OpenPublica

Accountability starts with access.

© 2026 · Filed for the public record

Use casesAboutAPIPrivacyTermsLinkedIn
Home/Greenville, North Carolina/Board of Adjustment
OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

Greenville Board of Adjustment Meeting – August 24, 2017

Board of Adjustment — Thursday, August 24, 2017
BodyGreenville, North Carolina
SessionBoard of Adjustment
DateThursday, August 24, 2017
StatusFILED
Video Record
0:00 / 20:44

Original source
Transcript — VerbatimClick a timed line to jump · ⧉ to share it
1:23

Okay.

1:24

We're about to get started here.

1:26

Welcome to the Thursday August 24th, 2017 meeting of the Greenville Board of Adjustment.

1:33

Madam Secretary, would you please call the roll?

1:35

Bill Johnson?

1:36

Here.

1:36

Kevin Faison.

1:37

Here.

1:38

Thomas Taft Jr.

1:39

Rich Winkler.

1:41

Michael Glenn.

1:42

Here.

1:42

Rodney Bullock.

1:43

Here.

1:43

Ann Ballis.

1:45

James Moritz?

1:46

Here.

1:46

Brad Gooth.

1:48

Mr.

1:48

Chairman, all members present tonight are voting members for tonight's meeting.

1:52

Okay.

1:52

Thank you.

1:55

We've got two minutes to approve here.

1:58

Do we have a motion to approve the minutes of the June 22nd meeting?

2:01

So move.

2:02

Section.

2:03

Okay, all in favor?

2:04

Aye.

2:04

Aye.

2:04

All opposed.

2:06

Okay.

2:07

Uh minute approved.

2:08

How about July 27, 2017?

2:11

So moved.

2:12

Second.

2:13

All opposed.

2:15

All in favor?

2:16

Aye.

2:19

Mr.

2:19

Phillips, would you please remind the public of the general procedure and voting requirement, please?

2:24

Mr.

2:24

Chairman, as stated on pages two and three of the meeting handout available to the public, the evidence to be considered by the Board of Adjustment is as follows.

2:32

The Board of Adjustment is a quasi-judicial body that makes a decision concerning an application, petition, or appeal based on the evidence presented by those in favor as well as those in opposition.

2:43

The members of the Board of Adjustment are laypersons, and as such, the rules of evidence that are followed in a court are relaxed for cases heard before this body.

2:51

Though the rules of evidence are relaxed, it does not mean that they are ignored.

2:54

Only evidence that is material, competent, and substantial will be considered and may be used by the board in its decision decision making process.

3:03

The board may not consider, nor is it admissable admissible to present or offer affidavits, letters, or other writings in support of or in opposition to a matter before the board unless the person who prepared the writing is testifying.

3:17

These writings are considered hearsay.

3:20

Statements by a person such as, in my opinion, the application will create a traffic hazard, is not admissible opinion and may not be considered by the board.

3:29

However, such an opinion may be admissible if it is made by an expert or a person who is a qualified is qualified to give opinions concerning traffic hazards is making a presentation to the board concerning his or her investigation and the basis for his or her conclusion in the report.

3:45

A layperson can give an opinion, but he or she must also prevent facts to show how the proposal affects his or her piece of property specifically and not just in a general way.

4:42

An undisclosed ex parte communications with the person before the board, any witnesses, staff, or other board members, decisions on either a request for recusal by a member or objections objections by a person appearing before the board shall be decided by a simple majority vote.

5:00

No board members shall take part in the hearing consideration or determination of any matter in which that board member is involved or has a financial or personal interest.

5:09

Personal interest shall be defined as having a family member involved in the project under consideration.

5:14

A neighborhood association involvement where a board member is on the governing body of such association, or where the board member is involved in a conflict or dispute with the applicant on a matter unrelated to the application.

5:27

If a board member has such a conflict, he shall declare the conflict and request to be excused from voting on the issue.

5:33

A majority vote of the remaining members present shall be required to excuse the member.

5:38

No board members shall vote on any matter deciding in the application or appeal unless he shall have attended the public hearing on that application or appeal.

5:46

No board members shall discuss any case with any parties in interest prior to the public hearing on that case, provided, however, that members may receive and or seek information pertaining to the case from any other members of the board.

6:00

If a board member has had an ex parte communication, that needs to be disclosed at this time.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Zoning And Land Use█████████████████████████████████████████████54%
Procedural█████████████████████████30%
Public Health█████████11%
Alcohol Regulation████5%
Summary of Proceedings

Greenville Board of Adjustment Meeting – August 24, 2017

The Greenville Board of Adjustment met on Thursday, August 24, 2017, at 11:15 AM. All nine voting members were present. The board approved two consent agenda items and heard two public hearings for special use permits, both of which were approved unanimously with staff-recommended conditions.

Consent Calendar

  • Minutes of June 22, 2017 – Motion to approve, seconded, all in favor. Approved.
  • Minutes of July 27, 2017 – Motion to approve, seconded, all in favor. Approved.

Public Comments & Testimony

No public comments were made other than the applicants and their representatives.

Discussion Items

Special Use Permit – 692 Olive Inc. (Wine & Craft Beer Shop)

  • Applicant: Leah Danick, owner of 692 Olive Inc.
  • Location: 692 East Arlington Boulevard (tax parcel 44946), within Arlington Village, zoned CG (General Commercial).
  • Proposal: Operate a wine and craft beer shop; the applicant stated that she intended to add a few bottles of wine and craft beer alongside olive oils and balsamic vinegars, with occasional complimentary tastings, not a private club or wine bar.
  • Staff Report: Presented by Ms. Blunt. The use is permitted under City Code 15-019 (2015). Notices mailed to adjoining owners on August 10, 2017, and published in the Daily Reflector on August 14 and 21, 2017. Staff recommended two conditions: (1) the property shall not operate as a private club; (2) the property shall comply with all North Carolina ABC laws.
  • Board Discussion: No questions or objections. The board accepted the findings of fact and approved the petition with the stated conditions. All in favor.

Special Use Permit – Carolina Scalp Center LLC (Scalp Micropigmentation)

  • Applicant: Mike Green, owner of Carolina Scalp Center.
  • Location: 315 Evans Street (tax parcel 04479), in the Uptown Greenville area, zoned CD (Downtown Commercial).
  • Proposal: Operate a personal services business for scalp micropigmentation (hair tattooing for hair loss). The applicant noted that the health department had already inspected and passed the facility.
  • Staff Report: Presented by Ms. Blunt. The use is not otherwise listed under personal services (Use 15A). Staff recommended three conditions: (1) comply with Section 13A-283 and health department requirements (sanitation, first aid, vaccinations, disposal of needles, etc.); (2) comply with North Carolina General Statutes 13A-283 and 15A NCAC 18A; (3) services limited to scalp micropigmentation – no body art or piercing.
  • Supporting Speaker: Michael Overton, broker for Graham Clark LLC (building owner), expressed support, stating the use is compatible with other tenants in the building.
  • Board Discussion: Questions about licensing and the nature of the procedure. The applicant explained that the training was received in Houston and that the equipment differs from tattoo shops. Staff had no objection. The board accepted the findings of fact and approved the petition with the stated conditions. All in favor.

Key Outcomes

  • Approved (unanimous): Special use permit for 692 Olive Inc. to operate a wine and craft beer shop at 692 East Arlington Boulevard, with two conditions.
  • Approved (unanimous): Special use permit for Carolina Scalp Center LLC to operate a scalp micropigmentation business at 315 Evans Street, with three conditions.
  • The meeting was adjourned after the second item.

Meeting Transcript

Okay. We're about to get started here. Welcome to the Thursday August 24th, 2017 meeting of the Greenville Board of Adjustment. Madam Secretary, would you please call the roll? Bill Johnson? Here. Kevin Faison. Here. Thomas Taft Jr. Rich Winkler. Michael Glenn. Here. Rodney Bullock. Here. Ann Ballis. James Moritz? Here. Brad Gooth. Mr. Chairman, all members present tonight are voting members for tonight's meeting. Okay. Thank you. We've got two minutes to approve here. Do we have a motion to approve the minutes of the June 22nd meeting? So move. Section. Okay, all in favor? Aye. Aye. All opposed. Okay. Uh minute approved. How about July 27, 2017? So moved. Second. All opposed. All in favor? Aye. Mr. Phillips, would you please remind the public of the general procedure and voting requirement, please? Mr. Chairman, as stated on pages two and three of the meeting handout available to the public, the evidence to be considered by the Board of Adjustment is as follows. The Board of Adjustment is a quasi-judicial body that makes a decision concerning an application, petition, or appeal based on the evidence presented by those in favor as well as those in opposition. The members of the Board of Adjustment are laypersons, and as such, the rules of evidence that are followed in a court are relaxed for cases heard before this body. Though the rules of evidence are relaxed, it does not mean that they are ignored. Only evidence that is material, competent, and substantial will be considered and may be used by the board in its decision decision making process. The board may not consider, nor is it admissable admissible to present or offer affidavits, letters, or other writings in support of or in opposition to a matter before the board unless the person who prepared the writing is testifying. These writings are considered hearsay. Statements by a person such as, in my opinion, the application will create a traffic hazard, is not admissible opinion and may not be considered by the board. However, such an opinion may be admissible if it is made by an expert or a person who is a qualified is qualified to give opinions concerning traffic hazards is making a presentation to the board concerning his or her investigation and the basis for his or her conclusion in the report.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com