WASHINGTON HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION  Regular Scheduled Meeting = Minutes Tuesday November 6, 2018 7:00 PM  Members Present  Colleen Knight  Kathleen Couch  Mark Everett (Chairman) William Kenner Rebecca Clark Karen Mann Members Absent Cheri Vaughn Others Present John Rodman, Director Emily Rebert, Historic Planner Jessica Green, Administrative Support  I.  Opening of the meeting  The Chairman called the meeting to order. A moment of silence was taken. A silent roll call was taken by staff.  I. Invocation II. Roll Call IV. Old Business  V. Certificate of Appropriateness  A. Major Works  1. Are request has been made by Mr. Jim Wiley, acting as agent for Beacon Street, for ac Certificate of Appropriateness to construct aj new: single family, one and al half- Jim Wiley came forward and was sworn in. He stated that as they continue through Moss Landing, they try to make each! home very unique to itself. He presented the plans for the proposed home on lot 10. Rebecca Clark stated that she appreciated the fact that they put the stairs going up to the porch on the Academy Street side. She stated that the other two homes that are already there are two story homes and this proposed plan is for a one and al half-story dwelling.  story dwelling on Lot #10 within Moss Landing.  1    She asked how the elevation ont the roof of this home will compare to the others. Mr. Wiley stated that the first-floor height willl be very similar since the garage is located underneath, on the ground floor. He started that the first flooris is to where the existing town homes are. He explained that with a one and a half-story the roof pitch will still sitj pretty close to the two-story dwellings, just where you would normally have ai flat roofthere will be more ofaj pitch. He stated that there would not be a significant difference in the height of this dwelling and the existing two-story dwellings. Kathleen Couch asked ifthe original plots were plated to: face. Academy. Mr. Wiley stated that he believed the original plan proposed town. homes facing Academy Street. Mr. Wiley stated that all the other homes on. Academy Street face Academy sO they wanted tol keep that consistency. Mark Everett talked about the house being a corner lot facing Academy Street with the door facing Water Street. Mr. Everett stated that with the stairs going out to Academy Street there is not actually entry from Water Street. Mr. Wiley stated that they have already had this treatment on Water Street where the steps do not directly go up tot the front door due to the configuration of the house. He stated that they feel walking up the steps on Academy Street and being guided to the door will feel very natural. He stated that they purposely worked on this home design because it has really nice detail down Water Street, so both sides on the home will have a lot ofdetail. He explained that you will see the door from Water Street, candidly he would like to give the future home owner the option to have step off ofb both streets. Mark Everett asked ift they would be averse to putting stairs going down to Water Street as well. Mr. Wiley stated that he is not averse to it, but he would like to. keep that up to the buyer of thel home. The Chairman opened the floor and no came forward to speak for or against the Rebecca Clark stated that she was okay with the plan and design oft the house. Karen Mann stated that since this is a corner. lot it is a little different than other homes they have looked at in the development. She stated that she agreed that the configuration of the door and stairway goes more with the style ofthe home. Rebecca Clark stated that she didn'tthink turning the door would work but felt a secondary stairway would be fine. She stated that all the other houses on  request.  Academy Street have the entrance facing Academy.  2    Kathleen Couch made the following motion: Imove that the Historic Preservation Commission grant a Certificate of Appropriateness tol Mr. Jim Wiley ofE Beacon Street Development to construct ai new single-family dwelling on the property located at Lot #10 Moss Landing. This motion is based on the following findings of fact: the application is congruous with the Historic Preservation Commission Design Guidelines, specifically Chapter 5.0 New Construction Section 5.2 Residential Construction. Her: motion was seconded by Rebecca  Clark. All voted in favor and the motion carried.  2. A1 request has been made by Mr. Jim Wiley, acting as agent for Beacon Street, for ac Certificate of Approprateness to construct aj new: single family, two-story  dwelling on Lot #31 within Moss Landing.  Mr. Wiley came forward and presented the plan for Lot#31.  Colleen Knight made the following motion: Imove that the Historic Preservation Commission grant a Certificate of Appropriateness to Mr. Jim Wiley of] Beacon Street Development to construct aj new single-family dwelling on1 the property located at Lot #31 Moss Landing. This motion is based on1 the: following findings off fact: the application is congruous with the Historic Preservation Commission Design Guidelines, specifically Chapter 5.01 New Construction Section 5.2  Residential Construction.  3. Ai request has been made by Mr. Jim Wiley, acting as agent for Beacon Street, for a Certificate of Appropriateness that states once a Moss Landing plan has been approved by the Historic Preservation Commission, it can be processed as a Minor Works Certificate of Appropriateness should the plan be presented again. This would apply for previous and future Major Work plans that fall outside the Emily Rebert explained that in 20161 the Historic Preservation Commission approved al blanket approval for 8 plans in the Moss Landing development with the understanding there may be some variation between them. She explained that there are some other plans that are coming before the Commission that are outside of those 8 plans. She explained the: request to the Commission. She stated that if aplan is approved by the Commission then all future construction oft that approved plan would be approved as a minor work. Mark Everett stated that they are being asked to expand that subsection of plans in the 2016 blanket approval and allow them tol be approved as ai minor work because it has been previously approved by the Commission as al Major work. Mark Everett asked ifstaffhad enough information to determine which plans would bei included. The Commission discussed the request. William Kenner stated that there may be changes to the design that he would like to look at before they are approved.  2016. Moss Landing blanket approval.  3    Markl Everett stated that with the original blanket approved ift there were changes to the design of one oft the plans it would have to come back to the Commission for review. William Kenner pointed out problems that may come up with adding to the blanket approval and: requiring plans to come before them for review. Mr. Wiley stated that back in 2016 when the blanket approval was done Beacon Street did not specify at that time that the blanket would extend to new approved plans. With that being said they are trying to make differentiations in a way where the homes feel unique. He stated that this would just make the process more efficient for them. Karen Mann again questioned the elevations oft the future homes. Mr. Wiley explained some oft the future plans for Moss Landing and stated that they plan for keep the current. height of the elevations and do not The Chairman opened the floor and no one came forward to speak for or against. Karen Mann made the following motion: Imove that the Historic Preservation Commission grant staffthe ability to approve a Certificate of Appropriateness: to Mr. Jim Wiley of Beacon Street Development to construct new: family dwellings on the property known as. Moss Landing ifit has been previously approved as a major work. This is based on the following findings of fact that the application is congruous with the Historic Preservation Commission Design Guidelines. This is an addition to the previous 8 plans approved in the 2016 blanket approval. Colleen Knight seconded the motion. The motion carried with ai majority vote 4. A1 request has been made by Mr. Sed Naziri for a Certificate of Appropriateness to recreate and paint the brick oft the primary façade of the property located at 157 Mr. Sed Naziri came: forward and was sworn in. He explained that he would like tor recreate what use to be the building façade at 157 West Main Street, the old Belk Building. He stated that through the years there has been a lot of changes to the front façade oft this building and it is currently ai mess. He explained that many of the bricks are damaged and they would like to: recreate the old look oft the façade. William Kenner asked what type of] paint they planned to use. Mr. Naziri stated that the paint would be a water-based paint, sO that the brick can still breath but also be protected. William Kenner asked ifMr. Naziri would be showing staff the type of paint he would use. Mr. Naziri stated that he would. Mark Everett stated that going over the request it looks like Mr. Naziri will not be going back with the original type oft materials, but will be recreating. Mr. Naziri stated that currently the façade is a combination ofcement/concrete blocks and bricks. He explained that 30 to 45% of the bricks are damaged. He stated that they would  plan on going any higher.  with William Kenner voting in opposition.  West Main Street.  4    like to cast inj place with material that is similar to what is there now. He stated that the material is a cement and sand mix, which is pretty much the same mixture as the bricks that are on the façade now. He explained that they will use this mixture to fill in all the cavities and replace the damaged bricks. He stated that they will carve into the material to make it have the look ofbrick. He stated that the facade would have the same look as it did before and thei material will look like brick once they are finished. He stated that this process will take 151 to 20 days and each day the mixture will be a: slightly different color. This is why they are: requesting toj paint the façade after the work is done and give it a unified look. Mark Everett asked ifMr. Naziri considering finding actual brick to match. Mr. stated that he discussed the façade with his experience mason and they decided that casting in place and using the proposed material was the best solution. He stated that he didn'tt think he would be able to find brick to match the existing brick on the building. The Commission asked questions about the existing façade. Mr. Naziri stated that he would discuss the paint material and color with staff. He stated that he would try tol be compatible with the surrounding buildings along Main Street. He explained that they will probably end up having to paint the entire building. He stated that they will come back before the Commission when they are ready for the back and the side oft the building. At this time, they are concentrating on the front façade only. Mr. Rodman explained that the metal plate at the top of the building was put there forsafety due to bricks falling. Mr. Naziri stated that he would like to remove the metal plate and recreate the brick design and look there. He stated that ifthat wasi not possible, they would go back with a strip of concrete. Rebecca Clark stated that he felt what Mr. Naziri is trying to do is good because the building is in suchl back shape, but she was concerned about the amount of changes that are being made to the building. Mr. Naziri stated that in the future he will be removing the cider block, repairing the window frames and putting in windows, but right now they are only discussing thel brick repair. He stated that he will be repairing the keystones on the arches also. Kathleen Couch stated that since the restoration is being done sequentially, what they approve on the front façade will affect and roll into the other sides and may limit what they can approve as they go around the building. She stated that they do not have one cohesive picture oft the building plans. Mr. Naziri gave a brief description the plan for the rear and side oft the building design. Emily Rebert stated that currently the building is not a contributing structure but with correct restoration it has the potential to become one ini the: future. Ms. Rebert also explained what the State Office would require ifhe were to use tax credits and what some of the details on the original façade looked like. Mr. Naziri stated that the façade will look nice and they wouldn't want to do anything that would make it look otherwise. Karen Mann stated that she had hoped that they were only going toj paint the keystones and some of the small details, not the entire façade. She stated that painting the brick is against the design guidelines. Mr. Naziri stated that he is open to suggestions for paint and color oft the paint for the  5    building. Karen Mann stated that by the guidelines the preference is to not paint thel brick. She stated that she wondered what the brick will look like once: it is cleaned up. She stated that since they will be using casting, they could color the material to match the brick. Mr. Naziri stated that they planned toj power wash the brick first, but it will be very difficult to match the casting material with the original brick. Thisi is why hei isi requesting toj paint the entire façade. Kathleen Couch expressed concern that they are approving changes to the building piecemeal and without something showing them what the front of the building will actually look like. She stated that they want to make sure the resolute will have a cohesive look and will be consistent with look oft the downtown. Mr. Naziri stated that his goal is tol bring the building back to its original appearance.  The Chairman opened the floor.  Doris Moate came forward. She stated that they all know that this building is in very bad shape. She stated that she encourages what Mr. Naziri is trying to do. But she is also concerned about the project being done piecemeal. She stated that its seemed to hert that the Commission and the Planning staff needs some kind of vision or something draw out showing the end result once the work has been done. She stated that as a citizen as well she would like to see what he wants to do to the building. She suggested that ift the Commission allows this project asa piecemeal process then every change will bel brought back to the Commission for Meg Howdy came forward and was sworn in. She stated that Mr. Naziri is not currently living in Washington but he is spending a lot oftime coming back and forth working with Emily and keeping her in the loop. She stated that they actually sent this building offto UNCG for plans and this building has had a lot of faces since it was first built. Ms. Howdy stated that unfortunately when it was Belk, they really messed up the front façade. She stated that Mr. Naziri is spending al lot of time and effort into bring up the building. She stated that she understood that the Commission wants to see the entire project and not piecemeal, but he is working closely with Emily as well as John Wood and his team to see what is best for the project. Ms. Howdy stated that they also have tol be reasonable when considering the project, with the amount oft money it takes to There being no others coming forward the floor was close and the request was Colleen Knight stated that she didn't have a problem with considering the request piecemeal. She stated that right now with this request they are only looking at repairing the façade. They are only considering the brick repair and paint. She  consideration.  restore this building. brought back to the table.  6    stated hat the Commission approved paint for the Harbor District Alliance as long as they agreed to work with Emily. She stated that she didn'tseel how repairing the brick and the modeling on the front will affect anything on the side or back of the building. Mark Everett stated that ift they are going to approve one façade, he would love to see ai rendering oft the entire façade including the store front and other details of the Main Street façade. Rebecca Clark stated that Mr. Naziri is only asking to recreate the brick work and the fact that the building is a non- contributing structure she didn'tthink painting it was an issue. She stated that the standard for this building is a little different since itl has been altered some much already. Ms. Clark stated that personally she didn't] have a problem with what Mr. Naziri is requesting and isj just glad that someone is doing something with this building. William Kenner stated that hel had concerns about them pressure washing thel brick and the type of! paint they plan to use. He stated that pressure washing could damage the current brick and some paints may hold in moisture and cause: more damage to the brick. Mr. Kenner stated that he is glad Mr. Naziri Rebecca Clark made the following motion: Imove that the Historic Preservation Commission grant a Certificate of Appropriateness to Mr. Sed Naziri to approximate the appearance ofthe original brick details and paint the masonry on the front façade ofthe property located at 157 West Main Street. This motion is based on the following findings of fact: the application is congruous with the Historic Preservation Commission Design Guidelines, specifically Chapter 3.1 Walls, 3.2 Materials, and 3.7 Storefronts. Ifurther move that the Historic Preservation Commission note that the motion is based on the building not being ac contributing structure. Colleen Knight seconded the motion. Mark Everett noted that the building is ai noncontributing structure and has an extensive amount ofbricks that are damaged. The motion failed with ai tie vote. Colleen Knight, Mark Everett, and Rebecca Clark voted in favor and Kathleen Couch, William Kathleen Couch made ai motion to continue the request to the December: meeting with ai recommendation that Mr. Naziri provide ai rendering ofh his complete plans for the front of the building. William Kenner seconded the motion. The motion carried with a majority vote. Rebecca Clark and Colleen Knight voted in opposition. William Kenner stated that he would also like to see past projects. 5. A request has been made by Ms. Patty Franz: for a Certificate of Appropriateness to elevate the structure and: remove the chimney on1 the property located at 613 Ms. Patty Franz came. forward and was sworn in. She stated that this cottage went through substantial flooding during Florence and the City deemed if8 83% loss.  came to town and took on this project.  Kenner, and Karen Mann voted in opposition.  Old Second Street.  7    She explained that she is trying to go through FEMA to get the ICC: insurance to have the property raised. She stated that she needs the COA in order to get a building permit. Ms. Franz stated that they are looking at raising it4f feet. William Kenner asked if dirt will bel brought in to raise the house. Ms. Franz stated that they would not be bringing in al lot of dirt. She stated that she would like to go with 4-foot piers. She stated that through the flood insurance program onei requirement for her is to be cost effective, SO she believes the piers are the best way to go. Mark Everett asked Emily about other projects they have looked at. Ms. Rebert stated that the project on Short Drive is bringing in fill for their elevation. Kathleen Couch stated that the Short Drive was a much more significate elevation. Ms. Franz stated that the house must be raised above the BFE: in order for FEMA to approve it. William Kenner pointed out that this is the last house on Old Second Street and Ms. Franz has done al lot to save thej property. Karen Mann asked if the chimney on the East side was a functioning chimney. She explained that she has two chimneys and the one on the east side wasi not functioning. She stated that she asked to keep the chimney, but it isi in such bad shape that once the house is raised the whole chimney will come down. She stated that she planned to keep the chimney in the middle of the house. She stated that she plans tol keep the bricks from the chimney on the east side and use them The Chairman opened the floor and no one came forward to speak for or against Emily Rebert stated that pert the State Office ift the house is raised 4ft then it will not longer be a contributing structure. She stated that the State office recommended two feet of fill and 2 ft piers. Kathleen Couch asked ifs staffi had that in writing. Emily Rebert stated that John Wood never got it tol her in an email, but she discussed it with him over the phone yesterday afternoon. Ms. Franz stated that she spoke with John Wood directly before the meeting and he stated that in New Bern they were working on getting special dispensation to: raise the properties but also keep them as contributing structures. John Wood was going to check with someone in Raleigh and she was hoping tol hear from him in the morning. The Commission discussed this information further. Ms. Franz also discussed the cost to raise the house and it would be a financial burden for her to bring in fill/dirt. Ms. Franz stated that this area will flood again and she would fell more comfortable with the 4: ft pilings. She explained that she had 41 ftof water in the house after Florence. Karen Mann stated that perhaps they needed to give Ms. Franz a little more time to meet with staff and consider what the State office is recommending. Kathleen Couch asked ifMs. Franz had an estimate for bringing in fill. Ms. Franz stated that she only had an estimate for the pilings.  for something else on the property.  the request. The Commission discussed the request further.  8    Kathleen Couch made a motion to defer consideration ofthis Certificate of Appropriateness tol Ms. Patti Franz to elevate her dwelling and remove the east side chimney until she has had time to discuss John Wood's recent recommendations regarding 2 ftoff fill and 2-foot piers, which would maintain the historic integrity oft thel house to the December meeting. Karen Mann seconded the motion. It carried with a majority vote. William Kenner and Rebecca Clark 6. Arequest has been made by Mr. Fred Read for a Certificate of Appropriateness to elevate the structure on the property located at 516 East Second Street. Mr. Fred. Read came: forward and was sworn in. He explained that his house also flooded during Florence. William Kenner asked ifthis was a contributing structure. Emily Rebert stated that it was: not. Mr. Read stated that he would need to raise the house 4ft and add the lattice between the piers. The Chairman opened the floor and no one came forward to speak for or against Mark Everett stated that the difference with this house is that iti is a1 non- contributing structure. He asked ift there had been any discussion with. John Wood about this particular property. Emily Rebert stated that because staff did: not receive the elevation certificate until today no recommendation had been made yet. William Kenner asked when the house was built. Mr. Read stated that the original house was builti in 1910 and then rebuilt in 1976. Kathleen Couch asked when the house would become a contributing structure. Emily Rebert stated that itcould potentially in 2026. Kathleen Couch stated that ifthel house is raised and done by a certain standard it could be contributing to the district in the future. Ms. Rebert stated that she would have to talk to the State office and get their recommendation. She stated that if the house is raised too high then they could lose a future contributing structure. Rebecca Clark stated that the Commission cannot base a decision on weather or not the house may or may notl be a future contributing structure. She stated that this building has tol bei raised due to the flooding in that area or it will be destroyed. She stated that she felt like the Commission could not continue to make decisions based on the fact that it could potentially be a contributing structure, but is not currently. Colleen Knight stated that they do not even know for a fact that raising the house would disqualify the house. So, they are going to tell the owner that he can not raise his house based on something that may or may not even happen 8 years from now. Kathleen Couch stated that it is not a question ofr not allowing him to: raise the house, the question iss should the raising oft the house be done in a way that ifi in the future or currently the house is contributing is there al best way to do it. She stated that they cannot make that decision unless they have all the information and she didn'tfell they  voted in opposition.  thei request.  9    had all the information from John Wood ont this particular house. Karen Mann stated that looking at the houses along Jacks Creek that havé just been raised, they are not very attractive. She stated that it is much more appealing to grade the lot a little. She stated that to her it would make more sense for thej property owners to want to grade up the lots before raising the houses. Rebecca Clark stated that she didn't see where this property could be graded. Mr. Read stated that his main concern with grading the property is the cost. He stated that also he can: not put money into repairing the property and not raise it only for it to get flooded again. Rebecca Clark made the following motion: Imove that the Historic Preservation Commission grant a Certificate of Appropriateness to Mr. John Read to elevation the dwelling on the property located at: 516. Bast Second Street. This motion is based on the following findings of fact: the application is congruous with the Historic Preservation Commission Design Guidelines, specifically Chapter 3.2 Materials and 3.3 Foundation. Making note that this is a non-contributing structure. Colleen Knight seconded the motion. The motion failed with a split vote. Rebecca Clark, Colleen Knight, and William Kenner voted for the motion and Kathleen Couch, Mark Everett, and Karen Mann voted in opposition. Kathleen Couch made ai motion to defer consideration oft the COA to Mr. Fred Read to the December meeting. Karen Mann seconded the motion. The motion carried with a majority vote. Rebecca Clark and Colleen Knight voted in 7. AI request has been made by the City of Washington for a Certificate of Appropriateness to replace the top clerestory windows on the property located at Kristi Roberson with the City of Washington came: forward and was swomn in. She stated that the clerestory windows at the Civic Center are in: need of replacement and repair. Ms. Roberson presented the quotes that they received from a: number of contractors. She stated that they are. having some leaking and deteriorating issues with the windows. The Commission discussed the material of the windows. Emily Rebert stated that the Department ofI Interior Standards has been allowing aluminum windows at high elevations of some buildings. William Kenner stated that the City is requesting aluminum windows at 30 feet up. Ms. Roberson discussed the cost difference between the windows they considered. Mark Everett talked the maintenance over time that wooden windows at this location and sO high up could require over the years. The Commission discussed the number of windows that need to bei replace and the materials ofthe  opposition.  108 Gladden Street.  replacement windows.  The Chairman opened the floor and no one came forward.  10    William Kenner made aj motion to continue the request. Kathleen Couch 8. Are request has been made by the Washington Harbor District Alliance fora Certificate of Appropriateness: toi install string lighting throughout four alleyways Meg Howdy came: forward and stated that there are current four alleys downtown that are not well lite. She stated that they would like to make those alleyways safer as well as: make them look nice. She stated that other Main Streets throughout North Carolina have done this and it has been very successful. She stated that this will bring al lot of charm to the downtown as well as bring safe lighted alleyways. Meg Howdy stated that the lights will be up: year-round and showed a picture of the type of commercial grade lights they plan to use. She stated that the lights will bel high enough sO people can not pull them down. She  seconded the motion and all voted in favor.  within the Downtown Harbor District.  also talked about which alleys they planned to do. The Chairman opened the floor and no one came forward.  Rebecca Clark made the following motion: Imove that the Historic Preservation Commission grant a Certificate of Appropriateness to the Washington Harbor District Alliance and the City of Washington to install string lighting throughout four alleyways with in the Downton Harbor District. This motion is based on the following findings of fact: the application is congruous with the Historic Preservation Commission Design Guidelines, specifically Chapter 4.2Lighting. Colleen Knight seconded the motion and all voted in: favor.  B. Minor Works  1. A request has been made and approved by staff for a Certificate of Appropriateness for the owner of 405 East Second Street to replace the existing retaining wall along the driveway using like materials on the property. 2. A request has been made and approved by staff for a Certificate of Appropriateness: for the owner of 216 Stewart Parkway to replace the existing 3. A request has been made and approved by staff for a Certificate of Appropriateness: for the owner of524 West) Main Street to maintenance the existing  ductwork in the same location on the property.  items on1 the property: a. Trimming existing trees b. Re-installing the wooden shutters d. Repair existing sills using like materials  Reinstall wood siding where cement board siding was inappropriatelyplaced Replace existing siding, fascia, soffit boards, and eaves using like materials  11    4. A request has been made and approved by staff for a Certificate of Appropriateness for the owner of117 South Harvey Street to replace the existing 5. A request has been made and approved by staff for a Certificate of Appropriateness for the owner of507 East Main Street to replace the existing A/C 6.A request has been made and approved by staff for a Certificate of Appropriateness: for the owner of617 Bast Main Street to maintenance the existing  A/C unit in the: same. location on the property. unit: in the same location on the property.  items on the property: a. Roofing materials b. Repair porch using like materials C. Reconstruct previously removed columns  d. Replace the front that is an interior door with the original, exterior door. 7. A request has been made and approved by staff for a Certificate of Appropriateness for the owner of 405 North Market street to install a mini split 8. A request has been made and approved by staff for a Certificate of Appropriateness: for the owner of118 Charlotte Street to replace the existing porch 9. A request has been made and approved by staff for a Certificate of Appropriateness for the owner of 102 Stewart Parkway to replace the existing 10.A request has been made and approved by staff for a Certificate of Appropriateness for the owner of184 West Main Street toi replace the existing sign 11.A request has been made and approved by staff for a Certificate of Appropriateness: for the owner of 216 Stewart Parkway to replace the existing 12.A request has been made and approved by staff for a Certificate of Appropriateness for the owner of 405 North Market Street to install a mini split 13.A request has been made and approved by staff for a Certificate of Appropriateness for the owner of748 West Second Street to install a gas pack and 14.A request has been made and approved by staff for a Certificate of Appropriateness for the owner of748 West Second Street to install a gas pack and 15.A request has been made and approved by staff for a Certificate of Appropriateness for the owner of225 West Main Street to replace the split system 16.A request has been made and approved by staff for a Certificate of Appropriateness for the owner of219 East Third Street (Pamlico Rose Institute) to Rebecca Clark made a motion to approve all the minor works. William Kenner  system in the back yard oft the property.  floor boards using like materials on the property. ductwork in the same location on the property.  using like materials in the same location on the property. ductwork in the same location on the property. system in the rear elevation oft the property.  mini split system in the rear elevation of the property. mini split system in the rear elevation oft the property.  int the rear elevation oft the property.  install three (3) arbors in the Healing Garden oft the property.  seconded the motion and all voted in favor.  12    VI. Other Business 1. Treel Policy  Emily Rebert came forward and gave an update on what was discussed at the Tree Committee meeting and presented aj pamphlet that they designed.  2. 411 and 415 West Second Street Update  Emily Rebert stated that the Council voted to support working with Preservation North Carolina. She stated that the contents of411 West Second Street willl be sold  on Gov Deals.  VII. Approval of Minutes - October 2, 2018 Kathleen Couch and all voted in favor.  William Kenner made a motion to approve the: minutes. His motion was seconded by  VII. Adjourn  There being no other business Rebecca Clark made a motion to adjourn. The motion  was seconded by Kathleen Couch.  13