Stucco Related Remodel Question

Started by MountainDon, November 24, 2011, 12:19:10 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

MountainDon

Our home is stucco, 26 years old. Karen has grown to dislike stucco more and more.

We want to replace some windows starting with the back wall of the house. Making two smaller and simply replacing another 3.

This would be a good time to increase the insulation of the walls. They are 2x4 framed as was common here 26 years ago. Probably the old r11 as it is fiberglass. I'd add 1 or 2 inches of polyiso sheet foam with foil facing as the weather resistant barrier.

Then I'd furr out with vertical 1x and apply 4x8 sheets of vertical grain/style HardiePanel or Smatyside or something over that. I like the Plank style we did on the cabin but all the homes in the neighborhood are stucco or vertical look panels and I am not sure I want the horizontal plank as it would look "too different" Might be a factor when selling down the road a good while from now.

I am debating with myself on some things.

1 Should I remove the old stucco? If the job was contracted out most of them leave the stucco and apply foam and new siding over the old stucco. That is partly a cost to the homeowner thing I believe. For us it would mean more work and a few dollars tippage fee at the dump. Removing it would make fastening the foam easier I think. R value the stucco is about 0.20 so it's no help there. Maybe as a heat sink, but in the middle of the wall. I'm not sure that counts for much.

Comments, thoughts, ideas, yeas, nays, etc.

There is an interesting detail/quirk I'll get back here with later. It sort of complicates things a bit... darn builders from decades ago !!! 

And NO we do not want to build a new home and move and I can't figure out a way to have an insurance covered fire without the risk of spending time in jail.  ::)
Just because something has been done and has not failed, doesn't mean it is good design.

MountainDon

The detail I mentioned above....    This was common practice 26 years ago here in NM. Houses are virtually all built on a slab that for the most part ends up being only a few inches above the surrounding land. Bottom sill is PT and bolted down in typical fashion. No issue there.

It was common though, for the stucco to be run down over the bottom wood plate and concrete joint right to and even below grade level. Good thing this is a dry high mesa desert. Problems arise when people plant shrubs etc. along a wall and water them. Water will wick up the concrete and is lots of water is involved the stucco spalls off. If one is lucky they may only be some efflorescence. We've had a small amount of that in one place.

So we want to get rid of the stucco altogether I think. If we don't there is a chance of water wicking up the stucco and then being trapped behind the rigid foam. I suppose we could break away the stucco, only around the bottom perimeter, but would then have to deal with the uneven surface.

So let's say the stucco is removed in total. Then I have the problem of trying to side the wall down to the bottom. The walls are osb sheathed over the bottom wall plate, but not over the concrete slab. Whatever siding material, Hardie, Smartside, etc we use, it can not touch the ground or even be too close to the ground. No snow to speak of either so that's a good thing as well.

I've pondered this and have only come up with one idea that should work. Flashing material is available in vinyl material that is close to the same shade of tan as the new windows. I'm thinking of running a strip of the vimyl flashing around the perimeter bottom. It would overlap the concrete slab side a little and be caulked there with silicone. Then apply the rigid foam board with a metal angle/drip under the lower edge. Then furring, etc. Screen or whatever to keep the insects out of the air space.

Thoughts?

Just because something has been done and has not failed, doesn't mean it is good design.


Native_NM

I saw this done here in Albuquerque near my old office in the late 1990's.  Rather than siding, they restuccoed with synthetic stucco when they were done.  I think the process would be the same.   They actually used a circular saw with a diamond [masonary??] saw blade to cut through the stucco to the substrate, which was actually fiber board, except at the corners which was plywood.  They peeled the stucco off in big slabs.  The house had a flat roof.  During the "remodel" they went to a pitched roof.  They peeled the parapet back also, and brought in trusses.  They also reframed the window openings.  Many of the older homes in Albuquerque were built with the bedrooms windows like these:



They wanted to put in windows they could actually escape from in the event of fire.  The window openings were shimmed out with 2x material laid flat.  (1.5").  The foam was laid over the top of the fiber, then new wire was laid over the foam.  Unlike your place, many of the older homes in that area had a crawl space.  I remember it had hardwood floors.  The old windows were single-pane casement, and the walls were plaster, which was replaced with drywall.  The house was basically gutted to the studs.  New wiring, plumbing, HVAC.  My co-worker and I walked through it when it was close to completion and were amazed at the transformation.  It looked better than new.

My office mates and I would walk every day, and we got to see the progression over about three months.  (San Mateo and Lomas area).   You can drive down the street, and except for the windows you can't tell the house is new.  As it turns out, the house had actually caught on fire, and sustained damage in the rear.  The fire damage was not as bad as the smoke damage.   After the fire, the owners realized they were lucky to escape, and decided to retrofit the house during the reconstruction.  I stopped a couple times and chatted with the guys, as this stuff has always interested me. 

I'd suggest removing the stucco.  Just not sure how to address your problem.  Depending on your grade, you might be able to pull a few inches of soil off and slope away from the house.  That is lots of work, and maybe a new landscape.  Scratch that idea.  Maybe cut back a strip of the OSB and replace with tile backer?  That might mess with the structure and lead to racking;  not sure how your house was built. 

We had some friends that used to live near Rockaway  (Diamond Drive) in Rio Rancho, and they had the wood siding.  Over time the soil built up against the side of the house and the siding soaked up water like a sponge, so your concern is very valid. 


Note:  I pulled this house off the MLS tonight as it was in the same style and area of the house that was redone.  It is not the house that was remodeled/repaired.
New Mexico.  Better than regular Mexico.

dug

I can understand your concerns with the stucco going all the way down to grade but I have seen a lot of old (and new) houses in Arizona and New Mexico that were built this way and have not heard of any problems due to the stucco contacting the earth, though I suppose there have been some.

My vote would be to leave it on, or as you suggested to take off the bottom foot or so and work out the difference.

glenn kangiser

All slab houses around here put the stucco into the earth.  I think taking it off would create more water problems for you as it would then be an open joint to seal all around.

I think the flashing to cap the bottom of the foam but stopped above grade over the stucco would be best.  Short powder driven fasteners could anchor the flashing easily - or Tapcons with a bit more work.
"Always work from the general to the specific." J. Raabe

Glenn's Underground Cabin  http://countryplans.com/smf/index.php?topic=151.0

Please put your area in your sig line so we can assist with location specific answers.


PEG688

Quote from: glenn kangiser on November 26, 2011, 10:46:32 AM
All slab houses around here put the stucco into the earth.  I think taking it off would create more water problems for you as it would then be an open joint to seal all around.

I think the flashing to cap the bottom of the foam but stopped above grade over the stucco would be best.  Short powder driven fasteners could anchor the flashing easily - or Tapcons with a bit more work.


I wonder if Mtn D could score the stucco and leave the bottom 18 " or so of  stucco in place?  He could then fir out the wall above with the rigid foam and let his Hardi siding lip over the stucco , it would then look some what like a foundation wall below the siding! 
When in doubt , build it stout with something you know about .

glenn kangiser

It cuts well with the diamond blades on a small grinder or saw.  Might get a grinder from Harbor Freight in case it needs to be sacrificed.  The cement dust is rough on motors.

Generally stucco is around 7/8 inch thick plus or minus.
"Always work from the general to the specific." J. Raabe

Glenn's Underground Cabin  http://countryplans.com/smf/index.php?topic=151.0

Please put your area in your sig line so we can assist with location specific answers.

MountainDon

Thanks for the replies.

I had thought about cutting through a line as a water break. ???

I never gave it a thought all weekend while we were away. Now I have to think about what I'm going to do.
Just because something has been done and has not failed, doesn't mean it is good design.

Don_P

Quote from: MtnDon on November 28, 2011, 06:11:34 PM
I never gave it a thought all weekend while we were away. Now I have to think about what I'm going to do.

I'd go away again... and repeat as needed  ;D


MountainDon

I like that Idea, Don.



I think my wife is going to have to come to terms with keeping stucco. There are a lot of things that arise with such a chnage, if one is to do it up correctly. 

There are some windows we want to change and then come spring we'll get one of the many local "stucco guys" to do what's needed around them. Finish off with a new color coat.

Just because something has been done and has not failed, doesn't mean it is good design.

MountainDon

Well, we're back a square today.   ;) 

The plan has evolved to a multiple stage process. The room Karen really wants new windows in is a "bumped out" room, about 14 x 12 ft, on the rear of the house. There is a patio door slider and a window 8 ft wide x 6 ft tall (3 smaller windows with mullions). The slider is to come out and have a 6'0" x 4'0" vinyl slider window in it's place. The mullioned window will be replaced with a second 6'0" x 4'0" slider. There already is a 36" standard hinged door (yes, odd room to begin with.)

The plan is to leave the stucco on the exterior walls and apply 1 inch of foam in two layers (seams offset), using a radiant reflective layered foam as the final foam sheet, then an airspace and then the siding.

Details to follow as they are sorted out.


The balance of the rear of the house and the sides would be done over a period of time.
Just because something has been done and has not failed, doesn't mean it is good design.

MountainDon

Here's a rough drawing.

From drilling an exploratory hole or two the stucco is about an inch thick, up to 1.25 around windows. The stucco goes down a few inches below current grade. The walls in question either have 3/4" river rock in a two foot band along the wall or a paver brick sidewalk/patio right up to the wall.

I do want to apply some foil faced polyisocyanurate foam sheet insulation over the stucco. I've talked with several local licensed by the state, contractors and each has their own idea, from tearing off the stucco to more or less as I describe below. One would apply 2x strips to the stucco and only place strips of foam between them. One wants to do 3" of foam, which might be more advantageous, but costs more. (He would remove old stucco).

The present walls are 2x4 with R11 fiberglass infill insulation; circa 1985.

Here's what I'm thinking of. The drawing is missing the layers of building felt that are under the stucco and also does not show the felt I'd apply under the siding (over the furring strips).

Note: the drawing is tilted, the house is not.  ;D



The PT 2x6 along the bottom would be secured to the wall bottom plate and maybe the studs. Maybe a few anchors into the concrete slab edge if I can find long enough fasteners for that. Into the studs I'd use a Headlok or Timberlock, maybe a Ledgerlok screw.

Then the foam insulation over the stucco. Maybe 3/4 inch or maybe 1" foam; maybe two alternating 1/2" layers. Then 1x4 vertical furring strips would be applied over the foam. These would rest on the lower 2x6. (There would be a metal flashing under the foam against the wall, over the 2x6 edge with a turned down drip edge. That's illustrated in the drawing.) The furring strips would be secured to the studs with some more Headlok screws. The idea of butting the furring strips on the PT 2x6 is the strips would be supported by that and not totally be depending on the screws through the furring and into the studs.

The final siding is likely going to be the LP series 76 Smartside product; 8" or maybe 12" plank size. 5/4 trim around the windows, door and corners.

Thoughts?

No matter what I do it's not as easy or as good as what I'd do if this was all new.
Just because something has been done and has not failed, doesn't mean it is good design.

PEG688


  So you'd pull the old doors and windows , mount the foam and 4/4 cleats then re-install doors/ windows/ dryer / fart fan / electrical boxes and /or vents jack on the 4/4 blocks.  Pushing every thing out board??

And jamb extend the interior surrounds back out to the inside of the windows.

The corner boards will be funky , but that's all I see as major/ minor (depends on prospective of the client, Karen in this case, opinion of whats minor / major c*) . And the interior finishes of the surrounds and how you planned on addressing those. 

  That lower metal maybe should be a Z metal , tight to the PT in case it gets hit by racks , mowers , weed wackers etc. The little drip flare is nice high up on a building , but down at the base to many things can hit it and it's to easy to bend / look bad in the future.

I think it will be tucked back in after you apply your siding any way so tighter is better in this case IMO.

Nice drawing BTW.   
When in doubt , build it stout with something you know about .

MountainDon

I'd be doing this in sections. The first section is where two large windows get replaced by two smaller new low-e windows, so yes remove and replace them. The existing door will likely be replaced with a new door that Karen wants, so yes pull it out, do the wall opening and replace with a new prehung unit I have obtained at a craigslist deal price. Then extend the jambs, re trim the windows on the interior, fill in the drywall and so on. This section is a bump out from the back of the house. It would be done first. There are only two electrical receptacles on the exterior and two light fixtures on the esterior. They would be extended. No plumbing or anything else.

The next section would be the back wall of the house with a wrap around the corner to the next bump out. This would involve removal and replacement of three more windows. No doors, no electrical. But there is a hose bib and it's a frost free so I'd have to probably cut out a piece of drywall in the interior wall where the frost free bib is mounted. Then move it out or maybe get one with a longer reach. The frost free bib extends into an interior wall that intersects with the exterior wall.

Just because something has been done and has not failed, doesn't mean it is good design.


PEG688


A additional thought on the door would be to keep it hung with the inside flush rather than hang it to the outside of the wall unless it opening only about 110 degrees isn't a issue.    If you hang it to the outside you might look at using a 6 9/16" thick jamb, with your 2x4 walls that might work better after you add the other materials 
When in doubt , build it stout with something you know about .

MountainDon

The door is in a corner; hinged in the corner and only opens 90 as it is, so that is of little concern. But it is a good point for any readers who may be contemplating something similar.
Just because something has been done and has not failed, doesn't mean it is good design.

MountainDon

Oops. It may be better to keep the door flush with the inside as there is ceramic floor tile inside and I am not sure if I have any of it left to fill in if the door is shifted out. So I'll have to check on that.


Another tjought that popped into my head last night was using an angle iron or angle aluminum in place of the PT wood 2X at the wall bottom. ???

Just because something has been done and has not failed, doesn't mean it is good design.

Native_NM

 
You didn't mention the roof.  Do you would have to deal with the parapet?  Pitched roof?
New Mexico.  Better than regular Mexico.

MountainDon

No parapet thank goodness. That's the first place stucco fails. Pitched truss built roof sitting on the doubled top plates. Soffit material is some kind of fiberboard still in excellent shape. I haven't thought much about removing it or not yet. I am scratching my head on that. The stucco only goes up to it as the soffits were finished before the stucco went on. Since it's intact, not drooping, etc. I was probably going to leave it alone.


I think I have the door issue resolved. I found another deal on a prehung door, this time a 6 5/8 frame depth. That may work out to just about right with the new wall thickness.

Just because something has been done and has not failed, doesn't mean it is good design.

MountainDon

If anyone was wondering this project has a hold placed on it. I've got the windows, door, insulation, structural grade screws and some odds 'n' ends all on hand. Then when we were up at the cabin just before Christmas I had a mishap and injured my right hip. Nothing broken but I must have strained/sprained something as it hurts like heck. The chiropractor has helped some, but I seem to be stuck in a mild version of hell rather than the major version it was before. Tomorrow I'm being Xrayed.

There's no way I can do anything like this. So, when I'm feeling up to it I have it planned for completion in steps or stages. The Christmas break would have been perfect as our preschool was closed. We even emptied the room before taking off to the cabin. Now I'll have to fit pieces in on the weekends and be sure to have the space back to usable and fit for the purpose in case any state busy bodies show up. (state busy bodies = the meddlesome, prying and officious licensing folks).
Just because something has been done and has not failed, doesn't mean it is good design.


PEG688

When in doubt , build it stout with something you know about .

MountainDon

Stage One. Yesterday I started on removing stucco from around the windows and doors in question. Today I completed that part, more or less. Now I have to trim back the chicken wire to be ready for removal. If I'm lucky I hope to sell them on Craigslist. They are cheap 27 year old aluminum windows so I'm not holding my breath. As long as I can get more than what it would cost for the trip to the dump and their fee I'll be happy. Maybe as long as someone would haul them away for free, the whole works at once I'd be a happy guy too.   ;D



I used my air chisel. The task went smoothly and I caught most of the debris in a large carboard box.



Now I need to get some framing materials and other odds and ends to do the removal, reframing and installation of the new windows next weekend. This time we'll do it right and even use flashing.  Live 'n' learn. Although back then I don't think the builders did any better than I did.   >:(


PS: The hip is coming along fine. Hopefully it won't be long and I'll not have even the slightest gimpiness.  At least I now feel comfortable going up and down a ladder.
Just because something has been done and has not failed, doesn't mean it is good design.

MountainDon

I got started today. Yesterday I removed a little more stucco from around a couple edges. After lunch today the large 8'x6' window and the patio door slider were pulled and the openings framed for the two new 6' x 4' sliders. The new windows are in, but only temporary. The prime focus will be to now re-drywall the interior, tape and paint so preschool can get off to a nice clean start Tuesday. Then the next task will be the exterior wall isocyaanurate insulation with the windows finally properly flashed and installed. After that the horizontal lap siding. One thing at a time.

For the first time since I don't remember when, I had help that was not related to me.  :D  A preschool parent volunteered. He's a carpenter who makes things on Kirtland AFB. Things that get blown up.  ;D  I explained the short and long term plans and he hauled in his tools from his truck. He's a whiz; before I knew it I was handing him things and holding things in place while he did work that I approved of. No further coaching from me. This is actually not a bad deal.  :)

So tomorrow insulation is first on the list. Then I drywall. No helper on this part.  :(

Just because something has been done and has not failed, doesn't mean it is good design.

Redoverfarm

#23
Don the next time you run across trimming back the stucco you might consider using a diamond blade on a circular saw or angle grinder.  You would get a lot better edge and less tendency to crack the surrounding stucco.  Setting the depth of cut initally to the thickness of the stucco followed up by a metal cutting blade to rid the chicken wire.  Even if you find that you will have to use a chisel later you would have seperated the surface and vibration would not be transmitted to the adjoining stucco surface.  Only downside would be the dust created.   Just a thought.  ;D

MountainDon

I had thought of saw cutting and iy was the dust that detered me. Yesterday we had to cut some floor tile out where the patio slier sat. John used a diamond bladee on an angle grinder. Being a cordless (Makita) model and there fore no worry about 120 VAC and water in the same area, I used a squirt bottle of water to keep the dust down. Of course there was water flying all over but goggles kept it out of his face.
Just because something has been done and has not failed, doesn't mean it is good design.