DOCSLIB.ORG

Multi-Family Residential Design Guidelines[PDF]

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Multi-Family Residential Design Guidelines[PDF] MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES Adopted by the Marin County Board of Supervisors on December 10, 2013 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS BOARD OF SUPERVISORS COUNTY STAFF Susan Adams, District 1 Brian C. Crawford Katie Rice, District 2 Director of Community Development Agency Kathrin Sears, District 3 Thomas Lai Steve Kinsey, District 4 Assistant Director of Community Development Agency Judy Arnold, District 5 Jeremy Tejirian Planning Manager of Planning Division PLANNING COMMISSION Stacey Laumann Katherine Crecelius, At-Large Planner of Planning Division Ericka Erickson, At-Large Don Dickenson, District 1 Margot Biehle, District 2 John Eller, District 3 Michael Dyett, Principal-In-Charge Wade Holland, District 4 Matt Taecker, Principal Peter Theran, District 5 Jeannie Eisberg, Senior Associate WORKING GROUP Supported by a grant from the Metropolitan Transportation Bob Hayes Commission Smart Growth Technical Assistance Program Bruce Burman John Eller Steven Aiello Curry Eckelhoff Rich Gumbiner Allan Bortel Marge Macris Kathleen Harris Robert Pendoley Scott Gerber Steven Lucas Sim Van der Ryn Cover image adapted from: The American Transect, http://www.transect.org/rural_img.htm i CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................................................................................................1-1 Purpose ...............................................................................................................................................................1-1 Fundamental Design Principles .......................................................................................................................1-1 How to Use the Guidelines ...............................................................................................................................1-2 Organization of Document ................................................................................................................................1-3 2 GENERAL GUIDELINES .............................................................................................................................................2-1 2.1 Community Context ............................................................................................................................................2-1 2.2 Proportion, Scale, and Arrangement ..............................................................................................................2-3 2.3 Building and Street Relationships ...................................................................................................................2-4 Building Fronts and Entrances ........................................................................................................................2-4 2.4 Building Mass .....................................................................................................................................................2-7 2.5 Building Façades ..............................................................................................................................................2-9 General Composition and Rooflines ...............................................................................................................2-9 Windows ...........................................................................................................................................................2-10 Materials and Detailing ..................................................................................................................................2-11 Color ...................................................................................................................................................................2-12 2.6 Outdoor Living Space ......................................................................................................................................2-12 Shared, Private, and Publicly-Accessible Open Space ...........................................................................2-12 2.7 Landscaping, Storm Water, and Green Building ........................................................................................2-14 2.8 Exterior Lighting ...............................................................................................................................................2-18 2.9 Equipment and Service Areas .......................................................................................................................2-19 3 PLACE-BASED GUIDELINES ....................................................................................................................................3-1 3.1 Residential Neighborhoods ..............................................................................................................................3-1 Context Sensitive Design ..................................................................................................................................3-1 Building Scale and Character ..........................................................................................................................3-2 3.2 Mixed-Use Centers ............................................................................................................................................3-4 Context-Sensitive design ..................................................................................................................................3-4 Frontage and Massing ......................................................................................................................................3-5 Commercial-Residential Compatibility ..........................................................................................................3-7 Horizontal Mixed Use ........................................................................................................................................3-7 Multi-Family Residential Design Guidelines ii 3.3 Rural Towns .......................................................................................................................................................3-8 Context-Sensitive Design .................................................................................................................................3-8 4 PARKING, STREETS, AND PATHS ...........................................................................................................................4-1 4.1 Parking and Vehicle Access ............................................................................................................................4-1 4.2 County-Maintained Streets ..............................................................................................................................4-4 4.3 Privately-Maintained Streets ...........................................................................................................................4-5 4.4 Trails, Rear Access and Parking Area Lanes ................................................................................................4-8 5 DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS .....................................................................................................................................5-1 1 INTRODUCTION PURPOSE The Multi-family Residential Design Guidelines provide guidance for achieving high-quality residential design in unincorporated areas of Marin County. The Guidelines are intended to assist project appli- cants during the project design phase and County staff and decision makers in the review and approval process. While conformance with the Marin County Code is required for any project approval, these Guidelines offer additional direction about the County’s expectations and provide clear evaluation criteria that can be used in decision-making. The Guidelines aim to be prescriptive enough to create a framework for design and to carry out the vision in the Countywide Plan and applicable Community Plans, but flexible enough to allow for creativity and innovation in design. Development applications should achieve general consistency with the guidelines in order to be approved. Competing objectives in the Guidelines will need to be balanced in a manner that is true to the fundamental de- sign principles expressed below. FUNDAMENTAL DESIGN PRINCIPLES Marin County goals and policies set the foundation for guidelines in this document. The most relevant goals and policies are synthesized into the following “design principles.” • Sustainability. Encourage development patterns and building methods that make efficient use of land, energy and other resourc- es. Build things that last and adapt to new needs over time, includ- ing changing environmental conditions such as sea level rise • Health and Livability. Promote public health by making walking and biking attractive options and by encouraging community and other outdoor living areas that are appropriate to the place and the people who will use them. Multi-Family Residential Design Guidelines 1-4 • Physical Character. In each community, respect and enhance es- sential design characteristics that make it attractive and livable. Protect Marin’s scenic qualities, especially views of ridgelines, hill- sides, water, and trees. • Housing and Other Human Needs. Provide a mix of housing types to meet the needs of Marin’s workforce and residents, par- ticularly families, seniors, low-wage earners, and disabled people. • Compact Development. Use Marin’s land efficiently by having new construction take a
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Code Compliance Checklist: Deck, Porch, Stairs, Guardrails
    Form #160 Code Compliance Checklist DECKS, PORCHES AND STAIRS Building and Safety Project Information Permit Service Center Project Address: All plans must Permit Number: be submitted in electronic format as an Permit Submittal Requirements unsecured, flattened Schematic Site Plan showing existing building footprint and the location of new/ PDF with embedded reconstructed deck/porch/stair with distances to property lines. The site plan shall also fonts. Minimum 11”x17” contain project information (i.e., project address, owner’s information, scope of work sheet size. statement). This checklist is Framing Plan showing size, spacing and span of floor joists and supporting beams/ intended to provide girders. information and Foundation Plan showing location, size and depth of supporting individual footings/ improve consistency piers. Foundation and framing plans can be combined if clarity is maintained. in local application and enforcement of Construction Sections/Details of footings/piers, framing, connections, floor the California Building transitions, stairs, guardrails and handrails. See Code Requirements below for any Code requirements as additional guidance. they may apply to this Code Requirements project. Pier Size: Piers/footings shall extend a minimum of 12 inches below undisturbed Numbers in parenthesis grade, shall be a minimum of 12 inches in any plan dimension, and shall have #4 bar refer to code sections reinforcing. Piers/footings shall be sized to accommodate tributary point loads and limit of the 2019 edition the soil bearing pressure to 1,500 pounds per square foot. [CRC R507.3.1 and Table of the California R507.3.1] Residential Code Deck Materials: Deck framing (decking, joists, beams and posts) shall be of approved (CRC), California naturally durable or pressure-preservative-treated wood.
    [Show full text]
  • Single Family Residence Design Guidelines
    ADOPTED BY SANTA BARBARA CITY COUNCIL IN 2007 Available at the Community Development Department, 630 Garden Street, Santa Barbara, California, (805) 564-5470 or www.SantaBarbaraCA.gov 2007 CITY COUNCIL, 2007 ARCHITECTURAL BOARD OF REVIEW, 2007 Marty Blum, Mayor Iya Falcone Mark Wienke Randall Mudge Brian Barnwell Grant House Chris Manson-Hing Dawn Sherry Das Williams Roger Horton Jim Blakeley Clay Aurell Helene Schneider Gary Mosel SINGLE FAMILY DESIGN BOARD, 2010 UPDATE PLANNING COMMISSION, 2007 Paul R. Zink Berni Bernstein Charmaine Jacobs Bruce Bartlett Glen Deisler Erin Carroll George C. Myers Addison Thompson William Mahan Denise Woolery John C. Jostes Harwood A. White, Jr. Gary Mosel Stella Larson PROJECT STAFF STEERING COMMITTEE Paul Casey, Community Development Director Allied Neighborhood Association: Bettie Weiss, City Planner Dianne Channing, Chair & Joe Guzzardi Jaime Limón, Design Review Supervising Planner City Council: Helene Schneider & Brian Barnwell Heather Baker, Project Planner Planning Commission: Charmaine Jacobs & Bill Mahan Jason Smart, Planning Technician Architectural Board of Review: Richard Six & Bruce Bartlett Tony Boughman, Planning Technician (2009 Update) Historic Landmarks Commission: Vadim Hsu GRAPHIC DESIGN, PHOTOS & ILLUSTRATIONS HISTORIC LANDMARKS COMMISSION, 2007 Alison Grube & Erin Dixon, Graphic Design William R. La Voie Susette Naylor Paul Poirier & Michael David Architects, Illustrations Louise Boucher H. Alexander Pujo Bill Mahan, Illustrations Steve Hausz Robert Adams Linda Jaquez & Kodiak Greenwood,
    [Show full text]
  • High Performance Retrofit Opportunities of Toronto's 1970S Residential
    HIGH PERFORMANCE RETROFIT OPPORTUNITIES OF TORONTO’S 1970S RESIDENTIAL DETACHED AND SEMI-DETACHED HOUSES By Sharmeen Niger Bachelor of Architecture, Ahsanullah University of Science & Technology, 2006 Master of Planning and Design, University of Melbourne, 2010 A Major Research Project presented to Ryerson University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Building Science in the Program of Building Science Toronto, Ontario, Canada, 2016 © Sharmeen Niger 2016 Author‟s Declaration Page I hereby declare that I am the sole author of this MRP. This is a true copy of the MRP, including any required final revisions. I authorize Ryerson University to lend this MRP to other institutions or individuals for the purpose of scholarly research I further authorize Ryerson University to reproduce this MRP by photocopying or by other means, in total or in part, at the request of other institutions or individuals for the purpose of scholarly research. I understand that my MRP may be made electronically available to the public. ii HIGH PERFORMANCE RETROFIT OPPORTUNITIES OF TORONTO’S 1970S RESIDENTIAL DETACHED AND SEMI-DETACHED HOUSES By Sharmeen Niger Master of Building Science, 2016 Ryerson University Abstract Based on previous studies of Toronto‟s residential archetypes, this research focuses on retrofit opportunities of 1970s OBC (Ontario Building Code) detached and semi-detached houses in order to understand its viability at the micro level. A GIS mapping has been utilized to identify the concentrations of 1970s OBC archetype in old Toronto area. A comprehensive field survey has been performed to collect data for creating a baseline model which also establish a consistent characteristic of 1970s OBC archetype.
    [Show full text]
  • Keys to Independence: Finding Your First Apartment Moving Into Your First Apartment Is a Big Step Premium, Etc
    Keys to Independence: Finding Your First Apartment Moving into your first apartment is a big step premium, etc. on the journey toward achieving true independence. This is an exciting time but Pay attention to what Jonathan, a former one that can also be stressful. Wisconsin youth in care, had to say about the importance of money management. “In my One of the ways to maximize the level of first apartment, I was living paycheck to excitement and minimize the amount of paycheck,” says Jonathan. “I learned that you stress is to prepare for living on your own. have to pay for everything!” Setting up a realistic budget is important to getting what you want. Jonathan makes a great point—living on your own is not easy, nor is it cheap. However, Money Management learning how to manage Before begin looking for your money is a life-long your first apartment, you skill that will go a long should figure out how way toward achieving much rent you can financial independence afford. Review your and financial security. paycheck and estimate what your monthly take Household Expenses home pay will be. Your Once you know what you take home (or “net”) pay want in an apartment, is the money that’s you will need to take into leftover after taxes and consideration what you other deductions are taken out of your check. will be able to afford. You will need to set up a budget to cover all of Setting up a budget is an important first step your monthly expenses. You may be surprised in determining the applicable price range for how much your bills will add up.
    [Show full text]
  • Capstone Project Title
    MASTER of SCIENCE in REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT PARKVIEW VISTAS Christopher Dixon December 15, 2011 Johns Hopkins University Advisor: Coleman Rector Professor: Dr. Michael Anikeeff TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 2 Project Overview Investment Highlights Major Findings Sources and Uses Project Financial Highlights DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM 11 Multi-Family Retail SITE AND PROPERTY DESCRIPTION 14 The Site The Immediate Area Transportation Network and Traffic Site Physical and Zoning Characteristics Apartment Location Analysis MARKET ANALYSIS 35 Multifamily Top Down Analysis Significant Competitors Retail Top Down Analysis New Development Pipeline and Summary DEVELOPMENT ISSUES 79 Parking Construction /Excavation Above Metro Traffic Abutting Residential Political/Legal Environment Macroeconomic Concerns DEVELOPMENT AND CONSTRUCTION COSTS 90 SCHEDULE 93 FINANCIALS 96 Base Case Scenario Best Case Scenario Worst Case Scenario PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN 118 Parkview VistasParkview CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 127 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY view Vistas Park 2 II. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY I. Project Overview MIP Development will develop Parkview Vistas, a 40,000 sf, 5-story mixed use project at 3661 Georgia Avenue in order to meet a clear need for residential housing and retail in the submarket located near the Petworth/Georgia Avenue Metro Station. Our project will stand approximately 70 feet and will contain 4 levels of multifamily, 1 underground parking deck with 20 spaces, and 10,000 sf of first floor retail. The 4 floors of multifamily will include 6 studios, 7 2BR/2BA, and 25 1BR/1BA for a total of 38 units. Metro Investment Properties will make best efforts to lease the entire 10,000 sf retail space to one large “destination” retailer. The underground parking deck will include approximately 20 spaces to accommodate both retail and multi- family use.
    [Show full text]
  • The 50 Most Important Figures of Commercial Real Estate Finance
    APRIL 4, 2018 REAL ESTATE APRIL 2, 2019 REAL ESTATE APRIL 4, 2018 The 50 Most Important Figures REAL ESTATE TheofThe Commercial 50 50 Most Most Important ImportantReal Estate Figures FinanceFigures of Commercialof Commercial RealReal EstateEstate Finance Finance 9 Warren de Haan, 9Boyd10 Fellows, WarrenWarren de de Haan, Haan, ChrisBoyd Tokarski Fellows, and StewBoyd WardFellows, ChrisChris Tokarski Tokarski and and ManagingStew Ward Partners Stew Ward WarrenWarren de de BoydBoyd Fellows atManaging ACORE PartnersCapital HaanHaan Fellows Managingat ACORE PartnersCapital Warren de Boyd Last Year’s Rank: 10 Haan Fellows atLast ACORE Year’s Rank: Capital 9 ByLast The EditorsYear’s Rank: 10 By The Editors e launched the business three years By The Editors “Wt mayago be anda lender-eat-lender had a plan to be world one of out the true leadersthere. Butin the last unregulated year, one of theprivate debt-fund lending I e launched the business three years spaceworld’s in commercial brightest stars real managedestate,” Boyd to put Fellows more ago and had a plan to be one of the “Wsaid.capital “That into was the really market the goal.” than ever before. true leaders in the unregulated private lending GoalACORE accomplished. Capital upped The young its volume private by nearly space in commercial real estate,” Boyd Fellows lender’s15 percent, originations bringing topped $5.7 billion $5 billion in new last debt to Chris said. “That was really the goal.” year,the matching market, compared2016’s figure. with an even $5 billion Tokarski Stew Ward Goalin 2017. accomplished. Not bad for Thea firm young that’s private a month away “In 2016 we got off to the races then in Chris lender’sfrom originationscelebrating just topped its fourth $5 billion anniversary.
    [Show full text]
  • Ortal Horizontal Termination Clearance R1
    O N P L K K R V Electrical V Service E C Q V A F C (See Note 2) V Measure vertical clearances from this surface. J B U.S B V V (3 FT.) V B i D V M V G A V X H or i Measure horizontal clearances from this surface. V = VENT TERMINAL X = AIR SUPPLY INLET = AREA WHERE TERMINAL IS NOT PERMITTED A = 12 inches.................clearances above grade, veranda, J** = 7 ft. ......................... clearance above paved (See Note 1) porch, deck or balcony (See Note 1) sidewalk or a paved driveway B = 12 inches.................clearances to window or door located on public property that may be opened, or to perma- K = 6 inches................. clearance from sides of nently closed window. (Glass) (See Note 5) electrical service C = 24 inches.................vertical clearance to ventilated L = 12 inches................ clearance above electrical soffit located above the terminal (See Note 5) service 18 inches.................vertical clearance to unventilated (12 inches for Flush soffit located above the terminal Covered Alcove Applications Horizontal Power Vent) M*** = 18 inches .............clearance under veranda, porch, 42 inches .................for vinyl clad soffi ts and below deck, balcony or overhang electrical service 42 inches ......... vinyl D = 9 inches..................clearance to outside corner N = 6 inches ........... non-vinyl sidewalls E = 6 inches...................clearance to inside corner 12 inches ......... vinyl sidewalls F = 3 ft. (Canada) ..........not to be installed above a gas O = 18 inches ......... non-vinyl soffi t and overhang meter/regulator assembly within 3 42 inches ......... vinyl soffi t and overhang feet (90 cm) horizontally from the center-line of the regulator P = 8 ft.
    [Show full text]
  • Office Market Assessment Montgomery County, Maryland
    Office Market Assessment Montgomery County, Maryland Prepared for the Montgomery County Planning Department June 18, 2015 Contents Executive Summary..................................................................................................................... iv Regional Office Vacancies (Second Quarter, 2015) ............................................................... iv Findings .................................................................................................................................... v Recommendations .................................................................................................................... v Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 1 Montgomery County’s Challenge ............................................................................................ 1 I. Forces Changing the Office Market ....................................................................................... 3 Types of Office Tenants ........................................................................................................... 3 Regional and County Employment ......................................................................................... 4 Regional Employment Trends ............................................................................................. 4 Montgomery County Employment Trends .......................................................................... 6 Regional
    [Show full text]
  • Residents Fear Being Uprooted by Gentrification in Southeast Raleigh
    Residents fear being uprooted by gentrification in Southeast Raleigh BY JOSH SHAFFER [email protected] 22, 2013 FacebookTwitterGoogle PlusRedditE-mailPrint Ace West, left, and Dre Will foreground play chess Thursday, September 19, 2013 at Washington Terrace apartments in Raleigh. The apartment complex property is currently in foreclosure and for sale. TRAVIS LONG — [email protected] RALEIGH — For $459 a month, Polly Johnson rents a two-bedroom apartment at Washington Terrace – home since a tornado wrecked her house in 2011. She shares the apartment with her 77-year-old husband, Robert, a retired New York policeman who uses a wheelchair. The place isn’t perfect, but it’s an affordable set of roof and walls. On Thursday, Johnson learned that her modest development in Southeast Raleigh – small multi-family homes spread over several blocks – is for sale. It’s described as an ―exclusive listing‖ in a 57-page sales prospectus. So it’s clear to Johnson and her neighbors that someone wants them out, their apartments knocked down and replaced by something more profitable. The potential sale of 245 apartments for lower-income people has reignited long-simmering fears that downtown Raleigh’s rebirth will crowd out poorer neighbors to the south and east, swallowing up blocks suddenly turned valuable. In the prospectus, a real estate firm in Atlanta described Washington Terrace as ―classic redevelopment potential‖ in an area ripe for gentrification. With color photographs and pie charts, the brochure touted Washington Terrace’s proximity to The Hue on the western edge of downtown, where rents run three times higher. It showed pictures of distant Duke University, GlaxoSmithKline and Carter-Finley Stadium filled to capacity – all as amenities new tenants could enjoy.
    [Show full text]
  • Veranda Park Ii Residential
    Staff Report to the M P L 2 0 1 6 - 0 0 0 1 6 Municipal Planning Board I TEM # 11 June 21, 2016 VERANDA PARK II RESIDENTIAL Location Map Subject Site S UMMARY Owner Property Location: 2201, 2175 & 2141 S. Hia- Staff’s Recommendation: Approval of the re- wassee Rd. 6951, 6920, & 6850 Via Lago Ln. quest, subject to the conditions in this report. (south of S. Hiawassee Rd., north of Turkey lake, James Stowers, Esq. west of Lake Debra Dr., and eat of Westpointe Public Comment: Courtesy notices were mailed Geosam Capital US, LP Blvd. and Via Livorno Ave.) Parcel IDs #02-23-28 to property owners within 300 ft. of the subject Owner’s Representative -8214-00-000/ 001/ 020/ 030/ 052 & 02-23-28- property during the week of May 2, 2016. A public 8209-01-001/ 004/ 005) (±10.98 acres, District 6) meeting was held at the Hair in Motion Studio on May 4, 2016. Parking was the primary of concern of Applicant’s Request: Specific Parcel Master the attendees. On May 25, the applicant presented to Applicant Plan request for the residential phase of the Veran- the MetroWest Master Association board meeting. da Park II development, including four multifamily As of the published date of this report, staff received Sam Sebaali, P.E., President residential buildings totaling 642 dwelling units three inquiries from the public. Deffered from May Florida Engineering Group, with parking garages and the construction of Via MPB at the request of the applicant. Inc. Lago Ln. The development will occupy portions of Lots 2 and 3, Lot 5B and Tract A of Veranda Park Third Replat as well as Tract D and E of Veranda Project Planner Park Second Replat.
    [Show full text]
  • Air Change in Low and High-Rise Apartments
    Article Air Change in Low and High-Rise Apartments Yonghang Lai 1, Ian A. Ridley 1 and Peter Brimblecombe 1,2,3,4,* 1 School of Energy and Environment, City University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong; [email protected] (Y.L.); [email protected] (I.A.R.) 2 Department of Marine Environment and Engineering, National Sun Yat-Sen University, Kaohsiung 80424, Taiwan 3 Aerosol Science Research Center, National Sun Yat-Sen University, Kaohsiung 80424, Taiwan 4 School of Environmental Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich NR4 7TJ, UK * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 8 April 2020; Accepted: 8 May 2020; Published: 13 May 2020 Abstract: Air exchange in tall apartment buildings is critical in controlling indoor environments in urban settings. Airtightness is relevant to energy efficiency, thermal comfort and air quality experienced by urban dwellers who spend much of their time indoors. While many air change measurements have been made in residential homes, fewer are available for high-rise apartments. The blower-door and CO2 exchange methods were used to measure air change in some Hong Kong apartment buildings, for comparison with those from other parts of the world. Hong Kong apartments are often small and typical rented apartments show a median of seven air changes per hour under a 50 Pa pressure difference, similar to Mediterranean houses, though much greater than the airtight buildings of Northern Europe. Extrapolation of blower-door measurements made at 50 Pa to the natural pressure difference measured for individual Hong Kong apartments provides an approximation (within 8%) of the natural air change rate measured with a tracer.
    [Show full text]
  • THE DANISH SINGLE FAMILY HOUSE List of Content
    THE DANISH SINGLE FAMILY HOUSE List of content The romantic villa approx. 1860 - 1920 Historicism approx. 1850 - 1930 National romantic 1850 - 1920 Master mason house, approx. 1913 - 1930 Functionalismn The functional villa State loan house The modernist villa, 1950 – 1968 The standard house, approx. 1960 The energy-efficient house 1973 - 1985 The post-modern villa Style history THE DANISH SINGLE FAMILY HOUSE The model for single-family house as we know it today, which is Danish the most preferred way of living, has been developed over the last approximately 100 years The romantic bourgeois villa, approx. 1860 - 1920 At the end of the 1800s it was the wealthy part of the population, who built large residential houses, "bourgeois houses," on large grounds on the edge of or outside the polluted cities. Friboes Hvile 1756-58. Houses plan was most often convoluted to yield Plan and elevation. nooks and niches with space to create, storeroom, etc., but also with large living - and sleeping quarters, as well as toilets and bathrooms. The houses were usually equipped with several bay windows and balconies. The roof structure was pitched roof or mansard roof with dormers and large chimney pots. The houses were clean craftsmanship in the top, but using the best materials that could be provided, Perspective of Friboes Hvile. floors oregion pine etc. Akvarel by Ole Sand Olesen There was also not spared inventory as skirting boards, wall panels, and gerikter, and ceilings were provided with beautiful stucco work. The stairs from the hall was often done with brick steps and railing work with meticulous detail.
    [Show full text]