Farewell dance given by the crew of the U. S. S. Bridgeport
~2.5 x 4.25", booklet, 6pgs
Dance card booklet for a dance in Weymouth, England after World War I. Includes note from Bill regarding his lack of preferred partner. "The crew of the Bridgeport gave a dance in Weymouth but I did not go and did not have the partner I care for with me, you know what I mean. Bill."
1919-10-24
National Suffrage News
16 pgs, 8 x 11"
The February 1917 edition of the National American Women's Suffrage Association's monthly bulletin: National Suffrage News. Contains a tribute to Susan B. Anthony.
1917
Anna Howard Shaw, Emma Winner Rogers, Mary Summer Boyd, Carrie Chapman Cart
English
'Voters OK Parks Land Purchase' Clipping-Hearthstone
A photocopied newspaper clipping
1985-05-01
'Waiting to Hear About Task Force' Clipping-Hearthstone
One newspaper clipping
1987-11-?
'Parks 'Castle' Makes State Historic List' Clipping-Hearthstone
Newspaper clipping on copy paper
1987-11
'Politics Surface in Officials' Confrontation' Clipping-Hearthstone
Horizontal paper with newspaper article
1987-10-24
Parks Property Purchase Committee
8.5 x 11", printed letter
1985-02-01
Connecticut Trust For Historic Preservation (article) Autumn 1981
Article from Connecticut Trust for Historic Preservation Volume IV Number III from Autumn of 1981
This article is a key source in describing how Danbury's structure at the onset of its tricentenial was represented to the public. The historical preservation of 3 key buildings, the Palace Theater, the old library, and the Martha Apartments were all selected to be reorganized into a "cultural core". The pictures included in this article portray Main Street as a social hub.
Autumn 1981
Conecticut Trust for Historic Preservation
Journal
English
General Audience
Secondary Education
D ANBURY — ALMOST
300 YEARS OLD AND
STILL MATURING
In 1984 Danbury w ill be 300 years old.
For almost three centuries residents
have worked w ith t he l and, w ith
machines, and w ith each other to shape
a u nique place. Every stage of growth:
frontier outpost, commercial v illage,
hat city, and currently, corporate base,
has left a stamp on the c ommunity. The
gradual blending of Yankees. Irish.
Germans. Portugese. Italians. Blacks.
Hispanics. and i mmigrants from the
Middle East have produced a distinct
human c hemistry. What we i nherit is a
priceless civic asset, a slowly assembled set of t raditions w hich d efine and
give depth to our l ives.
Main Street has always been the focus
of l ife in D anbury. The first settlers
built t heir houses and church on the
swampy south end of the street. When
the t own became a regional supply center the stores and c raft shops were
located in the same area, and often in
the same buildings. Later the railroad
and the hat i ndustry's dependence on
the S till River pulled settlement northward. Early in the 20th century a
network of roads funneled local and
long distance automobile traffic past
the b anks, stores, and offices that
flanked the street. M ain Street was the
setting for major and m inor events in
the l ife cycle of its c itizens. For generations people have come to Danbury to
work and shop; to embark on pleasure
trips or to go off to war; to enjoy a
concert or a restaurant meal; to watch
parades or to observe l ife as it pulsates
in a busy city. And despite suburban
residential patterns and the l ure of a
decentralized mall. Main Street has not
been completely drained of its energy
and animation.
Danbury boasts a distinct heritage
that is not locked in a book but is displayed in the downtown buildings that
town is the essential ingredient of a
livable c ity. Only the heart of the
community offers a wide range of economic, social, and cultural opportunities
in a physical setting that constantly
enriches our lives by r eminding us of
our roots.
In the recent past Danbury has let
others run the r isks — and reap the
rewards — of i nnovation. But t his conservatism has begun to fade. Along
with t hirty other f orward-looking
American c ities, almost a ll m uch
larger. Danbury is t aking a n ovel
approach t o urban p lanning t hat w ill
sensitively balance the need to retain
significant a rchitecture of the past w ith
contemporary social, economic and
cultural objectives. As one of the p ilot
cities in the Economics of A menity
program sponsored by Washington
based Partners for L ivable Places. Danbury is seeking to develop its a rchitectural and c ultural resources as a
stimulus t o downtown revitalization.
Danbury was selected for participation in t his three-year program for three
reasons. An important consideration
was the dangerously healthy condition
of the local economy. In the p ath of
corporate colonization of the state.
Danbury boasts high employment, a
sturdy tax base and much new construction. This vibrant economy is a mixed
blessing. Uncontrolled development
threatens the scale, f abric and traditions
of the community. With Partners'
assistance. Danbury is striving to harness growth so that it enhances rather
than damages the quality of life in the
area.
In the last few years a new breed of
leader, less provincial and more aware
of the importance of professional
advice, has emerged in the community.
Organized in 1978. the Danbury Preservation Trust has convinced many of
the wisdom of making the preservation
of the large stock of 19th century
commercial buildings on Main Street, a
tangible reminder of Danburv's era of
present. Youthful Mayor James
Dyer concluded that $30.000 from private sources over a three year period, in
order to gain accesss to Partner's network of experts, was a b argain.
Finally. Danbury faced a set of
issues that dovetailed w ith Partners'
emphasis on the arts as a planning tool.
Historically dependent on New York
City f or cultural enrichment, t he city
lacks quality museums, galleries and
theaters. Such factors as the energy
shortage, the proliferation of local arts
organizations and the expansion of
Western Connecticut State College's
music and drama departments called
for an upgrading of area arts facilities.
Frightened by the prospect that an
immense shopping m all would soon be
constructed at a nearby suburban site.
the city is searching for a strategy that
will induce people to continue to patronize the downtown.
The third ingredient in t his mix is the
presence of two under-utilized historic
structures on Main Street that have
potential as arts facilities. The larger
building, the 2,000 seat ornate Palace
Theater ( 1928). has recently been purchased along with the adjacent Martha
Apartments by Portuguese immigrant
Joseph DaSilva. the city's major property owner. Further to the north on
Main Street is a Victorian brownstone
masterpiece, the 1878 former library.
that is l anguishing as an overflow for
city offices.
The immediate task of the DanburyPartners collaboration was to explore
the feasibility of giving t his pair of
buildings, which make such a pointed
statement about the heritage of the
community, a fresh life as a cultural
core t hat would animate the downtown
and. in the process, spur satellite retail
activity. T he Downtown Council,
appointed by Mayor Dyer to be the
local liaison with Partners, raised
$ 10.000 in contributions from local
industries to engage Ralph Burgard.
an arts planning consultant. In January
graphic scope of the study, it became
clear t hat w ithout sizable clientele t he
two cultural centers, no m atter how attractive, would be f inancially impractical. Consequently the study expanded
into a f ull scale arts plan t hat w ould
seek new ways of b ringing the arts and
people together.
Presently, the d owntown arts effort
is e ntering a second phase. A sophisticated market analysis that w ill
measure t he d rawing power i n the
region of all types of arts offerings is
being undertaken b y E conomics
Research Associates of W ashington.
D. C. The architectural firm of Hardy.
Holzman. P feiffer w ill provide engineering analysis and a range of design
options for both buildings.
During t he second six-month stage.
Mr. Burgard w ill continue h is efforts t o
strengthen the arts groups in the region.
Contemplated tasks are the inauguration of a regional arts council directed
by a professional s taff, and the establishment of a corporate fund for the
arts. If this vision materializes, the
preserved Palace Theater and library will bring t he f inest educational a nd
cultural programs to the region and
strengthen the local character of M ain
Street. The animation and vibrancy
brought by people enjoying down town's
diverse activities w ill ensure the celebration of Danbury's architectural
heritage and c community identity in 1984
and for years to come. Dr. Herbert
Janick, Professor, Western Connecticut State College.
The a rchitectural f abric of Main Street, despite losses from neglect, natural disasters, and misguided renovation,
embodies Danbury's past.
Projected plans for the Palace Theater have been
fostered by the cooperative efforts of Drew Painter,
Joseph DaSilva, and Herbert Janick.
Library, Danbury
Article Sent to Jim Dyer by W.W. Goodman Regarding the Possible Effects the Addition of the Mall Could Have on Downtown
This is an article that William W. Goodman sent to Jim Dyer regarding the possible shopping center to be constructed at the fairgrounds. The article highlights the possible diminishing effects that this establishment could have on the downtown shopping scene.
The actuial article highlights a proposed shopping center at the "Meadowlands" less than 10 miles from Downtown Newark, NJ and about 5 miles from Jersey City. It reflects upon how this shopping center could impact the downtown businesses within these cities.
October 1980
The Region's Agenda
Journal Volume X, Number 1
English
;
W I J U L I A M W. G O O D M A N
10/28/80
Dear J i m
Many o f the arguments i n t his report a pply
to
the p ossible Shopping Center at the
Fair Grounds - and its effect on our own downtown s hopping
area.
Thought you w ould be interested i n r eading
this!!!!!!
\l
Volume X, N umber 1
THE REGION'S AGENDA
October 1980
IMPACT OF PROPOSED MEADOWLANDS REGIONAL SHOPPING CENTER ON S URROUNDING CITIES
Statement of Regional Plan Association in Response to: "The Urban Impact of the Retail Component of
Berry's Creek Center" by Gail Garfield Schwartz, a Consultant's Report to the Hackensack Meadowlands
Development Commission on the Proposal to Build a Large Regional Shopping Center in the Meadowlands,
Less than 10 Miles from Downtown Newark, about Five from Journal Square in Jersey City
The Schwartz report leaves the whole issue of the size
and composition of Berry's Creek Center e xactly
where it was. Its i nformation does not answer any of
the questions which led Regional Plan Association
and m any others to ask for public debate before the
Hackensack M eadowlands Development Commission
approves and facilitates construction of a major
regional s hopping center at Berry's Creek.
As an "urban impact" analysis of the proposed Berry's
Creek shopping center, it fails because it considers
only the e ffects on existing retailing, not on the
eventual revival of New Jersey cities that the Governor
has pledged. And, as an analysis of the effects on existing shopping areas, it fails because ( 1) the conclusions
are based on i nsufficient d ata and (2) a key e lement
isn't q uantified at all: how m uch sales loss can be sustained by a store, a shopping cluster or a regional mall
before it has to close.
The real issue is: What can New Jersey cities become
if the leverage of State policy supports their revival—
as promised by the Governor. This report seems to
accept the c ontinued drain of the mainstream of New
Jersey's economy from its cities.
Who Will Lose What Sales?
Even the question the report does address remains unanswered objectively: What will be the effect on retaM-_
ing surrounding the Meadowlands of a regional sho
ping center at Berry's Creek? There are m any subjecti
conclusions, but no hard answers. The report itseu testifies:"... Berry's Creek C enter... will be a shopper
goods facility" (furniture, clothing, general merchandise), but "to q uantify f he distribution of such expenditures . . . of the residents of each community,
over all the m ajor accessible malls and all the other
options, including the local option, is not possible,
given available data." In other words, the report cannot answer the question asked.
Though stating that regional shopping centers are
irrelevant for another kind of retail trade, "convenience goods" (i.e., food, gasoline, stationery, hardware, etc.), the report devotes several pages to analyzing convenience goods sales, concluding that: "At
least 98 percent of the present proportion of local
residents' expenditures on convenience goods should
be retained by these communities, as a group, despite
Berry's Creek Center." It is not at all clear how such
a precise figure can be calculated for convenience
goods and not for shopper goods. In any case, the
precision turns out to depend on policy: the report
recommends that supermarkets be excluded from the
regional shopping center at Berry's Creek to be sure
that existing convenience goods stores in the m arket
shed are not severely a ffected! So again, the plethora
of n umbers leads to no objective answer to the
question addressed.
We do learn two very significant relationships from
the numbers of the report, neither of them stated in
the t ext:
1. There will be a net decline in aggregate real-dollar
retail expenditures of residents in the study area
over the foreseeable future. Therefore, whatever
dollars are spent at Berry's Creek stores have to
come out of dollars now being spent at existing
stores in the area.
2. In order to be profitable, the proposed Berry's
Creek shopping center will have to take in about
$200 million in sales per year in 1977 dollars. This
is equal to about 20 percent of all shopper goods
expenditures of all the people in the s tudy area,
according to c onsumption patterns revealed in the
research done by Regional Plan Association for the
Regional Accounts s tudy (Indiana University Press,
1980). It also equals about 20 percent of all shopper
goods sales in the s tudy area in 1977. In other words,
shopper goods sales and spending on shopper goods
by residents in the study area are about equal now,
and the proposed Berry's Creek shopping center
will have to take in a bout 20 percent of t hat amount
to be p rofitable! So it is conceivable that the total
sales of Berry's Creek, in the net, would be drained
from the d owntowns and neighborhood shops
within the s tudy area. But even if the report's suggestion is t rue that a considerable amount of the
sales diversion will be from Willowbrook Mall, both
Regional Plan's and the report's figures point to
the probability that at least two-thirds of the Berry's
Creek sales will be s hifted from M eadowlands area
downtown and neighborhood shops, not from existing regional malls.
The effect of a loss of 13-20 percent of total shopper
goods sales from the study area is not objectively
described in the report. For example, the report raises
the question of whether the loss in sales to Berry's
Creek Center "would encourage the s hutdown of
Bamberger's" in d owntown Newark. After an array of
numbers about who now shops where, there is no
answer. More disturbing, there is a deceptive answer
about the i mpact on clusters of smaller shops. The
report shows how fragile is the health of local shopping clusters: "Because small businessmen and women
are likely to go out of business more frequently than
chain stores, . . . vacancy rates in local areas are
normally . . . about 10-15 p ercent... at any given
time. The danger point is 20 percent vacancies for over
one year." So, if Berry's Creek shopping center drives
just 5-10 percent of local stores out of business, a
local shopping cluster could be destroyed-with real
estate tax e ffects for the municipality. This vulnerability of local shopping clusters is u nderplayed in the
report by concluding that 20 percent of the stores
have to be driven out of business by the Berry's Creek
shopping center to endanger the whole cluster when,
in fact, it is only the 5-10 percent difference between
normal vacancies and the 20 percent vacancy danger
point.
What is missing from the report is any indication of
the sales loss for each type of store that might threaten
its continuance. Would, for example, the six percent
decline in sales at W illowbrook, suggested by one of
the report's tables, result in stores closing? Might
enough stores close to m ake the whole mall shut down
eventually, with serious real estate tax consequences
to Wayne?
The report provides soothing but very subjective
assurance of minimal effect from building 1.5 million
square feet of shopping and perhaps more. (The
report recommends unconstrained growth of the shopping center and suggests it should be larger than now
being considered.) The work days of employees in
some existing stores might be decreased a little, some
profits thinned, with no effect on real estate taxes,
according to the report. Assuming Berry's Creek will
have good public transportation and substantial office
growth, the report implies its choice: a shiny embryonic new downtown is b etter than strengthened cities.
But in the face of the cataclysmic results of not
s trengthening New Jersey cities, the report poses as
the reason for favoring shopping centers their great
convenience for people with cars. (Dr. Schwartz might
argue t hat it is not her choice of p arking convenience
vs. strong downtowns but the public's; but she did
not h esitate to propose restricting the p ublic's convenience in h aving s upermarkets in Berry's Creek
Center to p rotect neighborhood stores. Is the v iability
of cities a less important goal?)
The r eport argues that a s hopping center near the
Region's Core is p referable to regional malls farther
out of the u rban center. With that, the contenders in
the M eadowlands dispute could doubtless all agree.
But t here is an a lternative. Promising efforts by N ewark c orporations, both to enlarge office j obs downtown a nd redevelop near-downtown neighborhoods,
suggest t hat concerted public-private-civic e fforts
could begin to m ake downtown Newark a vital center.
That is true, also, of other New Jersey cities. The report's negative evaluation of N ewark's potential is
backed by no f acts whatsoever. Nor is its assertion
that retailers d on't w ant to locate in d owntowns. Huge
new shopping centers i n d owntown White Plains a nd
Stamford belie that, as do n umerous recent news reports and c onversations of retailers with Regional
Plan staff members. Now is the t ime for a concerted
drive to restore the m ainstream of the A merican
economy and society back through our cities.
It is not enough to brush off the p otential of New
Jersey cities, saying that people d on't w ant to locate
there right n ow. If New Jersey is to ignore the Governor's promise of city revival, we should have some
vision of what will happen to the cities instead. Are
they to become even more the backwaters of the unwanted? Second-class opportunities for city residents
seem to be accepted by the report when it observes
that many Newark and Jersey City residents don't
have automobiles to go to s uburban malls nor enough
income to support good stores in the cities. That is
precisely our a rgument for recentralizing retailing
downtown. Unless middle-income people participate
in city downtown activities, there will be neither
adequate public transit to give the poor, old and
handicapped mobility n or a dequate opportunities f or
jobs and services in them.
The report's a rgument that Berry's Creek is within
easy reach of city residents and therefore good for
them implies that it will have public transit convenience and f requency competitive with what downtowns could provide if revived. In research for the
U.S. D epartment of T ransportation, Regional Plan
identified the factors most conducive to support for
public transit: a large compact downtown surrounded
by housing in w hich the density starts high near the
center and tapers off from there, i.e., the p attern of
cities not shopping centers. Nor w ould Berry's Creek
ever have the mix of activities that downtown Newark
already h as—for e xample, $350 million of new higher
education institutions near downtown and a teaching
hospital, Symphony Hall, the best reference library
in the S tate and the N ewark Museum.
In Sum
Altogether, the study is far from assuring that the ratio
of b enefits to costs of Berry's Creek Center for the
State of New Jersey will be substantial. Nor does it
deal with the basic question: should New Jersey develop in and on its cities or continue to t urn its back
THE
REGION'S
AGENDA
REGIONAL PLAN A SSOCIATION
235 East 45th Street
New Y ork, New York 10017
on them and leave them forgotten b ackwaters-with
lessening o pportunities for those who m ust remain
there and a bandonment of any h ope of restoring centers of civilization, excitement and creativity for all
New Jerseyans?
Regional Plan Association draws from the r eport the
conclusion that the net gains of such a s hopping development are far too small to w arrant its a pproval, at
least until much more effort has been made to revive
New Jersey cities and their d owntowns, as the State
has proposed.
Some Examples of Contradictions Resulting From
the Subjective Nature of the Report
1. "Limiting the size of Berry's Creek Center might
limit its d rawing power enough to discourage
tenants, b ut not enough t o assure t he s tatus q uo
in e xisting local retail areas." T herefore, the conclusion: d on't l imit the Center's size. But this
sentence follows t he c onclusion that Berry's Creek
Center, as proposed, w ill not seriously a ffect local
retail areas. So w hat does the quoted sentence
mean?
2. P ublic "support of one t ype of d evelopment" is
approved even if it "may reduce the economic
feasibility of o ther developments." That "is preferable to a completely free market where the p ublic
has no control over the e nvironment, the aesthetics,
the spill-overs, or the costs." (This is an a rgument
for g overnment assistance to retailers to compete
with Berry's Creek Center when it is b uilt.) In
another place, the report opposes public i ntervention to control "the size, type, number, or q uality
of shopping center merchants . .." as "generally
unsuccessful." The report itself suggests a c ontrol
on t ype of store: "the HMDC in m anaging the development" should "separate any s upermarkets in
Berry's Creek Center from the m ajor retail center,
so t hat the s upermarkets are accessible only to
Berry's Creek Center residents and not to p atrons
4 e ntering the c enter for comparison shopping purposes." So c ontrolling the type of store seems
promising on page 24, but likely to be u nsuccessful
' on page 54 when a d ifferent conclusion is desired.
And, despite t he p reference f or p ublic intervention
on page 56, page 24 suggests it w on't work: ". . .
consumers in a densely built up area such as the
(study area) have so m any shopping opportunities
that public policies cannot push customers from
one area to another."
Next Steps
This consultant report was one of two c ontracted for
by the Hackensack M eadowlands Development Commission in response to concerns expressed by the
Governor's Cabinet Development Committee about
the possible e ffects of M eadowlands development on
surrounding areas. The second s tudy-on transportation implications of the M aster Plan for the M eadowlands—will be completed shortly. We assume that
both the Commission (200 Murray Hill Parkway, East
Rutherford, N .J. 07073) and the Cabinet Development Committee (c/o Donald Linky, Director, Office
of Policy and Planning, Governor's Office, State House,
West State Street, Trenton, N.J. 08625) would be
interested in your c omments on t he reports, available
at the Commission.
(c) Regional Plan Association, 1980
Non-Profil O rg.
U. S. Postage
PAI D
NEW Y ORK, N. V .
PERMIT NO. 3 554
Mr. W i l liam Goodman .
p
President
8-77
Shepard's Moving & Storage S ervice
32 Henry
Eethel, Connecticut 06801
Downtown Action Plan
The Plan of Development, adopted by the Planning Commission in March, 1980, provided general direction for the future development of Downtown Danbury. It is recommended that the Planning Department with the guidance of the CBD Coordinating Panel develop a Downtown Action Plan which will guide public and private investment decisions in the future.
1981
4pgs
DOWNTOWN ACTION PLAN
The Plan of Development, adopted by the Planning Commission
in M arch, 1980, provided general direction for the future
development of Downtown Danbury. It is recommended that the
Planning Department with the guidance of the CBD Coordinating
Panel develop a Downtown Action Plan which will guide public
and private investment decisions in the future. The purpose
of t his Downtown A ction Plan will b e:
-Provide a p lanning framework for development of
Parcel A and future parcels of l and;
-Promote economic development through urban d esign;
-Promote p ublic and p rivate cooperation and i nitiative in p ackaging and marketing development
proposals ;
-Design p rograms and g uide lines to e nsure design
compatibility b etween buildings, between downtown
blocks and w ithin the downtown as a w hole;
-Provide a m odel that will integrate properly t he
historical assets of the community with new d evelopment ;
-Develop a guide for use by City officials in
planning capital improvements and p ublic s ervices;
-Develop an i mplementation program.
#OUTLINE FOR DOWNTOWN ACTION PLAN
SCOPE OF STUDY
Purpose of Study
Boundary of Study
REGIONAL SETTING
Role of Downtown in R egion
Past Efforts at R evitalization
INVENTORY AND ANALYSIS OF URBAN FEATURES
Circulation System
Parking F acilities
Public Facilities and Services
Existing Land Use
Zoning Districts and R egulations
Ownership Pattern
Urban Design
Paths, E dges, Districts, Nodes, Landmarks
Design Features
Streetscapes
Lighting and Utility Poles
Signs
Street Furniture
Crosswalks and Sidewalks
Street Landscape
Public Art
Market Considerations
Public I nterest Groups
Comprehensive Summary
PROBLEMS/ISSUES AND OPPORTUNITIES
Problems/Issues
Opportunities
GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
PLAN OF DEVELOPMENT
Establish Theme
Identify Treatment Areas
Prioritize Areas of Potential Development
Land Use Plan
#- 2-
PLAN OF DEVELOPMENT (cont.)
Transportation Plan
Urban Design Plan
MODEL BLOCK TREATMENT
Select Block
Building Conditions Survey
Facade Analysis
Facade Treatment
Public Improvements
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
Ordinance Revision
Map Revisions
Bonding
Capital I mprovements Program
Tax Increment Financing
Economic Development Corporation
Public/Private Partnership
Marketing Program
Simplicity of buildings Facade
tral c olors accent a tea h isto
Oven i zed s ign c ompetes w ith o ther
' signs ,
o color schades
[he i ntesT-ty o f ch* s tructure's
mage and character
p##tmg w i t h th##rr.
Patched a ppearance of old
transom w indow a r-ea d evalues s tructure
Overr;ar.g a nd support w i r e s
are visually undesirable,
style
Facade c olors
and T iater-afs
abruptly c ortrast w ith rest
Of D 'OCR.
f
e vmbits
good
s upport
ot
visual e lement g f a l ock s cape, t hus t he domineer mg
to s milar .s and devilment !.m. o e-od=.
blockscape
Windows should continuously
ndows, and .archway strongly support block ! cape's historical theme.
Unified color scheme accentuates character and a rt, s t ic
Openr-g
of
a r c h w a y s adds
spatial u sage, d imension and
Removal o f g round level - narquees
and overhang from front o f c ol 5or!cai - dsnt/ty
propor'Jondl in h eight t o p rov.de a u nified s tructural image
Arcade provdes 'Meresting spatial
d'mension ang p edestrian a ccessibility to possible tuture urban
spaces.
Utilisation and maintenance o f
dS ting stucco .-ndt-rial w ith
ors amplify nteg-ity
of adjacent
historical
Structure
example o f c o n t r a s t
fragmentation of a s;n
building due tc :<ick of
coordination b etween
tjiTiong o wners ,
Wooden s tore s igr
located at ped
jr.ented l evels.
anvas a wnmgs >nould b e
used r ather than o ther
Canvas and wooden awnings e stablishes p edestrian s cale a nd s upports
character of olocKscape '-airier than
deploring b y u sing m etal o r a l a s t C
continuity
will
be
o f b iocXscape
strengthened
Arch style windows support b iocK shapes historical theme
FIGURE 15