michael adams wrote:
"Bruce" wrote in message
news
On Fri, 04 Sep 2009 08:52:14 GMT, "Richard J."
wrote:


I think the Hammersmith Flyover is one of the best looking concrete
viaducts, and wouldn't be improved by that sort of treatment (and I
don't know what it's called).

I picked the Hammersmith Flyover off the top of my head as a concrete
structure, and didn't mean to imply that it was a particularly ugly one.

http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?hl=en&...JjAo2hmTbOlgpv
bw978fQ&cbp=12,41.4,,0,-3.45&ll=51.491057,-0.225048&spn=0,359.958801&z=15


The effect in Basil Jet's linked images is called "stucco" and it is
a style of rendering, not a concrete finish.

It's cut stone and has nothing to do with concrete at all.

The style is rustication.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rustication_(architecture)

Thanks to everyone who has replied. Two similar effects are being discussed
here, and it's possible that the two pictures I linked to are of the two
different effects. The majority of buildings in London with this sort of
appearance have worms of something, presumably stucco rather than concrete,
stuck on top of flat blocks of something, presumably stone rather than
concrete. I will keep an eye out for buildings in which the stone block has
vermiculate rustication.