Changing soffits (and maybe fascias and gutters) before a re-roof. Is that stupid?

UKworkshop.co.uk

Help Support UKworkshop.co.uk:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Krome10

Established Member
Joined
17 May 2012
Messages
287
Reaction score
53
Location
South West Wales
Hi folks

Hope you're all enjoying the nice weather.

I apologise, I keep posting with questions about general DIY stuff etc rather than woodwork related stuff... But there's a lot of knowledgeable people on here and I keep getting sound advice, so I hope you all don't mind.

I've almost finished hacking off the concrete render from our stone building. We'll be having it re-pointed, but not rendered, and as such the soffits are no longer wide enough. Plus, they need to be the ventilated type on some sections. So once the pointing is finished, the plan is to put in new soffits to the correct width and with ventilation slots where needed.

While I'm at it, I might change or at least paint the fascias and barge boards, and I hope to put in deeper/better gutters.

The thing is, at some point in the future we are likely to need a re-roof. It could be soon, it could be a few years time. Would it be daft to put in new soffits/fascias/gutters and THEN have a re-roof? Or are they pretty separate things? Is there a usual order of events?

Many thanks
 
What you are doing is interesting, and I’m curious. My understanding is that in general stone built buildings, that are made of nice stone, if they were found to be porous after completion the usual remedy was either paint or apply render. Now this is hearsay that I’ve picked up over the years. It might be just one two many lemonades talk, but it seemed to make sense to me. Is this others understanding?
If this is the case, will you be potentially creating a whole host of damp problems?
 
What you are doing is interesting, and I’m curious. My understanding is that in general stone built buildings, that are made of nice stone, if they were found to be porous after completion the usual remedy was either paint or apply render. Now this is hearsay that I’ve picked up over the years. It might be just one two many lemonades talk, but it seemed to make sense to me. Is this others understanding?
If this is the case, will you be potentially creating a whole host of damp problems?
Stone isn't porous - except for peculiar oddities like pumice.
Usual reason for render is money saver to cover cheaply built stonework which won't be as tidy as a proper masons job. If built to be rendered often the only dressed stone is the window and door surrounds, or sometimes the quoins as well
But may look and weather perfectly OK without the render.
 
Last edited:
Stone isn't porous - except for peculiar oddities like pumice.
Usual reason for render is money saver to cover cheaply built stonework which won't be as tidy as a proper masons job. If built to be rendered often the only dressed stone is the window and door surrounds, or sometimes the quoins as well
But may look and weather perfectly OK without the render.

I don’t agree that stone is not porous. Limestone and Sandstone are two examples of stone which is definitely porous.
 
The stone itself doesn't have to be porous for the wall as a whole to be porous.

Normally I'd expect a stone wall to have a fluctuating moisture gradient between its inside and outside faces.

A random stone wall will likely have a lot of voids, many of which may interconnect and even equate to an informal cavity.
 
I don’t agree that stone is not porous. Limestone and Sandstone are two examples of stone which is definitely porous.
Not in terms of building stone but may have vulnerable surfaces .
Limestone itself definitely not porous but limestone strata may be due to cracks being widened, as it is water soluble. Hence limestone cave systems and very dry landscapes.
Sandstone generally not porous either, nor soluble, hence wet landscapes.
But both can be weathered and there are all sorts in between
 
I'm pretty convinced that render was often applied for cosmetic reasons - fashion, if you like. In modern times cement-based renders (painted or not) are notorious for developing hairline cracks which suck in rainwater faster than they breathe it out.
 
...

A random stone wall will likely have a lot of voids, many of which may interconnect and even equate to an informal cavity.
Can vary enormously - dry stone wall no mortar lots of cavities, pointed rubble walls with mortar both sides but not a lot in the middle, solidly mortared walls with no voids at all, etc.
 
I'm pretty convinced that render was often applied for cosmetic reasons - fashion, if you like. In modern times cement-based renders (painted or not) are notorious for developing hairline cracks which suck in rainwater faster than they breathe it out.
Perhaps a bit of both as it's also cheaper than having neatly coursed and dressed stone. May include mismatched odds and ends and even the occasional half brick etc
 
Stone isn't porous - except for peculiar oddities like pumice.
Usual reason for render is money saver to cover cheaply built stonework which won't be as tidy as a proper masons job. If built to be rendered often the only dressed stone is the window and door surrounds, or sometimes the quoins as well
But may look and weather perfectly OK without the render.
I don’t agree that stone is not porous. Limestone and Sandstone are two examples of stone which is definitely porous.
You just beat me to it. Granite and Flint might be exceptions but even some of the inferior quality slate walls in this part of the country, do not keep the wet out. I worked on a neighbouring property that had 2 foot thick walls. Despite being newly pointed driving rain would find its way through and cause an obvious darkening of the clay paint used on the interior lime plastered walls.
Regarding the OP's enquiry , - it will probably a case of seeing what sort of gap you are dealing with. It will have to be sealed to prevent critters of any sort gaining access to the loft space, If sufficient of the rafter ends are rotten it might be worth only doing a temporary repair, rather than committing time and money on something that will have to be changed in the near future
 
You just beat me to it. Granite and Flint might be exceptions but even some of the inferior quality slate walls in this part of the country, do not keep the wet out. I worked on a neighbouring property that had 2 foot thick walls. Despite being newly pointed driving rain would find its way through and cause an obvious darkening of the clay paint used on the interior lime plastered walls.
Regarding the OP's enquiry , - it will probably a case of seeing what sort of gap you are dealing with. It will have to be sealed to prevent critters of any sort gaining access to the loft space, If sufficient of the rafter ends are rotten it might be worth only doing a temporary repair, rather than committing time and money on something that will have to be changed in the near future
Sounds like bad detailing! Slate or similar flat slab stonework should be laid with slight slope to the outside so that any windblown rain will drain out.
Really noticeable in the Lake District and often not pointed at all on the outside.
 
Not in terms of building stone but may have vulnerable surfaces .
Limestone itself definitely not porous but limestone strata may be due to cracks being widened, as it is water soluble. Hence limestone cave systems and very dry landscapes.
Sandstone generally not porous either, nor soluble, hence wet landscapes.
But both can be weathered and there are all sorts in between
Sorry but you are wrong on this Jacob hence the need to seal stone work surfaces and floors. An unsealed limestone floor will quickly absorb a spill. You may well be right in terms of why render is more commonly used but all stone has pores. A quick Google gives the relative porosity and permeability of different stone types.
 
Anyway, back to the original question……if you think about it for a mo, most re-roofings (coverings only) pay no attention to the fascia and gutters as they are, in general (as you’ve already thought), separate components. However, it’s worth understanding and considering the following……

The top of the fascia board should be set to allow the eaves course (the bottom course) to sit at the same angle as the rest of the roof. A casual glance at other roofs will undoubtedly highlight random examples of eaves courses that appear to ‘dip’ downwards because the fascia has been ‘set’ too low. This is not a water penetration issue but simply good practise and aesthetics.

Also, any guttering should be sized/positioned to allow the eaves course to overhang that guttering by (say) 50mm or, preferably, centre of the gutter.

If you take both of the above details into account I cannot think of any other reason for not doing what you want.

edit:
ps….just a thought…..if you are going to change the fascias you could incorporate fascia ventilation instead of having to include it within the soffits. 👍
 
We are in a similar position stone building (1800) cement rendered started hacking off and found damp behind it. So all the rendering will have to come off at some point. Just removing the lower section at the moment then using lime nhl 5 as we live close to the sea.
E73FBC01-B654-409D-BB99-13911EB4D3E0.jpeg
 
Rocks is definitely porous, it's measured in Darcys. If rock were no porous then aquifers and oil fields would be impossible.
 
Back
Top