Cyburbia - The Urban Planning Portal
      Home      Forums      Gallery      PlanningWiki      Site of the Day      Voices      Bookstore      Gear      Advertise      About Cyburbia     
The Cyburbia Forums: because listservs are boring.

You have not registered a Cyburbia Forums account
(Or you have not logged in yet.)

This annoying message will appear on every screen until you register an account or log in. Membership is completely free, and we promise not to send you any spam.

The Cyburbia Forums is the oldest and most active English language urban planning message board on the Internet, and one of the small number of online communities where members enjoy intelligent, troll-free discussion. Cyburbia has hundreds of active members, yet is a strong community full of creative, friendly, and occasionally offbeat planners, planning students, architects, urbanists and other like-minded people who care about and/or help shape the built environment. Cyburbia Forums members enjoy a sense of community and camaraderie that is unmatched by any planning-related web site or listserv. We'd love to have you join us as another Cyburbian.


Go back   Cyburbia Forums | Urban Planning Community > Cyburbia - urban planning community
Reload Tattoo/piercing studio in downtown?
Register Blogs FAQ Calendar Search Today's posts Mark forums read

Register Now for FREE!
Complete the form below to instantly register to the Cyburbia Forums. We promise not to spam you or give your registration information to others.

Username: Password: Confirm Password: E-Mail: Confirm E-Mail:
Real name (will not be visible to the public, or given to other)    Location (City/municipality, state/province/region)
 
Human verification: random question
  I agree to forum rules 

Sponsors

User login

Google search
Google

 
Tattoo/piercing studio in downtown?
By Suburb Repairman at 2009/05/11 - 5:00pm

I have been asked to evaluate whether tattoo/piercing studios should be allowed as a by-right or conditional use in our Central Business District; they are currently prohibited. This is a small city of 50,000+ with a university having 30,000 enrolled. The university is adjacent, and practically a part of downtown.

There are currently two tattoo studios in downtown, which are legal non-conforming uses from years ago.

I'm a bit indifferent about the whole thing, but I've never been in a place with a mega-high concentration of tattoo studios either to see the effects. Any thoughts on what I should consider as I evaluate how to treat these things?

I have checked notes from when the Code was amended to prohibit the tattoo studios, but it was part of a comprehensive revision and was not specifically discussed that I can tell.

by Chet on Fri, 2008/11/07 - 7:39pm
My opinion is "by right". In a city of that size I wouldn't worry about a "concentration". The market is only going to support a few of these places, even as a college town.

Don't forget -- Most every tattoo shop also does body piercing.

by Seabishop on Fri, 2008/11/07 - 7:53pm
In the similarly sized city where I used to work the tattoo studios were some of the nicest facades downtown and never caused trouble. My opinion is "by-right" because as a land use they don't have any more negative effects than any other retail or office use. I don't think it would be fair to subject them to a public hearing process for no good reason.

by jmello on Fri, 2008/11/07 - 7:55pm
We are a college town and we have two tattoo parlors downtown. I beleive they are by right. I am a transportation planner, so my specific knowledge of the code is limited.

by boiker on Fri, 2008/11/07 - 8:01pm
Quote:
Originally posted by Chet View post
My opinion is "by right". In a city of that size I wouldn't worry about a "concentration". The market is only going to support a few of these places, even as a college town.

Don't forget -- Most every tattoo shop also does body piercing.
Exactly. I agree. I don't know what the big fear in these kinds of uses are anyway. Is there is a studio that directly ties/correlates deviant behavoir, crime, or other social ills to these uses? Or is it the past that plagues them?

by Gedunker on Fri, 2008/11/07 - 8:04pm
About two-thirds of your size, branch campus of the state university away from our CBD. We require Special Exception/Conditional Use for them. We have some 'high end' places and some places that would make sailors proud (sorry, sailors). The latter tend to be shoe-string operations and, uh, use an abundance of low-end signage (always over-sized and chintzy) in an attempt to survive. They rarely do, but someone's ready with a new one as soon as the place vacates.

Off-topic:
World-famous Tattoo Charlie's tag line: "Done while you wait".

by Cardinal on Fri, 2008/11/07 - 9:02pm
There are two concerns. One is a more general question if the balance of non-retail to retail businesses tips to a point where there is no longer a sufficient quantity of retail businesses to have a viable retail district. Some non-retail uses, such as restaurants, can help to support retail. Others do not. Tattoo parlors are arguably the latter. The second concern is whether a tattoo parlor is going to project a negative image or attract activity that may detract from neighboring business or the district as a whole. It's a little bit like the drunk sleeping in a doorway. Yes, he may be harmless, but his presence does not want to make you linger. For these reasons, if you are going to allow the use, I would do so as a conditional use. That extra bit of control lets you evaluate the location, operation, and aesthetics on a case-by-case basis to determine if it will have any harmful impacts.

by Otis on Fri, 2008/11/07 - 10:07pm
I would go with by right. I think a lot of the concerns about tattoo parlors was when "tattoo" meant "bikers and drunken sailors." Times have changed.

It seems like around Otisville the tattoo craze is winding down. I see fewer young women with tattoos than there used to be. Maybe that's just me hoping.

by Suburb Repairman on Fri, 2008/11/07 - 10:09pm
These are all great so far! Part of why I'm not super worried is that our rents are high enough downtown that I'm not sure the "Sailor" type can afford it. That said, I really like Cardinal's observations on the retail v. non-retail stuff. Very helpful.

by vagaplanner on Sat, 2008/11/08 - 2:37am
By-right all the way! There really is no good reason to require conditional/special use permits. A town where I worked didn't allow them in downtown at all, but they were a bunch of d!cks! Got fired from there!

by Seabishop on Mon, 2008/11/10 - 2:21pm
Quote:
Originally posted by Cardinal View post
There are two concerns. One is a more general question if the balance of non-retail to retail businesses tips to a point where there is no longer a sufficient quantity of retail businesses to have a viable retail district. Some non-retail uses, such as restaurants, can help to support retail. Others do not. Tattoo parlors are arguably the latter. The second concern is whether a tattoo parlor is going to project a negative image or attract activity that may detract from neighboring business or the district as a whole. It's a little bit like the drunk sleeping in a doorway. Yes, he may be harmless, but his presence does not want to make you linger. For these reasons, if you are going to allow the use, I would do so as a conditional use. That extra bit of control lets you evaluate the location, operation, and aesthetics on a case-by-case basis to determine if it will have any harmful impacts.
Your local commission members will probably disagree, but a modern tattoo parlor can contribute to the vitality of a arts district when you're trying to attract young people.

As a seperate note, I think I'm going to invest in a tattoo-removal company and become a millionaire as todays college kids age.

Contact - Cyburbia - Top
     ©1994-2010 Cyburbia       vBulletin 3.8.4 ©2000 - 2010 Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.