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

Mabel Board of Adjustment Meeting – January 23, 2020: Three Special Use Permits Approved

Board of Adjustment — Thursday, January 23, 2020
BodyGreenville, North Carolina
SessionBoard of Adjustment
DateThursday, January 23, 2020
StatusFILED
Video Record
0:00 / 31:04

Original source
Transcript — VerbatimClick a timed line to jump · ⧉ to share it
0:51

Good evening and welcome to the January 23rd meeting of the Mabel Board of Adjustment.

0:56

This time we'll call the meeting to order.

0:58

Madam Secretary, could you please call a roll?

1:02

Bill Johnson?

1:03

Here.

1:04

Rodney Bullock?

1:05

Here.

1:05

Michael Glenn.

1:07

Here.

1:07

Ann Bellis.

1:08

Here.

1:09

Hunt McKinnon.

1:10

Here.

1:10

Dylan Godley.

1:11

Here.

1:12

James Moretz.

1:14

Nathan Cohen?

1:15

Here.

1:16

Christopher Lilly?

1:17

Here.

1:18

Sharon Evans.

1:19

Here.

1:19

Stephen Atkinson.

1:23

Good evening, Mr.

1:23

Chairman.

1:24

The voting members for tonight's meeting are as follows Mr.

1:26

Johnson and Mr.

1:27

Glenn, Mr.

1:28

Bullock, Ms.

1:29

Bellis, Mr.

1:30

McKinnon, Mr.

1:32

Lilly, and Mr.

1:33

Atkinson.

1:34

Miss Evans, Mr.

1:35

Cohen, and Mr.

1:36

Godley are not voting members but are allowed to participate in the discussions and are allowed to ask questions.

1:43

Thank you.

1:44

Do I hear a motion to approve the last meeting?

1:46

The minutes of the last meeting.

1:51

Second.

1:52

All in favor?

1:54

Opposed.

1:57

Mr.

1:57

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

2:02

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.

2:29

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

2:33

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 prepared the writing is testifying.

2:55

These writings are considered hearsay.

2:58

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.

3:06

However, such an opinion may be admissible if it is made by an expert or 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 for his or her conclusion in the report.

3:22

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

3:36

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

3:46

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

3:50

Pursuant of North Carolina General Statute 168-388 and section 4 of the Board of Adjustments rules of procedure.

3:57

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

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Zoning And Land Use████████████████████████████████32%
Cannabis Regulation███████████████████19%
Procedural██████████████14%
Public Hearing██████████████14%
Religious Organizations████████████12%
Mobile Home Parks█████████9%
Summary of Proceedings

Mabel Board of Adjustment Meeting – January 23, 2020

The Mabel Board of Adjustment met on January 23, 2020, to consider three special use permit applications. All three were approved unanimously without opposition. The meeting included roll call, approval of prior minutes, and a procedural explanation by Mr. Phillips.

Discussion Items

Special Use Permit – Q Tobacco Inc. (Tobacco Shop Class One)

  • Applicant/Representative: Mike Baldwin, representing Saul Alpha Roque (Farouk Oxala) of Q Tobacco Inc. Mr. Oxala also testified.
  • Proposal: Operate a tobacco shop class one at 1311 West Arlington Boulevard, Suite 104. The property is zoned CH (Heavy Commercial) and is approximately 1 acre with a 7,000 sq. ft. multi-tenant building. The shop would sell cigarettes, cigars, rolling tobacco, and similar products, but no smoking apparatus (e.g., vape pens, hookahs, bowls) – those are class two items. Hours: 9 a.m. to 9 p.m.
  • Staff Report: Staff (Ms. Blunt) presented the application details, noting compliance with zoning and future land use. Conditions required compliance with all fire and building codes, and the use must remain a class one only (no class two items).
  • Board Discussion: Board member Mr. Godley asked about the sale of vape pens and JUULs; Mr. Oxala confirmed he would not carry those as they are class two. Staff clarified that JUULs are considered smoking apparatus and thus class two.
  • Public Testimony: Only the applicant spoke in favor. No opposition was voiced.
  • Outcome: The board approved the special use permit with the conditions cited. Motion and vote: unanimous (all in favor).

Special Use Permit – New Beginnings Christian Center (Church Renewal)

  • Applicant: Apostle Yvonne Jones (overseer) and Pastor Shauna McMillar Crumble, representing New Beginnings Christian Center.
  • Proposal: Renewal of a special use permit to operate a church at 2402-A United Drive, in the IU (Unoffensive Industry) zoning district. The church had been operating since 2016; city ordinance requires reapplication every three years. The property is a multi-unit commercial building; the church occupies Unit A. Active membership: about 45 (75 on roll).
  • Staff Report: Staff noted no new industrial uses in the area, no issues with the church, and general compliance with the future land use plan. No conditions recommended.
  • Public Testimony: Apostle Jones spoke in favor, describing the church as a blessing to the neighborhood and noting a cooperative incident with a neighboring business. No opposition.
  • Outcome: The board approved the renewal. Motion and vote: unanimous.

Special Use Permit – Donald Best (Mobile Home Placement)

  • Applicant: Donald Best (of Sutton Realty, LLC).
  • Proposal: Place a mobile home on a lot at 924 Myzel Street, zoned RA20 (Residential Agricultural). The property is in a 500-year floodplain (no floodplain regulation required). The mobile home would be on a single-family residential lot, consistent with the Horizons plan.
  • Staff Report: Staff noted compliance with zoning and no objections. Conditions: must meet all fire and building codes.
  • Public Testimony: Mr. Best stated he would live in the mobile home. No opposition.
  • Outcome: The board approved the permit. Motion and vote: unanimous.

Key Outcomes

  • All three special use permits were approved unanimously by the voting members present (Bill Johnson, Rodney Bullock, Michael Glenn, Ann Bellis, Hunt McKinnon, Christopher Lilly, Stephen Atkinson). Non-voting members (Sharon Evans, Nathan Cohen, Dylan Godley) participated in discussion.
  • No motions were denied, and no opposition was recorded from the public or board.
  • The meeting was adjourned by motion after the final item.

Meeting Transcript

Good evening and welcome to the January 23rd meeting of the Mabel Board of Adjustment. This time we'll call the meeting to order. Madam Secretary, could you please call a roll? Bill Johnson? Here. Rodney Bullock? Here. Michael Glenn. Here. Ann Bellis. Here. Hunt McKinnon. Here. Dylan Godley. Here. James Moretz. Nathan Cohen? Here. Christopher Lilly? Here. Sharon Evans. Here. Stephen Atkinson. Good evening, Mr. Chairman. The voting members for tonight's meeting are as follows Mr. Johnson and Mr. Glenn, Mr. Bullock, Ms. Bellis, Mr. McKinnon, Mr. Lilly, and Mr. Atkinson. Miss Evans, Mr. Cohen, and Mr. Godley are not voting members but are allowed to participate in the discussions and are allowed to ask questions. Thank you. Do I hear a motion to approve the last meeting? The minutes of the last meeting. Second. All in favor? Opposed. 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.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com