The Garland Company

Log Out | Topics | Search Moderators | Register | Edit Profile

Author Message David Axt, AIA, CCS, CSI Senior Member Username: david_axt Post Number: 1267 Registered: 03-2002 Posted on Thursday, December 01, 2011 - 12:25 pm:    Has anyone had experience with the Garland Company for a turnkey roof? Richard L Matteo, AIA, CSI, CCS Senior Member Username: rlmat Post Number: 466 Registered: 10-2003 Posted on Thursday, December 01, 2011 - 12:38 pm:    I've had experience with Garland, but not for a turn key system. I did find them (local reps) somewhat difficult to work with, but their products are okay. Lynn Javoroski FCSI CCS LEEDŽ AP SCIP Affiliate Senior Member Username: lynn_javoroski Post Number: 1341 Registered: 07-2002 Posted on Thursday, December 01, 2011 - 01:51 pm:    I've had experience with them, but not as a turnkey system. I didn't work directly with the reps, as the project was in CA and I'm in WI, but the Architect in CA was pleased. Lisa Goodwin Robbins, RA, CCS, LEED ap Senior Member Username: lgoodrob Post Number: 154 Registered: 08-2004 Posted on Thursday, December 01, 2011 - 01:59 pm:    I'm not a fan of Garland. My perception is that Garland sales reps talk the Owners into more expensive, but not necessarily higher performing, systems without competitive bidding. Then they lock them into expensive maintenance contracts. Melissa J. Aguiar, CSI, CCS, SCIP Senior Member Username: melissaaguiar Post Number: 140 Registered: 12-2003 Posted on Thursday, December 01, 2011 - 02:10 pm:    I have used them recently on project for turnkey roofing system. I was scratching my head but after talking to rep, architect and owner they wanted to use them on project. They said they could offer edge to edge roofing system warranties. Rep also told them that included insulation etc. Which I scratched my head but it looks like all is ok thus far. Job is located in AR. Melissa J. Aguiar, CSI, CCS, SCIP Ronald J. Ray, RA, CCS, CCCA Senior Member Username: rjray Post Number: 90 Registered: 04-2004 Posted on Thursday, December 01, 2011 - 08:08 pm:    Garland, Hickman, and Tremco all have similar approaches to marketing their overpriced roofing products. They approach the building owner, usually a public entity, and explain how they will design the roofing system, write the very closed specifications, obtain bids, oversee construction, and provide maintenance observations over the lifetime of the roof system, all for whatever the bid price is. They are able to do this since their prices are much more for the same roofing systems provided by other manufactures (Performance, Firestone and JM for example when modified bitumen roofing is the system). I have worked with Garland, Hickman and Tremco and found them to be very professional and helpful, although I have never used their respective products other than as an owner requested alternate bid which so far has never been accepted due to the price. The local Tremco rep is a friend of mine and he understands my thoughts concerning the products he represents. He also has no problem in admitting that when he writes a specification for his roofing products, it is extremely closed to the point that Garland and Hickman can not bid the project. I would not be concerned at all in regards to the quality of their roofing products as they always want to use the highest quality and highest price products they offer. Phil Kabza Senior Member Username: phil_kabza Post Number: 491 Registered: 12-2002 Posted on Tuesday, December 06, 2011 - 07:40 am:    I'm curious. HVAC engineers seldom shop for the least expensive boiler they can locate. Electrical engineers generally do not specify any-brand-will-do generic switching gear. Architects do not go out of their way to specify commodity, least-first-cost carpet, elevators, or windows. So why do so many architects (and specifiers) maintain that the least expensive commodity roofing solution is not only adequate, but somehow superior? This in the light of architectural risk managers' education programs that describe the high percentage of architect negligence claims related to roofing and building envelope failure. I have my own suspicions, but I'm curious about your thoughts and experience: Do higher strength roofing materials last longer? Require less maintenance? Result in less building and content damage for owners? Do higher quality/higher price installers provide better workmanship, resulting in longer system life, less maintenance, less content damage, etc.? Or is the bottom price roofing system acceptable for all building types? Lisa Goodwin Robbins, RA, CCS, LEED ap Senior Member Username: lgoodrob Post Number: 156 Registered: 08-2004 Posted on Tuesday, December 06, 2011 - 09:13 am:    Phil, It's been my experience that the Building Owner is often the force behind lowest first cost roofing systems. This is especially true for commercial and retail projects, where the first Owner does not plan to own the building for more than 10 years. Institutional and large public building Owners are more likely to demand particular roofing systems and preferred manufacturers based on their performance and service experiences. - Sheldon Wolfe Senior Member Username: sheldon_wolfe Post Number: 520 Registered: 01-2003 Posted on Tuesday, December 06, 2011 - 10:46 am:    It is curious, indeed. Fill a building with expensive equipment and furnishings, then use the least expensive roofing and waterproofing available. I suspect it's always the things that are not seen that are first to be "value engineered." It isn't always the owner; if the project is over budget, the architect won't want to use less expensive finishes, but will save money on the roofing. Does more expensive roofing really perform better? If so, why isn't there more difference in warranties? Why pay more for the "better" roofing, and end up with the same warranty? Many times, the difference between a product with no warranty and the same thing with a warranty is the price; you're buying an insurance policy. Companies don't sell insurance policies unless they're going to make money, which suggests it's better to not get the warranty, and put the money in the bank. Manufacturers don't help. They and the industry organizations will tell you it's good practice to use a cover board, but they don't require it. So if it's specified, the contractor goes to the owner and says the architect is an idiot for specifying something that isn't required. The architect is left trying to explain why it's a good idea, even though there is no effect on the warranty. J. Peter Jordan (Unregistered Guest) Unregistered guest Posted on Tuesday, December 06, 2011 - 11:36 am:    I often see roofs that are "over specified" (premium materials, higher uplift pressures, extra plies), often from roofing consultants. I also see either over specified or value engineered systems pushed onto architects (and then into my specs) who don't know any better. What I have learned over the last 5 years is that: (1) the FMG I-90 "gold standard" that I had looked to for years was probably about 50 percent more that what was really needed for 1- and 2-story buildings in the Houston market (not south and east of Houston). (2) the quality of installation probably has more to do with roof failures than the quality of the manufactured products. (3) in a really high wind event, there is enough debris blowing around to damage the membrane. A typical membrane roofing system that fails due to mechanical damage to the membrane in such an event is not covered by warranty. While I do believe in specifying good quality products and systems, I also believe that just good enough is, in most cases, good enough. For roofing products and systems (and almost anything else to do with the building envelope), paying for premium products may not result in any future economy. Paying extra for a good installer, a qualified inspector, and periodic inspections and maintenance are usually better investments. What Garland and others may offer is not premium products, but premium service over the life of the installation (including before installation begins). Will such roofs have to be replaced in the event of a hurricane? Probably, especially if one of those roof-top AC units that people think are heavy enough to not need fastening down gets blown across the roof, scraping a big portion of the membrane along the way. I would suggest that a good modified-bit / TPO / PVC / EPDM system (not necessarily the cheapest, but not the "best") will probably last a good 20 years if installed by a qualified installer. I will admit to being more than a little put out when a manufacturer goes directly to the Owner and pushes a particular product. These people will sometime fail to understand larger issues affecting the project. Lynn Javoroski FCSI CCS LEEDŽ AP SCIP Affiliate Senior Member Username: lynn_javoroski Post Number: 1343 Registered: 07-2002 Posted on Tuesday, December 06, 2011 - 11:58 am:    "the quality of installation probably has more to do with roof failures than the quality of the manufactured products" is precisely what I've been told by roofers and roofing consultants. (Sheldon, love your hat) Curt Norton, CSI, CCS Senior Member Username: curtn Post Number: 177 Registered: 06-2002 Posted on Tuesday, December 06, 2011 - 01:58 pm:    I believe poor roof edge design (and installation ) is a major cause of failures in wind events. Many designers don't even think about anchorage of the blocking or what it is attached to. Even the best and most expensive roof will blow off if the edge is exposed. Phil Kabza Senior Member Username: phil_kabza Post Number: 492 Registered: 12-2002 Posted on Thursday, December 08, 2011 - 02:20 pm:    I asked, and you spoke. Excellent feedback from knowledgeable practitioners. As for the value of higher quality, more expensive roofing systems, the answer appears to be "it depends," with few people in the industry explaining, or understanding, the performance factors that may make investing in higher tensile strength (BUR/MB) or puncture-resistant (SPR) roofing worthwhile, or as Peter points out, how much is too much. New construction specifications remain invested in commodity grade materials. I think we need to know more about the tensile strength curve related to membrane life. Quality installers are a big issue; I seldom see specifications that contain any significant qualifications factors for installers; we should work on this. Cover boards: Don't get me started. Inspection is worth more than warranties: Yes. High wind membrane failures typically are insurable events, not warrantable events: Yes. Roof edge design: If you don't believe Curt, just watch Storm Stories. Thank you for the great feedback.