Laserfiche WebLink
codes were about structures according to State Law, and Zoning Codes were upheld by <br />Municipalities. Mr. O'Malley questioned, Mr. Dorenkott answered; about the correspondence <br />dated March 16th and was addressed to Sacred Waters Kava Bar/Kovatch Group LLC. It was a <br />request for the owner to fill out an application for a change of use and or new business. It was <br />explained in the letter, this needed to be completed because they changed the name of the <br />business, and because of that, it was required to file the certificate of zoning. The memo to <br />Director of Safety, Jennifer Scofield, dated March l Oth was next to be discussed. The memo was <br />regarded as how the Building Commissioner came to his conclusion. Mr. O'Malley continued to <br />say that based on the information provided, it seems the memo in question included examples for <br />similar businesses in the city that had undergone a change in name but maintained the same <br />previous and proposed use. The memo presented these examples to support the conclusion that a <br />change in use had occurred in the case of the Kovach Group, and therefore, they were required to <br />file an application for a change of use. Based on the information provided, the Kovatch Group <br />did file an application in response to the order from March 16th. The application was then <br />submitted to Max Upton, Director of Economic and Community and Development. <br />Subsequently, Mr. Upton drafted a memo which expressed his analysis and recommended denial <br />on the application. The application was denied on the basis of Mr. Upton's referral. The <br />correspondence dated April 6th; another order appealed; was an order that indicated the <br />application had been denied. Exhibit 2A was questioned and was found to have the zoning <br />certificate from 2018 for the business, "Best Damn Tacos" and that the facility was not being <br />used for that purpose, and it was established that a change in use had taken place since the <br />issuance of that zoning certificate. <br />Cross examination began. Mr. Khawam questioned Mr. Dorenkott about previous applications <br />for change of use or new business. Using the example of "Kids Kingdom" there was uncertainty <br />surrounding it. The focus was on the fact that Kids Kingdom, as a new business entity, submitted <br />an application for their use of the space. The details about the previous business entity were not <br />readily available. More applications were questioned regarding the names of businesses, entities, <br />and uses. The next application discussed more in depth was for Cost Cutters. It appeared that <br />Super C Group LLC, operating under the business name Cost Cutters, was incorporated on May <br />30, 2019. The application for the business was received on June 24th 2019. Therefore, Cost <br />Cutters could have been considered a new business entity that started operating in the specified <br />space at that time. This question experience went on for several more applications. The March <br />16th letter was in question again. The reason for the letter was because there wasn't an <br />application for a zoning certificate and the building commissioner found out about that by his <br />superior, the Director of Safety. The building commissioner wasn't the one who ultimately made <br />the determination, but it was based on the recommendation by the Director of Economic <br />Development. There was discussion surrounding the appeal, dates and a denied sign application, <br />but nothing was directly concluded from those questions. Mr. Khawam stated that there was a <br />previous submission of an appeal from a different application unrelated to this current one that <br />was before the board, which was a sign application. It was established that in the zoning code, <br />types of uses are typically organized into categories. These categories helped define and classify <br />various permitted uses with a specific zone. The categories provided a framework for <br />understanding and applying regulations and restrictions with each use. Questions regarding the <br />uses included in the memo to the Safety Director were explained. The reason why those specific <br />uses were included in the letter was because they were relevant to the case at hand. The code <br />specified that restaurants with a drive-thru facility were permitted in a B2 district, while <br />accommodations, hospitality and entertainment, bars, taverns, and nightclubs required a <br />