North Carolina- A tattoo studio owner who defied Currituck County by opening his shop last year without a permit has won his appeal against the county’s Board of Adjustment.
A Superior Court judge ruled recently that the adjustment board had no grounds to deny Dreamcatchers owner Steven Canady [pictured] a conditional use permit for his tattoo shop in Moyock.
Based on the ruling, Canady applied for and obtained the necessary permit, County Attorney Donald “Ike” McRee said.
The court has not ruled, however, on Currituck County’s lawsuit against the tattoo shop owner, he said.
Because Canady opened his business without a conditional use permit more than a year ago, the county is seeking $100 a day in fines from the tattoo shop owner, McRee said. Those fines currently total between $20,000 and $25,000, he said.
McRee said he’s not sure how the court’s ruling on Canady’s appeal will affect Currituck’s lawsuit against the tattoo shop owner.
Canady could not be reached for comment for this story.
Meanwhile, another tattoo shop owner is scheduled to appear before the Board of Adjustments Thursday to request changes to his conditional use permit.
Bryan Beshears, owner of Ace In the Hole tattoo studio, was issued a permit last September that requires his shop to remain closed on Sundays and follow the county’s signage requirements.
According to county officials, Beshears will be requesting changes Thursday that would allow his studio to open on Sundays and display a larger business sign.
Beshears couldn’t be reached for this story. But Bryan Bass, a member of the Currituck Board of Adjustment, said the economic downswing may be driving the tattoo shop owner’s request.
“The economy is so bad now, I’ve been hearing through the grapevine that businesses would like to be able to put up bigger, flashier signs,” Bass said.
Bass voted to deny both Beshears’ and Canady’s requests for conditional use permits when the pair appeared before the adjustment board in June 2007. Bass said he voted for denial because of a discrepancy over wording in the county’s unified development ordinance.
According to the UDO, shops and stores that expose naked breasts, buttocks and genitalia are classified as “adult” businesses. Prior to last spring, tattoo studios were categorized as “adult” stores, and were not allowed to open in areas zoned for general business.
That changed, however, when the Board of Commissioners voted 3-2 to alter the UDO’s classification of tattoo studios as adult businesses.
When Beshears attempted to obtain his conditional permit last June, Bass said he was aware that tattoo parlors were no longer considered adult businesses.
But according to the UDO, Bass said, businesses where naked body parts are exposed must be classified as adult establishments.
“It had nothing to do with being against tattoos, it was the wording of the UDO that I had to consider,” Bass said.
Bass said he asked Beshears if he would at any time be exposing naked body parts to perform tattoos or piercings. According to Bass, Beshears admitted there was a possibility of nakedness in his shop. That alone, Bass said, made Beshears ineligible for the permit.
“If he was still allowing nakedness in the store, it needed to be defined as an adult store,” Bass said.
After the board’s decision, Beshears and Canady, both without permits, took two different courses of action. Canady decided to illegally open his store without a permit. Beshears, however, decided to reapply for a permit, this time submitting to the conditions of the UDO.
At his hearing before the adjustment board last September, Beshears testified under oath that he would not perform body piercings, or tattoos on breasts or buttocks.
“We had no reason to withhold the permit because his requests complied with the UDO,” Bass said.
Since the store has been in operation, Bass said Beshears has been in compliance with the conditions of his permit.
The Board of Adjustments will hear Beshears’ request for modifications to his permit Thursday at 7 p.m.
