By Rick Palsgrove
It’s going to cost a little more than originally expected to repair the roof of the Groveport Recreation Center.
Last December, Groveport City Council approved transferring $1 million out of the city’s $1.5 million rainy day fund to fix the metal and membrane roof system over the indoor swimming pool area at the recreation center. Of that amount, an estimated $900,000 was to pay for the repairs and $100,000 was to contract with Mays Consulting for design and administrative services related to the repair.
At its July 13 meeting, council approved allocating another $217,800 for the roof repair project.
Groveport City Administrator Marsha Hall said bids were opened June 30 for the roof repair project with Meade Construction getting the bid.
“Their bid was slightly over the engineer’s estimate, but under the 10 percent overage maximum,” said Hall.
Hall said another factor in the cost of the project is that the city decided to also include some maintenance work on the recreation center’s gutters and bricks. She said this maintenance work was due to be completed soon anyway, so it is practical to include it in with the other roof repair work.
According to Hall, the repair work will begin soon and can be made without closing the recreation center.
Groveport Law Director Kevin Shannon said last December that corrosion and rust on the roof were first noted in 2011 and then monitored until 2014 when an inspection revealed more damage to the metal roof, insulation and walls in the pool area.
Shannon said using the rainy day fund for the repairs to the roof is appropriate because the recreation center is “a great city asset.” He added, “We are considering all available remedies for the situation, including potential legal remedies.”
The recreation center was built in 2004.
“Tin Man” water tower demolition
Hall said the city received a proposal from Isler Demolition from Michigan to demolish the city’s 80-year-old, 77,000 gallon “Tin Man” water tower, located north of Blacklick Street, for $12,000. Isler Demolition will dismantle the tower and take the material for salvage.
“While we were originally hoping the salvage value would at least equal the cost to remove the tower, two things played against us,” said Hall. “First, the tank has lead paint which requires special removal procedures. Secondly, salvage costs are down.”
The refurbishing of the city’s other water tower, the 46-year-old, 200,000 gallon tank on South Hamilton Road, is nearing completion.
However, Hall said the Tin Man water tower’s age makes it too expensive to rehabilitate. Also, she said, the city does not need a second water tower because, in case of emergency, it has an available connection to a nearby city of Columbus water line.
Hall said the Tin Man water tower presents a liability issue in the neighborhood. She noted one resident had trouble selling her home because her house was located within the potential “fall zone” of the Tin Man water tower.
“Removing this water tower will make residents within the fall zone happy that it will be gone,” said Hall.
City Engineer Steve Farst said demolition of the Tin Man water tower could take place “between the end of September and the end of October” this year.