Background: "Up on the Roof"--- Roof Status of TRIS----2000 and 2006--Questions raised

One of the stunning areas of discussion at the Buildings and Grounds meeting in January 2007 concerned the status of the Theodore Robinson Intermediate School. On page 4 of the Plunkett Raysich study, it says, "The Theodore Robinson Intermediate School was constructed in 1962 as a high school with an addition to the east in 1992 and a small remodeling in 2001. The building area is 88,897 square feet....The current enrollment is third grade through fifth grade."

"According to a March 2000 roofing report written by SRI, approximately 20% of the roof is ballasted EPDM roof. This roof section had some membrane flashing problems that to be addressed."

The Observer assumes that this area of the roof is the area above the library that is scheduled to be repaired at a cost of $75,000 and is in the capital budget for next year.

The report (p.4) says "Taking the current age of the building into account and a summary of the roof work completed since the report, approximately 20% of the roof has a life expectancy of 0 to 1 years, 30% has a life expectancy of between 1 and 5 years and the remaining 50% of the roof has a life expectancy over 5 years."

In 2000, as the report notes, there was a little "remodeling" to get space for the intermediate grades. That is the area of growth and stress over the next ten years for the school. In 2000 that building was evaluated as being a candidate for remodeling and an investment worth making. If one reads the section on the window status of TRIS, and adds this to the statements about the roof, one has to wonder---either the engineering reports were flawed in 2000 and the building built in 1962 was of poor quality and would never be a long term solution or.....it was a good candidate for further investment. Did folks just not want to know in 2000?

The members at the Building and grounds meeting discussed whether if the further repair of roof and windows would be worth it....or whether it might be necessary to simply raze the oldest section of the school and rebuild....either on the site or elsewhere. I say this not to shock folks or create alarm. It is a question of review of the facts that is not complete at this time.

So----I mention this not to go back and blame anyone in the past...2000....but because it does become a factual issue of whether the oldest section built in 1962 is so totally flawed in essential aspects that further investment would not be prudent. Only a full engineering review....and by an independent engineering firm not in sales promotion for building schools...would be of value.

Make a note of it. You make the call.