Living Sky School Division’s dream of solving its roofing problems with spray foam has been dashed again, but all hope is not lost.
Half of Hafford School will be getting a new conventional gravel and tar roof, despite hopes that a spray foam system could have meant re-doing the whole roof for the same or less money – at the same time establishing a benchmark for future projects.
“I know there has been a lot of interest following this story through from the beginning to where we are now,” Facilities Manager Brian Bossaer told trustees at their Wednesday evening meeting.
“Unfortunately, we will not be proceeding with foam roof coverage in Hafford. I cannot in good faith recommend a roof that is less than what owners should expect at equal to or lower cost.”
Based on results of a tender that had called for either spray foam or conventional roofing and the accompanying necessary substructure work, the board of education awarded the Hafford School roof project to Flynn Canada, who had the lowest base bid of $358,491.
Three other companies made bids for the project as well, but only one bid on the spray foam option. The base bid was for a million dollars, made by Saskatoon-based Clark Roofing (1964) Ltd., who also bid on conventional method, second lowest at $403,393.
“This was, to my knowledge, the first public tender … which included manufacture warranty and all substructure requirements before and after foam was applied to the surface of our roof,” said Bossaer.
Bossaer had hoped that, because of the scope of the project, general contractors would bid, but none did. All the bidders were companies involved in the traditional roofing industry.
There were three options to bid on – a base amount for the five worst sections of the roof, an alternate option of three more sections and a further alternate option on the remaining two sections. If the results of the bid had been favourable enough, the project could have been expanded to include one or both of the alternate options.
All four companies bid on all the options, but Bossaer said, given the limited funding available from the provincial government, they couldn’t afford to include the two alternate options in the project.
In addition to coming in lowest, Flynn Canada’s was also the bid with the earliest completion date, with construction to start at the beginning of February and be finished by the end of March.
“They want to get started on that roof ASAP,” said Bossaer.
The other three bids called for a start date of May 1 and completion date of Aug. 14.
The other bidders were Century Roofing and Sheet Metal Ltd. of Saskatoon with a base bid of $417,816 and Thorpe Brothers Limited of Prince Albert with a base bid of $468,589.
Bossaer noted the results of the Hafford School roof project tender were being awaited by more than just the division.
“I put a lot of effort in and a lot of people are following along with this whole concept of foam,” he said. “More work is needed but we want to proceed as a school division, too, and get roofs happening until a better thing comes along.”
Left to do in the future will be three sections of roof across the front of the school and the office, the section of roof above the gymnasium and the section above the attached storage shed.
“That’s the dilemma we face and we’ve been talking about, where’s the money to keep up with the roofs.”
The division’s chief financial officer, Lonny Darroch, said, “Obviously we are disappointed.”
What he would like to see happen next is to arrange another meeting with the division’s roofing consultant, RMIA Engineering, and the manufacturer and applicator with whom they worked to come up with some standards of application.
“But we would certainly welcome talking to any others to see why there wasn’t the interest out there,” said Darroch.
While they may have been disappointed in the result of the tender, Darroch and Bossaer aren’t giving up on a spray foam future for Living Sky.
“It’s fair to say more work is needed to identify all the reasons why no successful competitive bids came forward from applicators,” said Bossaer. “I hope applicators and manufacturers have discussions on this type of project, and I welcome manufacturers to contact me to discuss.”
Bossaer said they “now have written language that can be viewed by different players to identify what is their concern on tendering such a project with the given specs.”
Part of the answer may be location.
“Rumour is coming back to me now that manufacturers are scared to stand behind their warranty in Saskatchewan, for whatever reason,” said Bossaer. “It doesn’t seem to be working as well as they thought in Saskatchewan.”
He noted, however, foam roofs are now being applied from Florida to Alaska.
There are long-term benefits to spray foam when it works, but you have to start with a proper roof, said Bossaer.
“This is what we were doing with Hafford,” he said. “We want the substructure work done right … we were trying to get a good roof and finish it off with spray foam and shoot for the long-term goal. Unfortunately it didn’t happen.”
A spray foam roof offers a long-term advantage in being able to top off the UV protective coating with additional skim coats.
“If your roof stays solid, in seven to 10 years, you could put another UV layer on it,” said Bossaer. “It would cost four or five dollars a foot and you’re back to a new-roof condition again.”
While there are advantages to spray foam, it has to come at a reasonable price, he said.
The first tender called in September for Hafford's roof attracted only one bidder, with a price of $1.7 million to do the whole roof.
“This one is $2.6 million,” said Bossaer. “Those numbers, even in the long term, don’t make sense. It’s just not there, but it should be.”
