A full tear-off isn't always necessary, and it isn't always avoidable either. Recover and overlay systems let an owner add a new roof assembly over an existing one that still has structural life left, provided code and the deck's condition actually support it.
A recover assembly adds a new insulation layer, often an ISO overlay board, over the existing roof surface, then a new membrane on top. It's different from a coating, which seals the existing surface, and different from tear-off, which removes everything down to the deck. Recover sits in between: a new roof system built on top of an old one rather than replacing it entirely.
The building code generally limits how many roof layers can accumulate before a recover is no longer permitted and tear-off becomes mandatory, so part of our scoping process is confirming what's actually already on the roof, since older buildings sometimes carry more layers than current ownership realizes. We've opened up roofs on Macon buildings that changed ownership two or three times and found layer counts that didn't match any records the current owner had on file, which is exactly why we verify in the field rather than relying on whatever paperwork came with the property at closing.
Recover typically costs less than tear-off and replacement, since it skips the labor and disposal cost of removing the existing roof down to the deck. For an owner managing a capital budget across a multi-building portfolio, that difference can be the deciding factor between funding a roof project this fiscal year or deferring it again.
It only works, though, if the existing deck and insulation are structurally sound and dry. We won't recommend recover over a roof with wet insulation just to save on this year's budget line, since trapped moisture under a new assembly turns into a much larger problem down the road.
We run an infrared moisture scan or core-sample survey before recommending recover over any existing roof. Wet insulation doesn't dry out under a new assembly, it stays wet and continues degrading the deck while the new roof on top hides the problem from view.
That survey gets documented and shared with the owner as part of the proposal, so the recover-versus-tear-off decision is based on actual roof condition rather than a guess or a lower initial bid number.
Beyond the layer-count limit, code also requires tear-off where the existing roof has significant wet insulation, structural deck damage, or where the added weight of another layer would exceed the building's structural capacity. We check all three before recommending recover, rather than the layer count alone.
For buildings going through a permitted renovation or addition, the roof scope often gets tied to that broader permit review, and we coordinate our recommendation with whatever the reviewing authority requires for the project as a whole.
We write recover and tear-off proposals side by side with the underlying condition data attached, so an ownership group, property management firm, or budget committee can see exactly why we're recommending one path over the other rather than taking our word for it. That documentation matters as much as the installation itself when the decision has to clear a committee vote.
Property management firms and REITs holding several buildings across Bibb and Houston counties often want recover-versus-tear-off decisions made consistently across the portfolio rather than building by building on an ad hoc basis. We can survey multiple properties on the same visit and hand back a single comparative report, so a regional facilities director can prioritize capital spending across the portfolio with the same underlying data for every roof.
That approach also helps when funding gets approved in phases, since we can sequence recover projects across a portfolio in the order the moisture surveys indicate is most urgent rather than whichever building happens to complain first.
It depends on existing layer count, deck condition, and moisture survey results, all of which we check during the site evaluation before recommending either path.
Generally yes upfront, since it avoids removal and disposal cost, but it's only appropriate when the existing roof is structurally sound and dry.
Often no, most building codes cap the number of roof layers permitted before tear-off is required. We verify your jurisdiction's specific limit as part of the scope.
We'll recommend tear-off in that area, or the full roof if damage is widespread, rather than recovering over a moisture problem that will continue to degrade the deck.
Yes, our recover and tear-off proposals include the underlying condition survey and comparative pricing so the recommendation is easy to present to an ownership group or budget committee.
