12-19-2007 Council Agenda - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

CONCLUSION Tattoo and body piercing establishments are becoming more common throughout the Metro area and the issue should be formally addressed. The City itself recently received an application to allow for the establishments of a tattoo parlor within the B -3 District. In order for the City to properly address the issue of tattoo and body piercing establishments in the future, regulations for such uses must be established. The most effective way to regulate tattoo and body piercing establishments would be to allow them in one specific zoning district. With regards to zoning, staff finds that allowing tattoo and body piercing establishments only in the PUD District appears to be the most feasible option. The PUD District along Rice Street is the City's primary commercial area. It is served well by a minor arterial street and, with one exception, the PUD district in this area does not abut any single family residential homes. To alleviate any additional concerns associated with tattoo and body piercing establishments, staff would recommend that the City consider the following potential conditions: 1. A license agreement is required to protect the health and general welfare of the City. The license agreement should address, at a minimum, each of the items listed in this report. Staff recommends that the City require a license, as Ramsey County does not have an ordinance relating to body art. The City may direct staff to prepare a license agreement and present it to the City Council. 2. Tattoo and body piercing establishments be allowed in the PUD District only. 3. Any such establishment shall require a minimum setback from all residential districts. 4. Any tattoo and body piercing establishment that abuts a non - commercial use shall require a buffer area with screening and landscaping, in compliance with Section 903.020, G of the Zoning Code. 5