Elmhurst council adopts first comprehensive zoning rewrite since 1992 after heated debate over tattoo rules

The Elmhurst City Council voted 12–1 with one member absent on June 15 to advance a comprehensive rewrite of Chapter 22 of the municipal code, the first full update since 1992. The measure, forwarded by the Development, Planning, and Zoning Committee, replaces many piecemeal changes with a form‑based approach and new districts while directing the city attorney to prepare final ordinance text and scheduling a six‑month review.

Alderman Chris Jensen, committee chair, framed the package as a long‑overdue modernization. "This is a long overdue modernization and update," Jensen said, describing the process as years of technical reports, public drafts and more than a dozen public meetings. He emphasized provisions meant to protect neighborhoods where commercial or industrial uses abut homes, including step‑down height limits and conditional use triggers for taller structures.

The council’s decision followed extended debate over how the rewrite treats body‑modification establishments — a term the draft defines to include tattooing, piercing and non‑medical modifications. The majority report permits those services as an accessory use in the C2 commercial district and as a conditional use in I‑1 industrial districts. Alderman Guido Nardini offered a minority report that would have limited such businesses to I‑1 only; that substitute motion failed 3–10–1.

Supporters of the majority compromise argued it balances public‑health safeguards with opportunities for local small businesses and artists. "Limiting body modification establishments to an accessory use in the C2 district does not prevent anyone from obtaining a tattoo in Elmhurst," Alderman Reimuss said, noting the approach modeled aspects of neighboring municipalities and reduces startup costs by allowing operations within existing personal‑service businesses.

Opponents pressed for tighter limits and expressed concern about changing long‑standing local land‑use categories. Alderman Nardini said he worried the rewrite might amount to "spot zoning" if it effectively reshaped allowable uses to accommodate a narrow set of applicants; he moved the substitute minority report for that reason.

Council members also considered an amendment to make body‑modification establishments a permitted principal use in both C2 and I‑1 without the 150‑square‑foot/single‑chair limitations proposed in the majority report. That amendment was defeated 5–8–1.

The committee strengthened environmental performance standards in the draft, adding protections against surface‑ and groundwater contamination during material storage and a prohibition on detectable air pollution beyond property lines, subject to Illinois EPA compliance. The rewrite also clarifies standards for stoops and window wells on narrow lots to make modest repairs and safe egress more straightforward without forcing routine variances.

Alderman Jensen and several members noted the draft will continue to be refined: the council voted to include a missing enforcement article from the redline into the clean draft and the measure requires staff and the city attorney to produce the final ordinance for later formal adoption. Jensen asked colleagues to support the vetted compromise, saying, "Where commercial or industrial meets a residential neighborhood, the code adds flexibility and protection at once." The council adopted the committee recommendation on the motion to approve the majority report (12 ayes, 1 nay, 1 absent).

What happens next: the city attorney will prepare the final ordinance language reflecting the committee's recommendations and the council will revisit the document in ordinance form; staff also committed to a formal review of the rewrite in six months to address unforeseen issues.