On Fri, 4 Sep 2009 23:12:20 +0100, "michael adams"
wrote:


"Bruce" wrote in message ...
On Fri, 4 Sep 2009 16:18:10 +0100, "michael adams"
wrote:

The Victoria Embankment is faced entirely in grey granite. Both the
embankment itself and most of the buildings facing.

Even without the benefit of eyesight even a blind man could feel
the difference between granite and stucco.


Given the very poor resolution of the Google image, and the fact that
my arms are not quite long enough to stretch from Buckinghamshire to
the Victoria Embankment to "feel the difference", I'll have to take
your word for it.

But anyone with good observation will know that there are a great many
buildings in London with stucco finishes which copy that style of
masonry. The whole idea of stucco - as practised very widely in
London - was to provide the appearance of fine masonry without the
attendant high cost.

That's correct. Especially in areas such as Pimlico (Cubbit) and Regents
Park (Nash).

And all painted sparkling white.


Indeed. It hides a multitude of sins. Many of the fine terraces are
not even built of courses of brick, but of brick rubble and lime
mortar, with a lot of unpredictable stuff thrown in.

I have worked on quite a few London projects where a new building was
to be constructed behind an existing facade. The stucco facades look
nice but they very often have minimal structural strength, so are
enormously challenging to keep supported while building work goes on
behind.

One of the worst constructed stucco terraces was the Royal Crescent in
Bath, where the mostly rubble walls and facades weren't even properly
tied together. It had to be strengthened in the 1980s at a high cost.