Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council asks staff to study downtown zoning change to allow tattoo shops, requests legal and economic analysis
Summary
After public comment and council discussion, the City Council asked staff to study a proposed amendment to the Downtown Brentwood Specific Plan to permit tattoo establishments, and to return with an analysis of legal constraints (including First Amendment considerations), economic impacts and possible limits on concentration.
The Brentwood City Council on Jan. 28 directed staff to study a proposed zoning-text amendment to allow tattoo parlors in the Downtown Brentwood Specific Plan area, after public testimony from business owners, residents and the applicant who seeks a downtown location.
What council directed: By motion, the council asked staff to prepare a proposed specific-plan amendment and to include: (1) a legal review of any constitutional or state law constraints on limiting or capping the number of tattoo establishments in a downtown commercial district, (2) an economic analysis of potential trade-offs and opportunity costs for different downtown uses (sales-tax and job-generation comparisons) and (3) options for any safeguards or concentration limits that would be legally defensible.
Public input: The council heard from the owners of a local, long-standing tattoo studio who seek to relocate to Downtown Brentwood; they and several local residents argued the shop is family-oriented, community-minded and would bring foot traffic to nearby businesses. Several downtown merchants and the Downtown Brentwood Coalition also commented, with many endorsing the proposal while others asked the council to confirm alignment with the Downtown Specific Plan and to analyze implications for desired downtown character.
Why it matters: The Downtown Specific Plan currently enumerates allowable and disallowed uses. Several council members said the plan was the product of an extended community process and that any change should be considered deliberately; others pointed out recent court decisions that have invalidated categorical bans on tattoo businesses when treated as expressive conduct. Council asked staff to include that legal context in their analysis.
Next steps: Staff will return with a written analysis that addresses legal constraints, potential economic impacts and realistic implementation options (including whether planning staff could limit concentration consistent with state and federal law). Council members said they expect a staff report that outlines costs and risks rather than an immediate policy decision.
Ending: The council’s request opens a formal path for reconsidering the Downtown Specific Plan language; staff will present recommended language and legal/economic background at a future meeting.
