HomeMy Public PortalAbout07-05-2017 Minutes HDC Regular MeetingPage 1 of 10
Draft Minutes
Historic District Commission
7 p.m. July 5, 2017
Town Barn, 101 E. Orange St.
Present: Chairman Reid Highley, Vice Chairman Brad Farlow, Joe Griffin, Jill Heilman, Laura Simmons,
Virginia Smith and Cheri Szcodronski
Staff: Planner Justin Snyder
Guests: Tony Dowling, Francisco Plaza and Anna Soloway
Item 1: Call to order, roll call, and confirmation of quorum
Chairman Highley called the meeting to order. Mr. Snyder called the roll and confirmed the presence of a
quorum.
Item 2: Reading of the commission’s mission statement
Chairman Highley read the commission’s mission statement.
Item 3: Adjustments to the agenda
Mr. Snyder added a discussion and vote on forming subcommittees, which would be Item 8.
Item 4: Approval of minutes from the June 7, 2017, meeting
Ms. Smith said on Page 5 in the second to the last paragraph, she was referring to the Sylvestre driveway
rather than the Ballard driveway. On Page 9, in the first full paragraph, change muttons to muntins. On
the bottom of Page 11, she asked whether the roof pitch is expressed correctly. The commission said
roof pitches should be expressed with a colon rather than as a fraction and noted that change. Also, on
the last page, under the first bullet point, Ms. Smith added “s” to board. Under the last bullet, the
commission wished to add “Certificate of Appropriateness” before “applications.” Also, Ms. Heilman
asked to add the word “proposed” to that bullet point, and Mr. Snyder said he understood what she
wished to express and would work on the wording.
Motion: Ms. Smith moved to approve the June 7, 2017, meeting minutes with the changes noted
above.
Second: Ms. Heilman seconded.
Vote: 7-0
Changes: See above.
Item 5: After-the-fact application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for Tony Dowling to construct a
3-foot-tall, 70-foot-long stacked fieldstone wall and graveled on-street parking area along and
within the East Queen Street right-of-way and an application to screen in an existing covered
porch on the east elevation at 103 E. Queen St. (9874-07-6697).
Motion: Ms. Simmons moved to open the public hearing.
Second: Vice Chairman Farlow seconded.
Vote: 7-0
Page 2 of 10
Chairman Highley asked whether anyone on the commission had a conflict of interest. No one did.
Tony Dowling was sworn in.
Mr. Snyder stated that this application is regarding 103 E. Queen St. and that a mixture of structures
which contribute and do not contribute to the character of the Historic District is in the vicinity.
Architecture: This rambling late 18th-century house faces East Queen Street with an ornate c. 1840
Italianate-style addition facing North Churton Street. The earlier two-story structure is two bays wide and
single-pile with a massive stone chimney with brick stack in the east gable end. The building has plain
weatherboards with flush sheathing under the hip-roofed porch, which is supported by octagonal porch posts
with a geometric railing between the posts. It has two-over-two wood-sash windows on the first floor and
six-over-six windows at the second-floor level. The four-panel door retains original hardware and six-light-
over-one-panel sidelights. In the late 19th century, a two-story, side-gabled triple-A-roofed wing was added
to the left (west) elevation of the original house, perpendicular to the original house and facing North
Churton Street. This section of the house is five bays wide and single-pile with weatherboards, two interior
corbelled brick chimneys, and four-over-four wood-sash windows with wide segmental-arched Italianate
surrounds. The decorative center-bay entrance has double-leaf arched one-light-over-one-panel doors within
a round-headed decorative surround similar to those found at the Parks-Richmond House on West King
Street. The entrance is sheltered by a single-bay, hip-roofed porch supported by square columns with a wood
railing at the roofline and a double-leafed arched door at the second-floor level that opens to the porch roof.
There are paired brackets along the roofline and two one-over-one windows with pointed-arch upper sashes
in each gable. There is a two-story, hip-roofed porch at the northeast within the ell created by the two wings.
The metal-roofed porch has been enclosed at the second-floor level with weatherboards and nine-over-nine
windows. The first-floor porch is supported by square columns.
Staff report: This was an after-the-fact application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to build an
approximately 3-foot-high and 70-foot-long stacked fieldstone wall and graveled on-street parking area along
and within the 103 E. Queen St. right-of-way. Because the work was done without prior permitting and
without permission of the Hillsborough Board of Commissioners, staff notified the owner of the correct
channels to go through for the work to potentially be approved. In addition to the application for the
Certificate of Appropriateness for the wall and gravel parking area, the applicant would need an
encroachment agreement from the Board of Commissioners because both the wall and parking area appear
to be located within the town’s right-of-way. Because on-street parking pad areas are prohibited without
prior approval from the town board, the Board of Commissioners would also have to decide if the parking
pad may remain. If either the Historic District Commission or the Board of Commissioners disapproves the
request, the applicant would have to restore the area to pre-construction condition.
The proposed wall is a stacked fieldstone wall that matches the type of wall that already was on the property.
It is located along a sloped bank and was designed to make the area easier for the applicant to maintain and
more aesthetically appealing to him. The stone used in the wall was salvaged from the 1840 section of the
home as well as from rock dug from under the house when the crawl space was deepened. It was
supplemented by Scott Stone sourced from Western North Carolina and Tennessee. The intent is to plant
some boxwoods, azaleas and possibly other small shrubs or grasses behind the new wall to enhance the
streetscape. Finally, the applicant has amended his original application to include screening in of an existing
covered porch on the east elevation of the house. The work would involve adding a 2-foot exterior shiplap,
wood-sided wall at the base of the porch. A south-facing wood-framed door would also be added from the
vestibule to the screen porch in addition to a double-screened door to be installed as an exit to the screened
porch.
The agenda packet included notification information, vicinity map, narrative, materials list and photos.
Page 3 of 10
The applicable design guidelines included Fences and Walls; Public Rights-of-Way; Site Features and
Plantings; Porches, Entrances, and Balconies; Walkways; Driveways and Off-Street Parking.
Mr. Dowling added that the wall is 57 feet long. The 70-foot measurement included the walkway in the
middle that was already there. The new wall is 22 feet long on the western side of the existing walkway
and 35 feet on the eastern side of the existing walkway. Mr. Dowling said his landscapers were back, so
he decided to improve the bank so that he could plant without the dirt and mulch washing away. Also,
he decided to have gravel put down along East Queen Street. His property is across from Dickerson
Chapel, and six cars are typically parked in front of his house on Sunday mornings, Wednesday evenings
and at other times for the church. He doesn’t mind, he added. Mr. Dowling said that like it or not, it’s a
parking area. He said he would go before the Board of Commissioners in August to seek permission for
the gravel parking pad. Mr. Dowling said that regarding encroachment into the town’s right-of-way, his
existing walkway extends 8 feet farther out and it didn’t occur to him that building a wall behind that
would be an issue. He has spoken with Public Works Director Ken Hines regarding the encroachment
issue.
Chairman Highley asked whether anyone was in the audience to speak for or against the application.
There was no one.
Chairman Highley suggested the board discuss one element of the application at a time, starting with
the screened porch. Mr. Dowling said he would like to build a short wall to create some sense of privacy.
He thought it was logical to match the shiplap siding on the house behind it.
Ms. Heilman asked what the shiplap wall would be resting on. Mr. Dowling answered it would rest on
top of the fieldstone. Ms. Heilman asked what material would constitute the 18 inches around the top of
the screened porch. Mr. Dowling answered he would use 2-inch by 6-inch lumber to frame the porch
around the top and continue up with screen. Ms. Heilman asked what the residual effect on the
structure would be if the porch was to be removed at some point. Mr. Dowling answered that one
would have to be careful where it joined the roof and columns. It would hopefully just be a matter of
repairing those. Vice Chairman Farlow asked whether any vertical supports would be needed. Mr.
Dowling answered no because of the columns. There was consensus from the commission that the
screened porch was appropriate.
Regarding the fieldstone wall, Ms. Simmons asked why it jogs in. Mr. Dowling answered there is a big
rock to avoid and an existing terracotta drainage pipe that he wanted to leave exposed because it
handles the drainage from his house. Vice Chairman Farlow asked whether the drainage pipe under the
walkway was existing. Mr. Dowling answered it was. He added that the town expressed concern that
the gravel might move into the drainage area, but that it did not even with recent heavy rain.
Ms. Simmons said she had concerns about the color of the stone being so new and bright, but she
realizes the church across the street has the same bright gravel. Ms. Heilman pointed out there are
several houses on that block with gravel parking pads. Ms. Smith said she counted five on the south side
of the street. Mr. Dowling said there was pea gravel already laid down by a previous owner before he
placed the gravel. Ms. Smith said she thinks one reason the town is not keen on this type of parking is
that so much grass and weeds grow through the gravel. It’s a maintenance issue. Also, Ms. Smith said
there is an issue with gravel getting into the street. Ms. Smith said that the design guidelines on Page 48,
Number 7 states that it is not appropriate to locate new parking in locations visible from the street. This
is visible from North Churton and East Queen streets, she said. She added acknowledgment that Mr.
Page 4 of 10
Dowling said it was not new off-street parking. She urged him to consider constructing the parking with
the brick pavers that a neighbor on the street has, although she conceded that would be a lot of brick.
Mr. Dowling said when gravel washes into the street, it’s likely from his driveway and not this parking
area. Ms. Smith said gravel in the street is coming more from use than from rain.
Chairman Highley asked Mr. Snyder to explain the process. Mr. Snyder said the Historic District
Commission is considering whether to grant permission aesthetically for the parking pad to remain. The
Board of Commissioners would consider permission for the physical encroachment parking pad from a
code perspective.
Mr. Snyder explained that if either entity acting independently of one another were to disapprove the
parking pad, it would have to be removed. Mr. Snyder said the Historic District Commission has to
determine whether it detracts from the character of the house, streetscape, or district. Chairman
Highley said there is a statement that parking pads detract from the character of a neighborhood in the
town ordinance.
The board held further discussion on the parking pad. Ms. Szcodronski said “constructed” implies that
improvements were added; it could be materials or boundaries were added. Ms. Heilman said she is not
sure that placing gravel on dirt is constructing a parking pad. Chairman Highley asked for other opinions
because Ms. Heilman has made the point that parking on the street happens here in Hillsborough. “At
what point do you go from defining a parking pad to constructing it?” he asked. “And there’s wording in
the design guidelines that pushes back against the idea of parking that is visible from the street,” he
added.
Mr. Dowling said if he had grass growing there, he wouldn’t have done anything. Because it was gravel
and dirt and had been clearly used as a parking space, in reality it is a parking space. Vice Chairman
Farlow said Section 6-29(c) in the town Code of Ordinances adopted in 2015 states that any existing
parking pad that was there before the ordinance may remain. It could be argued that this was already
there and that Mr. Dowling simply improved it. Ms. Heilman said in context of this streetscape, it is
almost universally gravel all the way down the south side of the street.
Chairman Highley said the bigger question is whether this parking arrangement detracts from the
character of the district. Mr. Snyder said the commission is only tasked with considering this particular
parking pad. Ms. Smith asked if it matters that this house is the most historically significant on the street
regarding architectural history and town history. Chairman Highley said he didn’t think that could be
applied as a mechanism to decide whether it could be approved. Ms. Szcodronski said the parking pad
detracts from the streetscape. It is not typical in historic landscapes. She thought the wall is beautiful
and likes it. She is sorry that it’s an after-the-fact application. She thinks the screened porch is fine, too.
But she thinks the streetscape is so noticeable. Because houses tend to be hidden behind trees, the
streetscape is especially important in our district, she said. Ms. Simmons expressed concern about the
gravel.
Ms. Heilman said she was fine with the gravel because there are historical homes on this street with
gravel in front so she doesn’t think it changes the context.
Ms. Smith said she is hesitant in speaking against the gravel because there is a lot of gravel on this
street. She has concerns about how it would look in 5 or 10 years. She said she is against it because it
does not match the guidelines and it detracts from the view of North Churton and East Queen streets.
Mr. Griffin and Vice Chairman Farlow said they did not have trouble with the gravel at this location.
Page 5 of 10
Chairman Highley said because there was some form of parking there in the past, he thinks
grandfathering should be allowed, with recognition that there is a pattern of use for parking in that part
of the Historic District. He said right now the gravel sticks out and is bright but in six months it will tone
down.
Ms. Heilman asked that if the commission moves forward with a motion and finding of fact, would there
be a way to structure the motion and finding of fact so that the concerns are isolated to the gravel and
not have the vote appear to reflect the entire project.
Chairman Highley said that for the record it should be noted that the gravel was approved because this
area has historically been used for parking and there are other examples of gravel parking areas along
this street. This would make the approval specific to this property, he said.
Ms. Simmons recommended Mr. Dowling lay gravel that is the same color as the wall and that is bigger
so that it doesn’t drag into the street. Chairman Highley said the commission needs to talk about the
gravel that is there.
When asked how to note that any disagreement regarding this application was regarding the gravel
parking area and not the screened porch and the fieldstone wall, Mr. Snyder said the minutes are the
official record and will reflect everyone’s concerns.
Vice Chairman Farlow said it was good stewardship to put gravel in this location because it is not just for
personal use but for use of the public because there is a church across the street and, therefore, some
of the church’s attendees park in front of Mr. Dowling’s house in this location. It is a heavily used
parking area at least twice a week and for weddings and funerals. Chairman Highley took a tally at the
meeting and noted those in favor of the gravel parking area were Vice Chairman Farlow, Mr. Griffin, Ms.
Heilman and himself. Those who were not in favor of the gravel parking area were Ms. Simmons, Ms.
Smith and Ms. Szcodronski. It was noted that Ms. Simmons’s reasoning was the color of the gravel and
that it detracts from the district. Ms. Smith’s reasoning was that it was inconsistent with the design
guidelines for off-street parking, and Ms. Szcodronski’s reasoning was that the gravel parking area
detracted from a historic streetscape.
Motion: Ms. Heilman moved to close the public hearing.
Second: Ms. Simmons seconded.
Vote: 7-0
Motion: Vice Chairman Farlow moved to find as fact that the Tony Dowling application is in
keeping with the overall character of the Historic District and complies with all relevant
standards of evaluation based on the commission’s discussion of the application and the
standards of evaluation in Section 3.12.3 of the Unified Development Ordinance
because the plans are consistent with the Historic District Design Guidelines Fences and
Walls; Public Rights-of-Way; Site Features and Plantings; Porches, Entrances, and
Balconies; Walkways; Driveways and Off-Street Parking.
Second: Mr. Griffin seconded.
Vote: 7-0
Motion: Vice Chairman Farlow moved to approve the application as submitted.
Second: Ms. Heilman seconded.
Vote: 7-0
Page 6 of 10
Conditions: None
Item 6: Application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for Ame Zimmerman to construct a 19-foot-4-inch-by-6-
foot, pressure-treated wood porch addition to an existing shed in the rear yard of 140 E. Tryon St.
(9874-16-0726).
Motion: Ms. Simmons moved to open the public hearing.
Second: Vice Chairman Farlow seconded.
Vote: 7-0
Chairman Highley asked whether there were any conflicts of interest regarding this application. There
was none.
Francisco Plaza was sworn in.
Mr. Snyder stated that this application is regarding 140 E. Tryon St. and that a mixture of contributing
and noncontributing structures is in the vicinity.
Architecture: Identical in form to the neighboring house at 134 E. Tryon St., this one-story, gable-and-
wing, Queen Anne-style house is three bays wide and single-pile with a gable on the left (east) end of
the façade and a projecting, front-gabled wing on the right end of the façade. The house has plain
weatherboards, notched weatherboards and arched vents in the front gables, an interior brick chimney,
and two-over-two wood-sash windows throughout. The six-panel door is sheltered by a hip-roofed
porch that wraps around the left elevation and is supported by tapered wood posts on brick piers. The
front-gabled wing features a canted bay on the façade. There is a gabled ell at the left rear (southeast), a
shed-roofed addition at the right rear (southwest) and an attached, side-gabled wing at the far rear. The
house is not on the 1905 Sanborn map, but it is present on the 1911 Sanborn map.
Staff report: The applicant proposed to construct a 19-foot-4-inch-by-6-foot, pressure-treated wood
porch addition to an existing shed in the rear yard of 140 E. Tryon St. The shed to which this addition
would be added is a noncontributing structure. It would have a 3:12 pitch instead of matching the
existing 5:12 pitch on the shed roof to allow adequate headroom under the double 2-inch-by-8-inch
beam supporting the roof. The materials of the roof are to be asphalt shingles to match those on the
existing shed, and the wood on the addition would be unpainted, with the exception of the fascia, which
would be painted to match the existing fascia on the shed.
The agenda packet included notification information, vicinity map, narrative and materials list,
elevations, aerial photo and shed photos.
The applicable design guidelines included Outbuildings and Garages; Wood; Roofs; Porches, Entrances
and Balconies.
Chairman Highley asked whether anyone was there to speak for or against the application. There was no
one.
Mr. Plaza answered questions from the commission. Ms. Szcodronski said there is in an entry in the
inventory that the shed was built in the 1950s, but Mr. Snyder has a building permit in the file from
2010, so she would like an explanation. Mr. Plaza said he cannot say what happened to the old shed
except to say that it’s not there anymore. Ms. Szcodronski said when the inventory was done in 2013, if
Page 7 of 10
no one was home, the person doing the inventory made a best guess. Mr. Snyder added that the new
shed was made to look old, and likely it was simply a mistake.
The commission did not have any further questions or comments about the proposed project.
Motion: Ms. Heilman moved to close the public hearing.
Second: Ms. Simmons seconded.
Vote: 7-0
Motion: Ms. Heilman moved to find as fact the Zimmerman application is in keeping with the
overall character of the Historic District and complies with all relevant standards of
evaluation based on the commission’s discussion of the application and the standards of
evaluation in Section 3.12.3 of the Unified Development Ordinance because the plans
are consistent with the Historic District Design Guidelines: Outbuildings and Garages;
Wood; Roofs; Porches, Entrances and Balconies.
Second: Vice Chairman Farlow seconded.
Vote: 7-0
Motion: Ms. Heilman moved to approve the application as submitted.
Second: Ms. Simmons seconded.
Vote: 7-0
Conditions: None
Item 7: Application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for Anna Soloway to construct a stepstone pathway and
natural stone bridge in the front yard and within the right-of-way at 508 N. Wake St. (9864-98-7855).
Motion: Ms. Heilman moved to open the public hearing.
Second: Ms. Simmons seconded.
Vote: 7-0
Chairman Highley asked whether anyone on the commission had a conflict of interest regarding this
application. No one did.
Anna Soloway was sworn in.
Mr. Snyder stated that this application was regarding 508 N. Wake St. There is a mixture of contributing
and non-contributing structures and vacant lots in the vicinity.
Architecture: This home is a contemporary two-story structure with a walk-out basement. It was built
in 2015.
Staff report: This is an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for Anna Soloway to construct a
stepstone pathway and natural stone bridge in the front yard and within the right-of-way at 508 N.
Wake St. The pathway would run from the front steps of the home to the ditch, where it would then
extend to a large single stone to bridge the ditch and allow easier access to the mailbox. The pathway
and bridge would encroach into the public right-of-way. As such, they would need approval of an
encroachment agreement by the Board of Commissioners. Any approvals by the Historic District
Commission for work to be performed within the right-of-way would be subject to approval by the
Board of Commissioners of the encroachment. Public Works staff did not have any issues with the
Page 8 of 10
applicant’s proposal and have noted that this item will go forward on the consent agenda of the Board
of Commissioners in August, making approval of the encroachment an eventuality.
The agenda packet included notification information, vicinity map, narrative, site plan and photos.
The applicable design guidelines included Walkways, Driveways, and Off-Street Parking; and Public
Right-of-Way.
Chairman Highley asked whether anyone was present to speak for or against the application. There was
no one.
When asked by Ms. Smith about whether the HDC has authority over projects in the public rights-of-
way, Mr. Snyder clarified that the commission has aesthetic approval of the project similar to any other
streetscape project in Town.
Ms. Soloway shared a photograph of the work of the stonemason she has hired for the project.
Motion: Ms. Simmons moved to close the public hearing.
Second: Ms. Szcodronski seconded.
Vote: 7-0
Motion: Ms. Heilman moved to find as fact that the Anna Soloway application is in keeping with
the overall character of the Historic District and complies with all relevant standards of
evaluation based on the commission’s discussion of the application and the standards of
evaluation in Section 3.12.3 of the Unified Development Ordinance because the plans
are consistent with the Historic District Design Guidelines: Walkways, Driveways, and
Off-Street Parking; and Public Right-of-Way.
Second: Vice Chairman Farlow seconded.
Vote: 7-0
Motion: Ms. Heilman moved to approve the application as submitted.
Second: Ms. Simmons seconded.
Vote: 7-0
Conditions: None
Item 8: Added item — Subcommittees
Mr. Snyder said this commission needed to form a subcommittee focused on communications and one
focused on outreach. Three members for each subcommittee would be preferable. Each subcommittee
would have a chair and possibly a secretary and would report to the commission monthly. The
communications subcommittee would take a more holistic approach to education about preservation
and would look at the commission’s role in the community. It would look at working on video logs,
newsletters, news articles and possibly holding Certified Local Government training sessions. Any
materials would be submitted to Mr. Snyder for accuracy and then to Public Information Officer
Catherine Wright for public dissemination.
The outreach subcommittee would take a more individualized approach and might knock on doors,
make phone calls, and introduce themselves to new people in town. This subcommittee might create a
folder of information to pass out to citizens, realtors, and other interested parties about the work of the
commission.
Page 9 of 10
Mr. Snyder suggested Ms. Szcodronski, Ms. Heilman and Vice Chairman Farlow should serve on the
communications subcommittee and Ms. Simmons, Ms. Smith and Mr. Griffin should serve on the
outreach subcommittee.
Each subcommittee could create its own mission statements.
Motion: Chairman Highley moved to establish a communications subcommittee and an outreach
subcommittee.
Second: Ms. Simmons seconded.
Vote: 7-0
Chairman Highley asked for volunteer chairs for each subcommittee and noted that Ms. Szcodronski
would serve as chairwoman of the communications subcommittee and Ms. Simmons would serve as
chairwoman of the outreach subcommittee.
Item 9: Updates
• Alliance for Historic Hillsborough: Virginia Smith — Ms. Smith reported the alliance held an Independence
Day party on July 2, in partnership with Music Makers Foundation, and had a community reading of the
Declaration of Independence. There were a lot of food trucks. She didn’t have a report on the estimate of
attendees, but the crowd looked to be a good size to her.
• Historic Properties Book Committee: Virginia Smith — The committee had not met again, so she had no
report.
• Education, outreach and communications: Jill Heilman — Ms. Heilman reported that she had not heard
further from Public Information Officer Catherine Wright, but she assumed there would be something in the
next quarterly newsletter. Mr. Snyder reported the July newsletter did not have a lot of space for a
preservation article.
Ms. Heilman said at a previous meeting this commission had talked about placing examples of quality
applications on the town website. She and Mr. Snyder had identified five or six that were recent enough to
digitize. There was one regarding a fence on North Nash Street that Ms. Heilman thought was good because
the applicant articulated in the narrative the need for the fence. They also chose an application for an
outbuilding that was full and complete, and the commission didn’t have a lot of questions because the
narrative fully explained the work. There was some discussion that this shed application was after-the-fact.
Another example application was regarding a renovation on East Tryon Street. Ms. Heilman said two
applications were prepared by homeowners and one was prepared by a professional. There was agreement
to place examples of a complete application for a fence, an outbuilding and a renovation on the town
website. Mr. Snyder suggested the subcommittee could look at how the examples should be structured on
the website. Ms. Heilman suggested asking the homeowners, as a courtesy, whether they minded their
applications appearing online in an anonymous way. Mr. Snyder suggested that any personally identifying
information could be redacted from their applications, but that the information is part of the public record
once submitted to the Town for review.
• Staff updates: Justin Snyder — Mr. Snyder reported the Churton Street access improvements are moving
forward, and he encouraged people to patronize businesses downtown, especially those with construction in
front of them.
Mr. Snyder also reported he had attended a Certified Local Government conference in Raleigh and presented
on demolition by neglect. There is a Certified Local Government training opportunity Aug. 16 in Sanford and
another training opportunity in September in Charlotte held by Preservation NC. Mr. Snyder said he needed
two members to attend a training. Ms. Smith expressed interest in attending the Preservation NC training.
Page 10 of 10
Ms. Heilman expressed interest in both upcoming training opportunities and asked Mr. Snyder to send her
agendas.
Mr. Snyder said whether a structure is contributing or non-contributing no longer matters when determining
findings of fact so he has removed it from the Certificate of Appropriateness application.
Item 10: Adjourn
Motion: Ms. Heilman moved to adjourn at 8:41 p.m.
Second: Vice Chairman Farlow seconded.
Vote: 7-0