Inc
The investigation consisted of a visual assessment of the building envelope with particular
emphasis on the soffits and cavity between the interior ceiling and the underside of the roof
deck. The conditions of the roofing system and the crawl space under the building were also
evaluated. Exterior observations were made from the ground and roof and other readily
accessible areas.
Copyright Hoffmann Architects, Inc. 2008 Page - 4
208019 Building Envelope Investigation
Hamilton Avenue School Modular Classrooms Greenwich, CT
Probes into interior spaces were made to observe concealed conditions. These probes
consisted of removal of the gypsum board walls and ceiling at areas of concern and in other
locations to determine typical construction details and evaluate the condition of the wall
cavity and insulation. It should be noted that all interior invasive probes were performed in a
controlled environment with the requisite safeguards in place to avoid contamination of the
building.
Copyright Hoffmann Architects, Inc. 2008 Page - 5
208019 Building Envelope Investigation
Hamilton Avenue School Modular Classrooms Greenwich, CT
Observations
The modular classrooms constructed in 2005 consist of 30 individual units connected in the
General
shape of a T and comprise a total of 35 classrooms, offices, and other interior spaces. The
footprint of the building is approximately 26,500 square feet.
Each individual unit is supported by a structural steel frame which is in turn supported by
cast in place concrete footings. The original drawings indicate that the footings vary in size
and are installed to a minimum depth of 42 inches below finished grade
The exterior sheathing of the modular buildings is comprised of Texture 1-11 plywood. This
Walls
sheathing also acts as the exterior siding. Interior to the T1-11 is a weather barrier, and kraft
backed fiberglass insulation. Vinyl covered gypsum board provides the interior finish for the
walls. Each unit comprises a portion of two classrooms with a corridor between them.
Photo 2: Typical exterior wall.
Copyright Hoffmann Architects, Inc. 2008 Page - 6
208019 Building Envelope Investigation
Hamilton Avenue School Modular Classrooms Greenwich, CT
Numerous probes were made into the exterior walls throughout the building to observe
concealed conditions. The interior walls are comprised of vinyl faced gypsum board and
wood studs which extend from the floor level to the ceiling. The walls are insulated with
kraft paper backed fiberglass batt insulation. The kraft paper on the insulation, situated on
the interior side of the wall cavity, acts as a vapor retarder. A perforated polyolefin
membrane weather barrier is secured to the exterior face of the studs just inside of the T-1-11
siding.
All invasive probes performed within the building were performed inside enclosures erected
to avoid contamination of the interior spaces.
Photo 3: Typical enclosure in which invasive probes were performed.
Copyright Hoffmann Architects, Inc. 2008 Page - 7
208019 Building Envelope Investigation
Hamilton Avenue School Modular Classrooms Greenwich, CT
Photo 4: Typical conditions inside walls showing kraft paper backed insulation. Note insulation is clean and
dry.
Observations of the wall cavities revealed that the interior spaces of the walls are clean and
dry. In some instances however, black staining was observed on the kraft paper. This was
initially believed to be mold, however closer observation revealed it to be an asphaltic
adhesive used to secure the paper to the batt insulation that simply soaked through the paper.
Copyright Hoffmann Architects, Inc. 2008 Page - 8
208019 Building Envelope Investigation
Hamilton Avenue School Modular Classrooms Greenwich, CT
Photo 5: Close up of bottom of wall cavity showing inside face of weather barrier. Note wall base plate is
clean and dry. This condition is typical throughout the building.
Photo 6: Black staining on kraft paper in Room 18.
Copyright Hoffmann Architects, Inc. 2008 Page - 9
208019 Building Envelope Investigation
Hamilton Avenue School Modular Classrooms Greenwich, CT
Photo 7: Close up of black staining showing that it is actually adhesive that soaked through the paper.
In Room 7, where the roof leak that prompted this investigation is located, a small amount of
mold was observed on the interior face of the T1-11 sheathing. We were told that moisture
was also observed in the wall assembly and insulation in this location when the roof leak was
initially reported.
Copyright Hoffmann Architects, Inc. 2008 Page - 10
208019 Building Envelope Investigation
Hamilton Avenue School Modular Classrooms Greenwich, CT
Photo 8: Small amount of mold on interior face of T1-11 siding in Room 7. Note: weather barrier was cut
away in this location to reveal the sheathing.
The weather barrier on each individual unit is secured to the exterior face of the studs. As
each unit was constructed, this weather barrier was wrapped around the last stud and secured
to the side. When two successive units are joined together, this weather barrier is
discontinuous across the joint. Furthermore, gaps that vary in size from approximately 1⁄2
inch to 2 inches exist between units. Fiberglass batt insulation is installed in the space
between units. On the exterior of the building a batten board is used to close the gap. It was
found that the weather barrier was not extended across the opening, however it should be
noted that in no location was moisture found in the gap between units.
Copyright Hoffmann Architects, Inc. 2008 Page - 11
208019 Building Envelope Investigation
Hamilton Avenue School Modular Classrooms Greenwich, CT
Photo 9: Gap between adjoining units. Note discontinuous weather barrier.
Photo 10: Typical junction between adjacent units. Batten board conceals the gap.
Copyright Hoffmann Architects, Inc. 2008 Page - 12
208019 Building Envelope Investigation
Hamilton Avenue School Modular Classrooms Greenwich, CT
A plywood skirt is installed around the perimeter of the building to conceal the underside of
the building and to prevent entry by animals or children. This skirt extends from the floor
level to the ground and is embedded several inches into the soil. Louvers are installed into
the skirt at regular intervals to provide ventilation to the underside of the building. Moisture
was observed to be wicking from the ground upward in the plywood skirt.
Photo 11: Building skirt embedded into soil. Also note louvers in skirt.
Copyright Hoffmann Architects, Inc. 2008 Page - 13
208019 Building Envelope Investigation
Hamilton Avenue School Modular Classrooms Greenwich, CT
A horizontal batten board is installed at the junction between the exterior wall sheathing and
the T1-11 skirt. Sealant applied to the joint between the horizontal batten board and the
sheathing protects from water intrusion. In many locations, this sealant joint was observed to
be damaged, or missing.
Photo 12: Horizontal batten board at building skirt. Note discontinuous sealant joint
Copyright Hoffmann Architects, Inc. 2008 Page - 14
208019 Building Envelope Investigation
Hamilton Avenue School Modular Classrooms Greenwich, CT
Soffits extend outward from the face of the building at the tops of the exterior walls. The
Soffits
soffits have a rectangular cross section measuring approximately 1 foot wide by 2 feet high.
The vertical face of the soffit is comprised of T1-11 while the underside of the soffits is
standard exterior grade plywood. At the north, south and west ends of the building the soffits
are omitted. By design, there are no soffit vents.
Horizontal batten boards are secured to the top and bottom of the vertical face of the soffit as
well as to the joint between units. In addition to closing gaps in the sheathing, the boards
also serve as architectural feature. Joint sealant is installed at many of the joints between the
T1-11 and the batten boards to protect against water intrusion. In many locations, this joint
was found to be damaged or missing.
Photo 13: Typical soffit at top of exterior walls
Copyright Hoffmann Architects, Inc. 2008 Page - 15
208019 Building Envelope Investigation
Hamilton Avenue School Modular Classrooms Greenwich, CT
Photo 14: Underside of soffits.
Photo 15: View of exterior face of soffit from roof. Note discontinuous sealant joint at lower soffit batten
board and gap between batten board and sheathing.
Copyright Hoffmann Architects, Inc. 2008 Page - 16
208019 Building Envelope Investigation
Hamilton Avenue School Modular Classrooms Greenwich, CT
PVC drain leaders transect the soffits at every other unit. The leaders are not insulated where
they pass through the soffits.
Photo 16: Roof drain leader passing through soffit.
Copyright Hoffmann Architects, Inc. 2008 Page - 17
208019 Building Envelope Investigation
Hamilton Avenue School Modular Classrooms Greenwich, CT
Photo 17: Roof drain leader passing through soffit.
Observations of the interior of the soffits were made through openings in the ceiling in 15
separate areas located throughout the building. Many of the openings spanned between two
adjacent units. The interior construction details of the soffits are different from unit to unit.
In many units, a thermal and vapor retarder (kraft paper backed insulation) extends up
beyond the top of the exterior wall to the underside of the roof deck. This barrier is secured
to the top plate of the wall as well as the underside of the roof, thermally isolating the soffit
from the remainder of the building. However, contrary to the walls, it was observed that the
kraft paper was situated on the exterior face of the insulation.
In numerous other units, batt insulation was installed between the top of the wall and the
underside of the roof deck. However in this instance, the insulation was observed with no
vapor retarder and was not adequately secured to either the wall or the roof deck. It was
simply laid in the space loosely.
Still in other locations, no insulation was installed to thermally isolate the soffit from the rest
of the building. The space was simply left open to the interior of the building.
It should also be noted that in some of the soffits, daylight was visible at the exterior
sheathing when viewed from the inside. This typically occurred at the junction between
adjacent units. Additionally no weather barrier was found in any of the soffits.
Copyright Hoffmann Architects, Inc. 2008 Page - 18
208019 Building Envelope Investigation
Hamilton Avenue School Modular Classrooms Greenwich, CT
Photo 18: Interior of soffit in Room 10 showing kraft backed insulation installed between top of wall and roof
deck. Note vapor retarder is on the cold side of the insulation.
Photo 19: Exterior view of same soffit in Room 10.
Copyright Hoffmann Architects, Inc. 2008 Page - 19
208019 Building Envelope Investigation
Hamilton Avenue School Modular Classrooms Greenwich, CT
Photo 20: Loose laid batt insulation in soffit of Room 2.
Photo 21: Uninsulated soffit.
Copyright Hoffmann Architects, Inc. 2008 Page - 20
208019 Building Envelope Investigation
Hamilton Avenue School Modular Classrooms Greenwich, CT
Initial observations made in Room 7 revealed heavy mold growth along the interior vertical
face of the soffit. An even black coating of mold covers the interior of the sheathing. The
soffit in Room 7 is uninsulated and the pattern of mold growth was consistent with that
which would be found resulting from condensation, however further investigation throughout
the building revealed moisture and mold in varying degrees in the soffits throughout the
building. As in Room 7, the moisture and mold primarily was found on the vertical and
lower horizontal surfaces of the soffits. However some mold growth was also found on
structural elements of the soffits to a lesser degree. In most locations, the mold observed was
spotty.
In isolated areas of the building however, heavy or severe mold growth, similar to that which
was found in Room 7 was observed in the soffits. This type of mold growth was observed in
both insulated and uninsulated soffits. Furthermore, in rooms 8, 10 and 15, significant
moisture was also found inside the soffits. The soffits in these rooms were thermally isolated
with kraft backed insulation however were still found to be wet inside. This indicates that
condensation is not the only issue creating these conditions.
Photo 22: Severe mold growth on vertical face of uninsulated soffit in Room 7.
Copyright Hoffmann Architects, Inc. 2008 Page - 21
208019 Building Envelope Investigation
Hamilton Avenue School Modular Classrooms Greenwich, CT
Photo 23: Spotty mold at vertical surface of uninsulated soffit in multipurpose room.
Photo 24: Some minor mold growth on sheathing and structural elements in soffit of room 3.
Copyright Hoffmann Architects, Inc. 2008 Page - 22
208019 Building Envelope Investigation
Hamilton Avenue School Modular Classrooms Greenwich, CT
Photo 25: Moisture and mold growth in Room 8 insulated soffit.
Photo 26: Room 10 soffit. Note mold growth on vertical and horizontal surfaces as well as structural
elements.
Copyright Hoffmann Architects, Inc. 2008 Page - 23
208019 Building Envelope Investigation
Hamilton Avenue School Modular Classrooms Greenwich, CT
Photo 27: Room 15 soffit. Note mold growth on structural elements, and water staining on horizontal
surface.
Copyright Hoffmann Architects, Inc. 2008 Page - 24
208019 Building Envelope Investigation
Hamilton Avenue School Modular Classrooms Greenwich, CT
The roof of the building is comprised of a 45 mil thick single ply EPDM membrane. The
Roof
membrane is fully adhered to rigid insulation boards which are fastened to an oriented strand
board roof deck. The roofing membrane is carried over the edge of the roof and terminated
on the face of the soffit with fasteners and a termination bar that also serves as a rain diverter.
Numerous rooftop HVAC units are installed on the roof. The units are set on equipment
curbs which are flashed into the roofing system.
Photo 28: Typical roofing termination detail
Copyright Hoffmann Architects, Inc. 2008 Page - 25
208019 Building Envelope Investigation
Hamilton Avenue School Modular Classrooms Greenwich, CT
At locations where the individual building units are joined, variations in the construction
along with installation imperfections resulted in misalignment at the soffit and roof. In some
locations this has caused detailing issues with the roofing terminations resulting in gaps in
the roofing membrane.
Photo 29: Gap in roofing termination at intersection between adjacent units.
The roof of the building is pitched from the center towards the drains which are located at the
soffits. Tapered insulation is installed at the edge of the roof to allow water to freely travel
toward the drains. Evidence of ponding water and debris build-up was observed throughout
the roof. Additionally, previous repairs were also found in many locations.
Many failures were observed in the roofing system. The failures typically occur at locations
where flashing membranes are installed. The failures generally consist of debonding of the
flashing membrane from the substrate creating an opening where water can easily enter into
the building.
Copyright Hoffmann Architects, Inc. 2008 Page - 26
208019 Building Envelope Investigation
Hamilton Avenue School Modular Classrooms Greenwich, CT
Photo 30: Area of ponding water.
Photo 31: Debris build-up at edge of roof.
Copyright Hoffmann Architects, Inc. 2008 Page - 27
208019 Building Envelope Investigation
Hamilton Avenue School Modular Classrooms Greenwich, CT
Photo 32: Previous roofing repairs.
Photo 33: Opening in flashing membrane installation.
Copyright Hoffmann Architects, Inc. 2008 Page - 28
208019 Building Envelope Investigation
Hamilton Avenue School Modular Classrooms Greenwich, CT
At the intersection between adjacent building units, a 12 inch wide strip of rubber flashing
membrane is adhered to the EPDM membrane to span the gap between units. Lap sealant is
applied along the edge of the flashing membrane for the full length. At many locations this
sealant was found to have pulled away from the edge of the flashing strip.
Photo 34: Typical roof closure strips between individual units.
Copyright Hoffmann Architects, Inc. 2008 Page - 29
208019 Building Envelope Investigation
Hamilton Avenue School Modular Classrooms Greenwich, CT
Photo 35: Roofing lap sealant pulling away from flashing strip.
At one location, a flashing boot that is installed at the gas line penetration in the roof is
recessed and can hold water. The underside of roof deck in the soffit under this location was
found to be wet with mold growing on the surface.
Photo 36: Recessed flashing boot at gas line penetration.
Copyright Hoffmann Architects, Inc. 2008 Page - 30
208019 Building Envelope Investigation
Hamilton Avenue School Modular Classrooms Greenwich, CT
Photo 37: Gas line penetration in roof deck. Note rusted gas line and mold on surface of deck indicating
water infiltration through recessed flashing boot.
Copyright Hoffmann Architects, Inc. 2008 Page - 31
208019 Building Envelope Investigation
Hamilton Avenue School Modular Classrooms Greenwich, CT
Fire separation walls extend above the roofline in three locations. The roofing membrane is
carried up and over the firewalls and is terminated at the ends of the walls with a bead of
roofing sealant. In some locations this sealant joint has failed
Photo 38: Poorly configured roofing termination at fire separation
Copyright Hoffmann Architects, Inc. 2008 Page - 32
208019 Building Envelope Investigation
Hamilton Avenue School Modular Classrooms Greenwich, CT
Observations into the crawl space under the modular buildings were made through an
Crawl Space
opening in the floor of Room 7. The floor structure of the modular units is comprised of 2
layers plywood underlain by batt insulation and a 1 inch rigid polyisocyanurate insulation
board with foil facing on both sides. The rigid insulation board is discontinuous between
structural steel framing members.
The space under the units was found to be extremely damp. The surface of the rigid
insulation was wet and a strong odor of mold emanated from the crawl space. However,
probes revealed the insulation beyond the foil facing to be dry. No moisture or mold was
observed on the underside of the floor.
It was found that the building is constructed over loose soil without surface preparation or a
vapor barrier. Furthermore, the topography of the site promotes moisture in the soil beneath
the building. Athletic fields sit atop a hill immediately to the east of the modular classrooms
which slopes downward toward the site upon which the classrooms are situated. This allows
runoff from the sports facility to drain directly to the location of the buildings, thereby
saturating the ground. It should be noted however that no standing water was observed.
Additional observations of the crawl space made through access hatches cut into the skirt,
revealed surface rust on the structural steel members supporting the units.
Photo 39: Opening in the floor of room showing 2 layers plywood, batt insulation and foil faced rigid
insulation.
Copyright Hoffmann Architects, Inc. 2008 Page - 33
208019 Building Envelope Investigation
Hamilton Avenue School Modular Classrooms Greenwich, CT
Photo 40: Hill on the east side of building allowing runoff to drain directly to the building site.
Photo 41: Crawl space under room 6. Note discontinuous rigid insulation boards and surface rust on steel
members
Copyright Hoffmann Architects, Inc. 2008 Page - 34
208019 Building Envelope Investigation
Hamilton Avenue School Modular Classrooms Greenwich, CT
Evaluations
The majority of the mold issues that are occurring in this building are confined to the soffits
General
of the individual modules. The severity of the mold infestation in the soffits varies greatly
from very little to severe. The most severe issues with regard to mold and moisture
infiltration into the soffits occur in the northwest portion of the building. Here, significant
moisture as well as mold growth was observed in the exterior soffits of each unit.
Through convection, warm air will always try to move toward cold. Additionally, warm air
Walls
has the capacity to hold much more moisture than cold air. Therefore when it comes into
contact with a cold surface, condensation forms. The purpose of a vapor retarder is to
inhibit movement of warm moist air from the inside of the building into the wall cavity
where it has no means of escape. If this warm moist air were to come into contact with the
cold exterior sheathing, condensation would form. With no means of escape, this
condensation would lead to the formation of mold on the surface of the sheathing.
The construction of each individual unit consists of an insulated exterior wall with kraft
paper on the interior side of the insulation. The kraft paper acts as a vapor retarder. Initial
reports indicated that the vapor retarder was installed on the wrong side of the insulation.
These reports were incorrect. The configuration of the exterior walls is consistent with
accepted practice in the Northeast. The kraft backed insulation is secured to the sides of the
studs inside the wall cavity with the vapor retarder facing the interior of the building.
Although this is the generally accepted practice, a more effective vapor retarder would be
created if the wings of the kraft paper were attached to the face of the studs.
The weather barrier installed on the exterior side of the insulation is meant to prevent any
water that passes by the exterior sheathing from entering into the wall cavity. This can be
through openings in the sheathing, wind driven rain or absorption through the plywood
sheathing. When moisture in liquid form comes into contact with the weather barrier, it
simply runs down the barrier and escapes at the bottom of the wall. Furthermore, the barrier
is perforated to allow any vapor that is trapped in the wall cavity to escape. These
perforations however are sufficiently small to prevent liquid water from passing through
unless under hydrostatic pressure.
The gap between individual units where the weather barrier is discontinuous is a weak point
in the system. Moisture from wind driven rain can easily migrate beyond the batten board
and into the insulation in the gap. Although no mold or moisture has yet been found in these
locations, they should be addressed.
The exterior walls terminate at the ceiling level. At this location, roof trusses form an attic
Soffits
space above the gypsum board ceiling. This attic space extends beyond the face of the
exterior wall creating a soffit. These soffits are primarily architectural features of the
building and do not comprise a vital part of the building envelope. The roof is insulated with
rigid polyisocyanurate boards between the roof deck and the roofing membrane. This
effectively makes the attic space part of the rest of the building with respect to thermal
conditions.
As noted previously, there are three differing conditions with regard to the construction of
the soffits. In many instances, the soffit is thermally separated from the rest of the building
by the installation of kraft backed batt insulation between the wall top plates and the
underside of the roof deck, however in just as many instances, no insulation was found to
thermally isolate the soffit or insulation was simply loose laid in the soffit.
In soffits where no insulation was found or where it was simply loose laid in the space, a
condition that promotes condensation on the interior surface of the sheathing is created. The
Copyright Hoffmann Architects, Inc. 2008 Page - 35
208019 Building Envelope Investigation
Hamilton Avenue School Modular Classrooms Greenwich, CT
lack of insulation at the exterior face of the soffit creates a breach in the fully insulated box
described above. As warm moist air in the building migrates towards the outside wall, it
comes into contact with the cold surface of the soffit sheathing and condensation forms.
Since there is no means for venting the soffits, the moisture cannot escape, thereby creating
dark and damp conditions in which mold can thrive. Review of the construction drawings
revealed that no thermal barrier isolating the soffits from the remainder of the building was
detailed. Furthermore there is no indication on the plans that soffit vents are to be installed.
In the locations where the kraft backed insulation is installed to isolate the soffit, the vapor
retarder is on the wrong side of the insulation. Since the attic is insulated on top of the roof
deck instead of at the ceiling level, a fully insulated box is created making the attic part of the
interior of the building. Therefore, by reversing the location of the vapor retarder at the
locations of the soffit moisture can travel into the insulation. However, since the insulation
in the attic space is not confined in a wall cavity, there is sufficient air movement to allow
moisture in the insulation to dry out.
Moisture and mold growth was noted in the soffits where this kraft backed insulation was
installed. In some locations considerable moisture and water staining was found. Since there
is a vapor retarder separating the inside of the building from the outside (even though it was
installed improperly) this indicates that there are other forces at work which create damp
conditions in the soffit. Review of the exterior of the building envelope in relation to the
soffits revealed several issues that contribute to the moisture in the soffits.
The joint between adjacent units is simply covered by a batten board. In some instances the
vertical joint is sealed with silicone building sealant, in other locations the joint sealant is
either damaged or missing altogether. As noted previously, daylight was observed through
the exterior sheathing of the soffit in some locations which indicates a location for moisture
to enter.
Roofing issues were also found that can contribute to the moisture in the soffits. The roof of
Roof
the building is pitched from the centerline of the building toward the outside where the roof
drains are installed. For this reason, most of the active roof leaks that have been discovered
are at the location of the soffits. Any rain water that falls on the roof is diverted to the edges
where the soffits are.
Splicing and termination details of the roofing membrane provide many places where water
can enter below the membrane and travel down the slope of the roof deck into the soffit.
Additionally, the flashing strips applied to the roof that span the gaps between units do not
sufficiently allow for movement between modules. Due to the modular nature of this
building, there is significant differential movement between individual units. This movement
can be caused by a number of conditions such as high winds, thermal expansion and
contraction, or building occupants moving between units in large numbers.
Differential movement between units imparts excessive stresses on the roof flashing
membrane strips and the lap sealant applied to the edges. This in turn will result in localized
failures such as seams opening up or membrane pulling away from the lap sealant. In order
to minimize the chances of leaks occurring at the joints between units, a wider flashing strip
should be installed over the existing. This strip should be installed with provisions to allow
for differential movement between modules.
The crawl space below the building is extremely damp. This is caused by the lack of a vapor
Crawl Space
barrier on the ground and the site conditions on which the buildings were constructed. The
hill to the east of the buildings directs runoff directly to the site on which the buildings sit,
creating damp conditions in the soil. A plywood skirt around the base of the buildings
effectively closes of the underside of the buildings from children and animals, however the
Copyright Hoffmann Architects, Inc. 2008 Page - 36
208019 Building Envelope Investigation
Hamilton Avenue School Modular Classrooms Greenwich, CT
louvers that were installed in the skirt are not large enough to provide adequate ventilation to
dry out the space. Consequently, considerable condensation is forming on the underside of
the foil faced rigid insulation board. Although the foil facing on the insulation board is
meant to prevent moisture migration into the insulation, the amount of condensation on the
facing is far beyond that which would be considered acceptable. The discontinuous
insulation boards also allow this moisture to reach the batt insulation and floor of the units
where mold can grow.
As noted previously, the vast majority of the moisture infiltration issues are confined to the
exterior spaces of the building, primarily in the soffits. This moisture can be attributed to the
poor insulation/vapor retarder issues in the soffits resulting in condensation along the
uninsulated face of the soffits, infiltration through the roof membrane and gaps in the siding,
and to a lesser degree, absorption through the T1-11siding. Without any ventilation in the
soffits, this moisture cannot escape. Thereby creating conditions where mold can grow.
Overall, the condition of the building is good. The units were constructed and assembled on
site in accordance with the stamped drawings. With the exception of the soffit detail. We
believe that the building units were designed and constructed in general conformance with
accepted standards and practice for use as a temporary facility housing classrooms and office
space. We also believe that the structure can be renovated to remove the issues that
promoted the moisture infiltration and to prevent future issues related to moisture, thereby
providing a clean, dry and safe environment.
Copyright Hoffmann Architects, Inc. 2008 Page - 37
208019 Building Envelope Investigation
Hamilton Avenue School Modular Classrooms Greenwich, CT
Recommendations
In order to eliminate the moisture infiltration issues in the Hamilton Avenue Modular
Classrooms, and prevent future issues related to moisture, a comprehensive rehabilitation
program with a probable cost of construction of $375,000 should be initiated. This
rehabilitation program should include the following major items
•
Walls and Soffits Removal of soffits around the entire building. This work will include demolition of the
soffits and reconfiguration of the roofing terminations at the building perimeter. This
will also require the installation of a rain gutter at the perimeter where the soffits have
been removed and subsequent tie in of the existing drain leaders. As part of this work,
the drain lines should be tested to ensure that they all function properly. This will
eliminate the vast majority of the moisture infiltration issues that have plagued this
building. Additionally, it will allow storm water to drain from the roof in the event of
ice dams or other clogs in the drain lines.
• Installation of vinyl siding throughout. This will also help to prevent moisture
absorption through the T1-11 siding. This siding should be installed onto furring strips
that are attached to the existing T1-11 sheathing. The furring strips will allow air
movement behind the siding to help keep the cavity between the siding and sheathing
dry. A weather barrier should also be installed at the same time. If it is deemed
necessary through moisture content testing, the T1-11 sheathing should be dried out
prior to installation of the siding. Another option would be to remove and replace the
sheathing.
• Installation of attic space ventilation. Implementation of the above recommendations
would result in a concealed attic space above the gypsum board ceiling. This space
would need to be ventilated.
•
Crawl Space Install a vapor barrier such as polyethylene sheeting under the buildings and cover with a
layer of gravel or processed stone. This will help to ensure that no moisture migrates up
from the ground under the building and create a mold issue. Currently, the foil faced
insulation that was installed under the building is preventing moisture migration into the
modular structures, however, a more proactive measure to control moisture in the space
below the building will help to prevent future problems with regard to moisture
infiltration and mold growth
• Remove the skirt that surrounds the modular buildings and replace with a PVC lattice
and bird screen. This will allow air circulation below the buildings thereby drying out
any moisture that may become trapped.
•
Roof Roof repairs should include reconfiguration of the roofing termination at the perimeter
of the buildings, at the junction between adjacent units and at firewall extensions.
Currently, a 12 inch wide strip of rubber flashing membrane is installed at the junction
between adjacent units. Hoffmann Architects recommends that a second 24 inch wide
strip be installed over the existing with a foam rod at the centerline to allow for
expansion and contraction between units.
Our opinion of probable cost of construction to complete this work is approximately
$375,000. We estimate that the renovations/repairs should take 3-4 months to complete.
This estimate does not include the costs for replacing the exterior sheathing. We estimate
that this work would result in an additional $50,000 in direct costs and add approximately 1
week to the construction schedule.
Copyright Hoffmann Architects, Inc. 2008 Page - 38
208019 Building Envelope Investigation
Hamilton Avenue School Modular Classrooms Greenwich, CT
In addition to our recommendations, Mr. Rob Brunetti suggested some site remediation to
improve the drainage conditions with regard to the surrounding areas. These
recommendations are included in Appendix A in the form of an e-mail sent to Ms Sue
Wallerstein. Mr. Brunetti estimates the cost for these recommendations to be an additional
$25,000.00.
Under an accelerated schedule, it may be possible to complete the work in 2-2 1⁄2 months.
This would add an estimated 25% to the overall cost of construction.
It should be noted that all time and costs associated with remediation and mitigation of
existing mold or any environmental issues that may arise are not included in the above
opinion of probable costs of construction. Mr. Robert Brown MS, CIH, Director of
Industrial Hygiene for Hygenix, Inc., estimates these costs to be approximately $90,000. His
estimate is included in Appendix A.
We envision the following sequence of work:
• Installation of necessary environmental controls to ensure building interior is protected
from contamination;
• Removal of soffits and reconstruction of the top portion of the exterior wall;
• Reconfiguration of the roofing termination at the new edge of the roof;
• Removal of the skirt that surrounds the crawl space under the building and installation of
PVC lattice (this work can be performed concurrently with the soffit removal);
• Installation of a dampproofing membrane under the building (this work can be
performed any time after removal of the building skirt).
• Drying out or removing and replacing exterior sheathing if necessary and installation of
a weather barrier
• Installation of new vinyl siding;
• Installation of a hung gutter and tie into existing drain leaders;
• Installation of new roof flashing membrane strips at the interface between adjacent units.
The above sequence of work is our opinion on how the work may best be completed in a
timely and efficient manner. Sequencing and scheduling of construction activities is
generally determined by the contractor as part of their means and methods to complete the
work specified and therefore may differ from the above.
With proper maintenance and the implementation of the above recommendations, it is our
opinion that this building can have an expected life span of up to 15 years. However it
should be noted that there are components within the entire building system that may require
more frequent repair or replacement.
Copyright Hoffmann Architects, Inc. 2008 Page - 39
208019 Building Envelope Investigation
Hamilton Avenue School Modular Classrooms Greenwich, CT
Drawings
Copyright Hoffmann Architects, Inc. 2008 Page - 40
208019 Building Envelope Investigation
Hamilton Avenue School Modular Classrooms Greenwich, CT
General Information
Statements of opinion of probable construction costs given in this report do not include
Construction Costs
professional fees for consultants concerning repair procedures, preparation of construction
documents, assistance with bidding, construction contract administration, or on-site
observation of construction. Construction costs projected in this report represent our
opinion as to what the probable costs, in today's dollars, might be to implement the
recommendations. They are based on our experience supplemented by published cost
estimating sources. They reflect preliminary data and have not been derived from accurate
quantities, drawings, details, or specifications. Actual construction costs may therefore vary
from the costs in this report. All time and costs associated with remediation and mitigation
of existing mold or any environmental issues that may arise are likewise not included in this
statement.
Duplication Restrictions This report is for the sole use of the party for whom the report was prepared. Use of its
contents by third parties shall only be with written permission of Hoffmann Architects.
Unauthorized use is prohibited and shall release Hoffmann Architects from any and all
liability associated with such use. Reproduction of this document, except by the party for
whom it was prepared for its own internal use, shall be by written permission of Hoffmann
Architects only.
Construction Use Notice This report is not intended for any purpose other than to report on conditions observed. Its
language and recommendations are not sufficiently detailed or specific enough, nor have
any drawings been provided, that could serve as a basis for securing proposals for or
executing the recommended work. This survey does not represent that unseen problems
may not exist. No representation is made or intended that implementation of our
recommendations will place the property in a condition wholly free of all defects or hazards.
Copyright Hoffmann Architects, Inc. 2008 Page - 43
208019 Building Envelope Investigation
Hamilton Avenue School Modular Classrooms Greenwich, CT
Appendix A
Copyright Hoffmann Architects, Inc. 2008 Page - 44
Steven J. Susca
Sue Wallerstein [Sue_Wallerstein@greenwich.k12.ct.us]
From:
Wednesday, April 16, 2008 12:56 PM
Sent:
Steven J. Susca
To:
Nvoye@aol.com; Lesliemori@aol.com; rbrunetti@pecorabrothers.com
Cc:
Greenwich - Modular Remediation
Subject:
Steve,
Nancy Weissler asked that you please include $25K in your modular remediation report (DRAFT
slated to be emailed to Nancy tomorrow, Thurs.) for the scope of work described in the
attached report from Rob Brunetti.
Basically you should include $25K for site work.
Please call or email if you have any qusetions.
Thanks,
Susan Wallerstein
Greenwich Public Schools
290 Greenwich Ave.
Greenwich, CT 06830
203-625-7471
sue_wallerstein@greenwich.k12.ct.us
----- Original Message -----
Sue,
Aubrey and I met at the modulars today and reviewed the site plans and the drainage
characteristics. We did not see any areas of major concern and don't think that any specific
design work is needed. We did however see a few areas that could be improved with some
simple grading adjustments that could be implemented. All adjustments can be made by a
landscaper or by a site contractor during the remediation of the units when the skirts are
being taken off anyway. Aubrey can be on site at that time and can describe some
grading/drainage improvements and if necessary help direct some of the adjustments. Here are
some items:
1) Field Side - there are two catch basins and a partial swale at field side of the trailers.
The one closest to the Jr. High building is set low and seems to be effectively draining 1/2
the area. There is even a little rise before the trailers that should prevent water from
getting under the units. The drain farthest from the Jr. High building seems to be high and
the sidewalk area as well as part of the hill drainage may not be getting to the drain. We
think the drain can be lowered by 8"-12" and a deeper swale can be cut into the grade between
the sidewalk and the hill, better intercepting the water from the hill.
2) Access ramps/decks - At every ramp/platform area there seems to be a localized depression.
Some extra fill creating a positive slope draining water from under the decks and ramps away
from the underside of the units can solve these locations.
3) Area between the interior corner of the trailers where they make a 90 degree turn by the
play area - This area near the benches seems to be flat and possibly drains toward the
underside. Once again, a little local berming at the trailers to induce more positive
pitch...plus maybe a small yard drain tied into the leader drain line shold help. We would
1
be surprised if the current condition was causing extra water under the trailers as is
anyway.
4) Apartment Side - The property edge between the school's property and the apartments is
pretty much separated by a drainage ditch cutting off run-off from entering the property. As
you get closer to the parking lot, the drainage ditch goes away and the adjacent property
most likely drains onto the parking lot...but we don't see any of this water getting to the
trailers as it gets directed to the parking drainage structure.
Aubrey does not recommend having an engineering design done to address these items as he
believes the solutions are low-tech and the money is better spent on additional grading,
adjustment to one catch basin and possibly a few yard drains. The total cost should be small
and pretty much any landscape contractor can do this. I recommended that you included $25K
in your estimates for a place holder for some labor and fill material and a few drains. This
should be more than enough and would easily cover costs of the work and some time to have he
or one of his engineers on site a few times with the actual contractor. I don't think $25K
added to your remediation budget will "tip the scales" for any decision between the two
options on the table.
Rob
-----Original Message-----
From: Sue Wallerstein [mailto:Sue_Wallerstein@greenwich.k12.ct.us]
Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2008 11:10 AM
To: Aubrey E. Mead Jr.
Cc: Robert Brunetti; Nvoye@aol.com; Anthony Byrne
Subject: Re: Friday Direction
Aubrey,
Thanks for the follow up. I spoke with Tony Byrne, the school system's Director of
Facilities, and it's our understanding that while your primary scope of work relates to site
plans @ the Western Greenwich Civic Center, the BOE wanted you to take a quick look at the
modular facility adjacent to Western Middle School. Based on preliminary reports from other
consultants working on the feasibility of remediating the modular facility, it's been
suggested that the site would benefit from a curtin/french drain on the northwest side of the
modulars, at the bottom of the slope coming down from the athletic field to reduce the amt.
of runoff going under the modular buildings. I believe at this pt. what we need is minimal A
& E, a general opinion about feasibility, and a rough estimate of cost. I have a set of
utility drawings for the site if someone can pick them up @ my office.
Regards,
Susan Wallerstein
Greenwich Public Schools
290 Greenwich Ave.
Greenwich, CT 06830
203-625-7471
sue_wallerstein@greenwich.k12.ct.us
"Aubrey E. Mead Jr."
=========================================
Please send your comments, news tips and press releases to GreenwichRoundup@gmail.com
No comments:
Post a Comment