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 - March 28, 2019

Board of Adjustment — Thursday, March 28, 2019
BodyGreenville, North Carolina
SessionBoard of Adjustment
DateThursday, March 28, 2019
StatusFILED
Video Record
0:00 / 43:58

Original source
Transcript — VerbatimClick a timed line to jump · ⧉ to share it
0:53

Good evening and welcome to the March 28th meeting of the Board of Adjustment.

0:58

This time we'll call it to order.

1:00

Madam Secretary, please call roll.

1:02

Bill Johnson.

1:04

Here.

1:05

Rodney Bullock.

1:06

Here.

1:07

Michael Glenn.

1:08

Here.

1:09

Anne Bellis.

1:11

Hunt McKinnon.

1:13

Dylan Godley.

1:14

Here.

1:15

James Moretz.

1:16

Here.

1:17

Nathan Cohen.

1:18

Here.

1:19

Christopher Lilly.

1:22

Sharon Evans.

1:24

Stephen Atkinson.

1:27

Mr.

1:28

Chairman, the voting members for tonight's meeting are Mr.

1:30

Johnson, Mr.

1:31

Bullock, Miss Bellis, Mr.

1:33

Moretz, Mr.

1:34

Glenn, Mr.

1:35

Cohen, Mr.

1:35

Godley, Mr.

1:37

Atkinson is not a voting member, but is allowed to participate in the discussions and is allowed to ask questions.

1:44

Thank you.

1:46

Okay.

1:47

Do I hear a motion to approve the match to the last meeting?

1:50

So moved.

1:51

There's a second.

1:52

Second.

1:55

Now, Mr.

1:56

Phillips.

1:57

Would you please remind the public of the general procedure and voting requirement?

2:01

Yes, Mr.

2:02

Chairman.

2:03

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.

2:10

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.

2:21

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.

2:30

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

2:34

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

2:42

The board may not consider, nor is it 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 is prepared prepared the writing is testifying.

2:56

These writings are considered hearsay.

2:59

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

3:08

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

3:35

A statement that another person who is not present and not testifying either supports or doesn't support the petitioner or application is hearsay and is not admissible.

3:45

The same rule applies to both the applicant and those in opposition.

3:50

Pursuant to North Carolina General Statute 168-388 and section 4 of the Board of Adjustment's rules of procedure.

3:57

No member of the Board of Adjustment shall participate in either the discussion or vote on any special use permit, variance, or appeal from an administrative officer's decision in any manner that would violate the effective person's constitutional right to a fair and impartial decision maker.

4:12

Prohibited conflicts include but are not limited to a member having a fixed opinion prior to hearing the matter and not willing to consider changing his or her mind, an undisclosed ex parte communication with the person before the board, any witnesses, staff, or other board members.

4:27

Decisions on either a request for recusal by a member or objections by a person appearing before the board shall be decided by a simple majority vote.

4:36

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.

4:45

Personal interest shall be defined as having a family member involved in the project under consideration, a neighborhood association involvement where a board member is on the governing body of such association, or where the or where the board member is involved in a conflict or dispute with an applicant on a matter unrelated to the application.

5:05

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

5:12

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

5:17

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

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Utilities Commission█████████████████████████████████████████████48%
Zoning And Land Use███████████████████20%
Procedural█████████10%
Public Safety████████9%
Public Comment████████8%
Land Use███3%
Environmental Protection██2%
Summary of Proceedings

Greenville Board of Adjustment Meeting - March 28, 2019

The Board of Adjustment met on March 28, 2019, to consider two special use permit requests: a child daycare facility at Christ Church and a public utility peak shaving generator installation by Greenville Utilities Commission. Both applications were approved with conditions.

Consent Calendar

  • The board unanimously approved the minutes from the previous meeting.

Public Comments & Testimony

  • For the first item (child daycare), no members of the public spoke in favor or opposition beyond the applicant and staff.
  • For the second item (GUC generators), Louis Spade, administrator of plant operations at Vidant Medical Center, spoke in favor, stating the hospital supports the project as a way to continue providing healthcare to Eastern Carolina. No opposition was voiced.

Discussion Items

  • Child Daycare at Christ Church (745 Davenport Farm Road): Applicant Poppy Joe Grinder, preschool director, requested a special use permit to operate a less-than-four-hour preschool program (9 a.m. to 12 p.m.) for children ages 2–5, with anticipated fall registration of 40–45 children. Future plans included possible expansion to longer hours, summer programs, and after-school care. Staff recommended two conditions: compliance with city code, state licensing, and NCDHHS regulations; and a parking plan approved prior to operation. The board discussed parking adequacy and the scope of the permit; staff clarified that after-school care qualifies as child care under city code. The board voted to approve with conditions.
  • GUC Peak Shaving Generators on Wellness Drive: Applicant Kyle Brown, professional engineer and electric planning engineer for Greenville Utilities Commission, presented a request for a special use permit to install a 6,000 kW peak shaving and emergency standby generator facility on a 21-acre parcel (tax parcel D 4470). The generators would run on natural gas, operate less than 250 hours per year, and be used to reduce wholesale power costs (estimated $130,000/month savings) and provide emergency backup for Vidant Medical Center, particularly for the emergency department and children's hospital chiller. The site is 150 feet or more from adjoining properties, and staff recommended a condition that the project maintain sound levels per the City of Greenville noise ordinance (75 dBA at property line). GUC provided a sound report from a similar installation showing 71.4 dBA at 25 feet. Board members questioned noise impacts, especially near the hospice and apartments, and maintenance testing; Brown assured compliance and that any testing would be during normal business hours. The board approved the petition with the recommended condition.

Key Outcomes

  • Child Daycare Special Use Permit: Approved unanimously with conditions (motion by [member], seconded). The board accepted the findings of fact and approved the petition.
  • GUC Special Use Permit: Approved unanimously with the condition of maintaining sound levels per city ordinance (motion and second). The board accepted the findings of fact and approved the petition.

Meeting Transcript

Good evening and welcome to the March 28th meeting of the Board of Adjustment. This time we'll call it to order. Madam Secretary, please call roll. Bill Johnson. Here. Rodney Bullock. Here. Michael Glenn. Here. Anne Bellis. Hunt McKinnon. Dylan Godley. Here. James Moretz. Here. Nathan Cohen. Here. Christopher Lilly. Sharon Evans. Stephen Atkinson. Mr. Chairman, the voting members for tonight's meeting are Mr. Johnson, Mr. Bullock, Miss Bellis, Mr. Moretz, Mr. Glenn, Mr. Cohen, Mr. Godley, Mr. Atkinson is not a voting member, but is allowed to participate in the discussions and is allowed to ask questions. Thank you. Okay. Do I hear a motion to approve the match to the last meeting? So moved. There's a second. Second. Now, Mr. Phillips. Would you please remind the public of the general procedure and voting requirement? Yes, 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 making process. The board may not consider, nor is it 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 is prepared 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 an 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 by a person who is qualified to give opinions concerning traffic hazards, is making a presentation to the board concerning his or her investigation and the basis of his or her conclusion in the report. A statement that another person who is not present and not testifying either supports or doesn't support the petitioner or application is hearsay and is not admissible.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com