Siding materials need proper clearances between finish grade and the siding—regardless the type of siding.
This requirement is not just to prevent damage to the siding—–it serves a couple of other functions as well. Maintaining proper clearances reduces access to wood structures behind the siding by wood destroying insects or damage from water that might find its way behind the siding.
It allows for inspection of the area. In other words inspectors can see what type of foundation is there, whether flashings are there and whether insects are moving into the structure behind the siding.
It is likely that in all parts of the country there is some reason to follow these principles—-not just the wet North West—and this is reflected in the building codes.
I have had builders tell me that if the siding can’t be damaged by water, that there is no problem with bringing the siding right down to the ground. While it is possible to design a wall cladding that could get away with this approach—–as a general rule it is not a good idea, and proper clearances are required. At an inspection a while ago, I was fortunate to get perhaps the most perfect example of why the builder’s logic is not sound.
Take a look at the concrete patio in the following picture. Notice how the patio is poured right up to the house and the siding comes right down to the patio. This in vinyl siding and is in no danger of being damaged by water. However, as an inspector I can not tell what is behind this connection. Flashings? Concrete? Treated wood? Untreated wood?
The point is—-who knows?
Of course sliding my knife under the siding at the concrete I didn’t hit anything. Whoops—this is not going to be good, I thought to myself.
This next picture was taken in the crawl space. The entire rim joist was bug infested and rotted away over the whole length of the patio connection with the house.
The grey color visible in the picture is the back side of the vinyl siding.
Maintaining good clearances between finish-grade and siding materials of all kinds is crucial to preventing this kind of damage. In most cases it doesn’t make any difference whether the siding is wood, vinyl, aluminum, stucco or brick.
Of course, creating proper clearances may require creating proper foundations first.
***
Charles Buell, Real Estate Inspections in Seattle
If you enjoyed this post, and would like to get notices of new posts to my blog, please subscribe via email in the little box to the right. I promise NO spamming of your email
Hi! We’ve bought a 1950s home that was recently sided with vinyl. The fellow left plenty of space between the vinyl and the ground, but what’s the below the siding (on an addition without a concrete foundation” seems to be untreated wood! Prior to this vinyl installation, the home was painted. What is the best solution? Painting the bottom foot or so of the exterior?
Christine, you will need to send me some pictures for me to give you any kind of recommendation. Send to charles@buellinspections.com
Would have been nice to show the proper way to finish siding down to a patio.
That would vary with the installation, but siding should pretty much never finish at the patio surface—there should always be a gap—and that will vary from 2-6″ depending on the type of patio materials.
If there was concrete up the wall some that went up before the old siding is it them ok to have vinyl all the way to the patio floor?
I had a Hard Board Contractor put siding on my house. Originally the pad was exposed 4inches above the ground. He ran the siding directly down to the ground, The termite inspector now says termites can get into the house because you cannot see the tunnels. Also, he refuses to cover mistakes and blemishes in the pre painted surfaces or black marks left on the white trim. I have photos. Is there anyone in State Government who can force him to do the job right? We are senior citizens and this is a black neighborhood. First he said it would cost $6000, then once he started it was $8,000 then $10,000. He is a crook
You don’t say where you are located but I would start with your local building department.
So sick of aesthetics taking precedence over function. It is common sense to leave a bit of concrete foundations exposed on all buildings, for the reasons you state. On older houses (pre-1970), this is pretty much the standard. I’m sorry that concrete isn’t considered “pretty.” But it works. It’s functional. It’s the right material for the application. Could we hire some building inspectors that start rejecting the siding-to-the-ground that is so common on new homes?
As a comparison, I think that garages are ugly too! Yet, I like being able to park in an enclosed, attached structure. That’s the compromise. Some with the siding. No it doesn’t look as good, but I don’t want to deal with rot on a 10-year-old home. My grandma’s house is 116 years old. It has mostly original siding. Minimal rot. Grandpa painted every 10 years and did spot repairs. My dad and uncles picked up the slack for grandma after grandpa died. The bottom 3 feet above ground level is concrete foundation. No wood comes anywhere close to the ground.
For comparison, my 1998 home is in need of new siding because of the sawdust Weyerhaueser siding. The bottom 3 boards had already been replaced all the way around (at around 10 years) because the idiot builder thought that it would look prettier with siding to the ground. Had I been the original owner, I would have rejected the siding. In Seattle’s housing market, you simply can’t be in a position to make demands, and need to expect to fix every real estate flipper and no-brain contractors’ mistakes.
Engineer, you are preaching to the choir I think. 🙂 We know so much and use so little of what we know. It is disheartening almost every day. It is not a type of job security I want.