Steve,

I admire all of your suggested solutions. The difficulty is that these 
situations reveal themselves by increments and it is not until years 
later that they take on a shape in the memory. We started by trying to 
understand and respond to the problem. It took a while to figure out 
that a piece of the problem was the color of the sand as different from 
the matrix and where the observer stood. Nobody cared if they saw sand, 
or not. The majority of parties had no clue what they were looking at to 
begin with. People are not always fully conscious. I was never able to 
explain to anyone, including the LPC staffer, what they were seeing. 
They would hear the words but they would not engage in the meaning. The 
property owner wanted to do the right thing, but had no clue what that 
was. They thought I had a clue. I should have had a clue. How is it... 
we begin to believe something is true because over repeated instances 
certain similarities remain constant... then you hit the situation where 
it all goes kablooie! Suddenly you feel a need to start over and to 
question everything that you had previously assumed to be the case. In 
the end our solution was to do nothing as long as possible.

][<

[log in to unmask] wrote:

> In a message dated 1/5/2007 8:28:05 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, 
> [log in to unmask] writes:
>
>     no matter what color we put on the
>     stucco it was a monotone and it reflected sunlight different than the
>     stucco
>
> There are many solutions to this problem, none of which are practical 
> without skill, money and/or time.  First, one could dilute the 
> coating, allow it to absorb into the paste and wash/wipe it off the 
> exposed sand to expose the sand.  Second, one could allow the building 
> to weather so as to expose the sand.  This may take years, depending 
> upon the weathering resistance of the coating.  Thirdly, and depending 
> upon the chemistry of the coating, one could wash the building after 
> coating with a solution to dissolve the coating off the sand, but not 
> the cementitious paste between the sand particles.  The solution could 
> be dilute muriatic acid, a dilute base (sodium hydroxide), or a 
> organic solvent.  If the project is large, one could easily violate 
> environmental laws/regulations/hysteria/ with the usual financial or 
> other consequences.  If the coating is a solution in water or an 
> emulsion, if one's timing is exquisite,  and if the weather conditions 
> are ideal, one could pressure-wash the coating off the sand 
> without completely washing it off the building.   Fourthly, one could 
> blow some sand on the coating to mimic exposed sand after 
> weathering.   Fifthly, one could hire a professional to crack heads, 
> butts, or buttheads like you suggested. Sixthly, one could 
> countersue.  Seventhly, one could use money to cause the complainer to 
> change viewpoints.  The list could go on and on, but I'll stop it here.
>  
> S. J. Stokowski, Jr.
> Stone Products Consultants
> 1058 Sodom Rd., Bldg. 2
> Westport, MA 02790
> 508-881-6364
> www.members.aol.com/crushstone/
> -- To terminate puerile preservation prattling among pals and the 
> uncoffee-ed, or to change your settings, go to: 
> http://listserv.icors.org/archives/bullamanka-pinheads.html 

--
To terminate puerile preservation prattling among pals and the
uncoffee-ed, or to change your settings, go to:
<http://listserv.icors.org/archives/bullamanka-pinheads.html>