Inspection finds water intrusion, mortar and roof problems at Hilltop and hospital; city outlines phased repairs

Consultants who inspected Herington’s Hilltop and the adjacent hospital building told the City Commission on Sept. 16 that water intrusion is the most immediate threat to the aging brick structures and recommended targeted repointing and roof-drainage work to prevent progressive masonry failure.

The city’s presenter introduced two outside consultants and asked them to highlight what needed immediate attention, near-term repairs and longer-term work. An unidentified building consultant said repointing loose mortar in parapets and unheated portions of the structure should be prioritized because “the biggest enemy of an old building is water,” adding that freeze–thaw cycles and ponding on the flat roof accelerate brick and mortar deterioration.

The consultants described how repointing is performed, recommended a mid-range Type S mortar for durability, and noted that some repointing had already been completed. They also called out roof ponding, roof leaks and concrete grading that channels runoff toward the walls as contributing causes. The consultant said some roof areas show ponding and that water left on a flat roof for several days finds pinholes and accelerates leakage.

Staff described four below‑grade locations with standing or recent water and linked that basement intrusion to exterior concrete surfaces that slope toward the building. As a lower‑cost interim measure, the consultants suggested temporary seals such as expanding foam and urethane sealant at gaps and regrading where feasible to reduce immediate water entry while longer-term solutions are evaluated.

On interior conditions, the inspection found plaster bubbling and cracking in places that consultants attributed to exterior water entry. For humidity issues in the kitchen/prep area, consultants recommended simple dehumidifiers as a cost‑effective first step (units the consultant said can be bought for roughly $250 each), while warning that more elaborate building‑wide systems can cost far more (consultants cited examples of rooftop or furnace‑integrated dehumidification systems that can run tens of thousands of dollars).

Commissioners and staff discussed access and cost: masonry work at parapet height and upper walls raises labor and equipment costs (scaffolding vs. man lifts), and skilled masons can be scarce. The consultants suggested comparing pricing among qualified masons and considering training some maintenance staff for lower‑cost, acceptable repairs in limited areas.

The panel also noted the auditorium’s rooftop unit (HVAC) and recommended first determining whether the existing unit can be repaired before planning replacement; consultants warned that replacing large rooftop units can be expensive and advised thorough evaluation, potentially with input from experienced HVAC designers.

Staff said they have begun some low‑cost measures (a few dehumidifiers and minor roof repairs), will attach the consultants’ updated maps and findings to future lease or repair materials, and will return with cost estimates and a recommended phased plan. The commission asked staff to provide a total of expenditures to date on the hospital acquisition and repairs before the next meeting.

The commission did not take a formal funding vote at the Sept. 16 meeting; staff said they will identify priorities and pursue follow‑up estimates for repointing, roof drainage corrections and basement mitigation at future meetings.