My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
11-23-2005 Council Agenda
>
City Council Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2005
>
11-23-2005 Council Agenda
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/19/2012 3:19:20 PM
Creation date
4/19/2012 3:11:50 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
129
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
MINUTES <br />PLANNING COMMISSION <br />NOVEMBER 10, 2005 <br />stated that she was concerned for what is best for her children and for her <br />neighborhood. She indicated that she has a petitioned signed by 60 of her <br />neighbors in just one day against the tattoo parlor and was still working to <br />obtain more signatures. Miller indicated she would present the petition to <br />the City Council. <br />Miller also noted that many of the neighbors have expressed <br />disappointment with the owners of the property at 2760 Lakeshore Avenue <br />that they would lease to a tattoo parlor without any consideration for the <br />residential neighborhood. <br />George Rossez, Australian Avenue, indicated that this is a residential <br />neighborhood and asked that the Commission and City Council please <br />consider the impact of a tattoo parlor on a residential neighborhood. <br />Rossez felt the use did not fit. <br />Duray indicated that he feels that this was not the right location for a tattoo <br />parlor given the residential neighborhood even though the property in <br />question is zoned B -3. Duray pointed out that there are a lot of residential <br />homes in the immediate area as well as many children. Duray indicated <br />that if the tattoo parlor was proposed in a strictly business area, he might <br />feel differently about it. <br />Socha felt that tattoo studios are getting an unwarranted negative <br />reputation, and indicated that she does not have a problem with the <br />proposal. Socha felt the studios were clean, the environment was not <br />negative, and noted that she knows about the Christian Tattoo Association. <br />Socha stated that she supported the proposed Text Amendment and CUP. <br />Hall stated that he had mixed feelings about the request and indicated that <br />he if familiar with the Christian Bikers Association and felt they provided <br />a great ministry. Hall indicated that his concern was with the particular <br />location. Hall felt that tattoo artists were being considered in a more <br />favorable light as they should be. Hall asked if Heffron has looked at <br />other locations. Heffron replied that he has, but the rents along Rice Street <br />are to high. <br />Hall stated that he would be more comfortable with the tattoo studio in <br />another location, and noted that if it were his residential neighborhood that <br />was being impacted, he would not be comfortable. <br />Heffron reported that he lives in Little Canada and feels the Little Canada <br />Road/Lakeshore Avenue location was a good one, especially since he is <br />proposing to locate at the north end of the building. He again noted that <br />his business is mainly repeat customers and referrals. Heffron felt that this <br />corner was not a residential corner and noted the heavy traffic on Little <br />5 . -14- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.