The URL can be used to link to this page

05-965Council File # � S /to Green Sheet # ��(`f �1_3 PRESEA'TED BY � � IiEFERRED TO RESOLUTION PAUL, MINNESOTA � CObiNIITTEE: DATE z Whereas, Greg Lehman, in Zoning File No. OS-139-469, made application to the Planning s Commission for a Change of Nonconfornung Use Pemut from beauty salon to tattoo parlor 4 under the provisions of §62.109(c) of the Saint Paul Legislarive Code for property located at 360 s Clifton Street, legally described as RAMSEY'S SUBDIVTSION OF BLOCK 21, STINSON, s BROWN AND RAMSEY'S ADDTTION TO ST. PAUL LOT 34 BLK 21; and s Whereas, The Planning Cotnmission's Zoning Committee, after hauing provided notice to s affected property owners, conducted a public hearing on August 18, 2005 where ali interested io persons were given an opportunity to be heard and, at the close of the public hearing, moved to ii continue a decision on the said application unul such time as the said Committee received from iz the Office of the City Attomey, advice regazding the interpretation of Leg. Code 62.109(c); and 13 i4 Whereas, On September 1, 2005, the Zoning Committee received the opinion from the is Office of the City Attorney and, following further discussion, submitted its recommendation to is the Commission; and iv ia Whereas, The Commission, having received the recommendation of its Zoning is Committee, moved to deny the said application based upon the foliowing findings and zo conclusions set forth in its Resolurion No. OS-83 adopted September 9, 2005: 21 22 23 24 25 26 1. The property at 360 Clifton was formerly a beauty salon, with one practitioner. The applicant has applied for a change of nonconforming use to open a tattoo parlar at this site. The tattoo parlor will have one tattoo artist and a secretary, who will also perform body piercing. z�r 2. The Planning Commission may allow a nonconforming use to change to a use permitted zs in the district in which the nonconforming use is first allowed, or a use permitted in a zs district that is more restrictive than the district in which the nonconforming use is first ao allowed, if the Commission makes the following findings: 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 a. The proposed use is equally appropriate or more appropriate to the neighborhood than the existing nonconforming use. This condition is not met. A beauty salon is a service business which is first permitted in OS and T'Nl districts. A tattoo parlar is mare intensive use that is first permitted in BC and TN2 districts. The previous use was open from 7 am. to 4 pm. from Tuesday through Saturday with extended hours on Thursdays. The proposed tattoo parlor would be open from 12 - 8 p.m. Wednesday through Saturday. oS - 9�s i b. The traffc generated by the proposed use is similar to that generated by z the existing nonconforming use. This condition is met. The tattoo parlor a would be a small business with only one tattoo chair. Traffic generated 4 from this business would be similar to the previous use. s s c. ?7ie use wi11 not be detrimental to the existing character of development in v the immediate neighborhood or endanger the public health, safety, or s general welfare. This condirion is not met. A tattoo parlor is classified in s the Zoning Code as a more intensive use than a beauty salon. Therefore, 10 the proposed use would be detrimental to the existing character of i i development in the immediate neighborhood. 12 ia d. The use is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The Land Use chapter i4 of the Comprehensive Plan supports a compatible mix of uses. This area is contains a mix of commercial uses on the north side of Jefferson and xs residential uses on the south side. iv is Whereas, Pursuant to the provisions of Leg. Code § 61.702(a), Greg Lehman, under is Zoning File No. OS-156-390, duly filed an appeal from the determination made by the Planning zo Commission and requested a hearing before the City Council for the purpose of considering the zi actions taken by the said Commission; and zz zs Whereas, Acting pursuant to Leg Code § 61.702(b) and upon notice to affected parties, a z4 pubiic hearing was duly conducted by the City Council on October 5, 2005 where all interested zs parties were given an opportunity to be heard; and zs zv Whereas, The Council, having heard the statements made, and having considered the zs application, the report of staff, the record, minutes and resolution of the Zoning Committee and zs of the Planning Commission, does hereby 30 a i Resolve, That the Council of the City of Saint Paul does hereby affirm the decision of the az Planning Commission in this matter and denies the said applicanYs appeal from that decision ss there being no showing of enor in the facts, findings or procedures in the decision of the a4 Planning Commission; and, be it 35 Page 2 of 3 � oS- 9�S z Further Resolved, that the findings of the Planning Commission, as set forth in Planning a Commission Resolution No. OS-83, are hereby adopted by the Council as its own; and be it s Further Resolved, that the Council, pursuant to L,eg. Code § 61.704 and Minn. Stat. § s 462_353, Subd.4, hereby directs the department of piamiing and econoxnic development to retum v the fees paid by the applicant for the said zoning appiication as well as the fees paid by the s applicant for this appeal within fourteen (14) days of the passage and approval of this resolution; s and be it io ii Finally Resolved, That the CiTy Clerk shall maii a copy of this resolution to the appellant iz Greg Lehman, the Zoning Administrator and to the Piam�ing Commission. Requested by Department of: By: Foxm Apprw�l by City Attorney oS 9�S � Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet � DepartmerM/office%ounci�; Date Initiated: cA �'�'AttomeY 10-OCT-05 Green Sheet NO: 3028413 Contact Person 8 Phone: Peter Wamer 266-8770 Must Be on Council Agenda 6y (Qate): 0 me 1 " Attum De artrnen Director 2 � rn 3 or's Office Ma ur/ 'sfa¢f 4 oocil 5 Clerk i C erk y Assign Number For Routing Order Totaf # of Signature Pages _(Clip AII Locations for Signature) Action Requested: � Memorialize City CouncIl's October 5, 2005 motion deny the appeal of Greg Lel�an from the decision of the Planning Commission to deny the applicafion for a Cl�ange of NonConfonniug Use Pemut &om a beauty salon to a tattoo pazlor at 360 Clifton Street. iaalions: Approve (A) or Reject (R): Planning Commission CIB Committee Civil Service Commission Personal Must Mswer the 1. Has this person/firm ever worked under a contract for ihis department? Yes No 2. Has this person/firm ever been a city employee? . Yes No 3. Dces this person/firm passess a skill not nortnally possessed by any wrrent cily employee? Yes No Explain all yes answers on separafe sheet and attach to green sheet InitiaYing Problem, Issues, OppoRunity (Who, What, When, Where, Why): AdvantageslfApproved: - -' The Council is required pursuant to the City Cl�arter to have its actions reduced to a writing either in�ke--f�rm f a resolution or ordivance depending npon the nature of the matter before it. The decision of the CouncIl in this matter requires a written resolution in order to comply with the Charter. Approving the attacfied resolution fiilfills the Coimcil's duty under the Charter, Disadvantages If Approved: None. Disadvantages If Not Approved: Failure to approve the resolutioa violates the City's Charter requirements. OCT � 1 2005 � otal Amount of Transaction: Funding Source: Financiaf lnformation: (Euplain) Cast/Revenue Budgeted: " �Activitv Number. �� °�r�' �' RECEIV`Q O CT I I 2005 MAYOR'S OF�iCE DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ECONOMlC DEVELOPMENT Susars Kimbe�ly, D'uector CITY OF SAINT PAUL Raady C. Ke[[y, Mayor September 19, 2005 Ms. Mary Erickson City Council Research Office Room 310 City Hall Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102 Dear Ms. Erickson: 25 West Fourth Sbeet Sain! Pau[. MN 55101 os - 9�S � Tetephone: b57-266-b700 Facsimi[e: 65 /-228-3210 I would like to confirm that a public hearing before the City Council is scheduled for Wednesday, October 5, 2005, for the foilowing zoning case. Zoning File Number: 05-156-390 Appellant: Greg Lehman Address: 360 Clifton Street, SE corner at Jefferson Purpose: Appeal of the Planning Commission's denial of a change of nonconforming use permit from beauty salon to tattoo parlor (Zoning File Number 05-139-469). Previous Action: Zoning Committee Recommendation: Denial (8-0) September 1, 2005. Planning Commission Decision: Denial (12-0), September 9, 2005 I have confirmed this day with Councilmember Thune's office. My understanding is that this pubiic hearing request will appear on the agenda for the October 5, 2005, City Councii meeting and that you will publish notice of the hearing in the Saint Paul Legal Ledger at least 10 days in advance of the public hearing. Please cafi me at 266-6591 if you have any questions. Sincerely, � Iti� Emily Ulm City Pianner cc: Zoning File #: 05-136-773 Appellant: Greg Lehman Paul Dubruiel Wendy Lane Christina Danico Allan Torstenson NOTICE OF PIIBLLC AEARINC: - ; 'Rie Saint Paiil City Coimcii will conduct a public heartng at 5:30 PM on Wednesday, October�5, 2005 in the City Council Chambers, 17iird Floor �Yty Hall, 15 West Kellogg Boulevard, St. Paul, MN, to con- sider the appeal of Greg Lehman to a deci- sion of the Planning Commission denying a change of nonconfomiing' use peruiit from beauty,salon to tattoo parlor at 360 Clifron Sh'eet,. SE corner at Jefferson Ave- nue. (Zo ninro File No. 05-P56-390j Dated: September 20, 2005 , Mary E7ickson nsssstant ccty counc;l secretary � - (SePtembec 22) -� � _-= ST. PXUL LEGAL T_ _-=° —z'_ 22103340 � CITY O� SAINT PAUL Randy C Kel[y, Mayor September 14, 2005 DEPAR"CMENTOFPLANNWG o � , & ECONOMIC DEVEIAPMENT , � '° � � Susan Kim6er{y, Director .. 25WutFourthSVeet Telephane:651-166-6655 SainiPau[,MN53102 Facsimi[e:651-22833l4 Ms. Mary Erickson City Council Research Office Room 310 City Hail Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102 Re:Zoning File #: 05-156-390 Appellant: Greg Lehman Address: 360 Ciifton Street, SE corner at Jefferson Purpose: Appeal of Pla�ning Commission's denial of change of nonconforming use permit from beauty salon to tattoo parlor (Zoning File # 05-139-469). City Council Hearing: October 5, 5:30 p.m., City Councit Chambers • Staff Recommendation: District Council: Zoning Committee Recommendation Support: Opposition: , Planning Commission Decision: Deadfine for Action: � Staff Assigned: Denial Deniaf Denial (8-0) 1 person spoke, 19 letters were received 2 people spoke, 5 letters were received Denial (15-0) The deadline for action was extended from September 25, 2QQ5 to November 24, 2005 Emily Ulmer, 266-6591 Attachments: Planning Commission resolution Pianning Commission minutes, August 26, 2005 and September 9, 2005 Zoning Committee minutes, August 18, 2005 and September 1, 2005 Correspondence received Staff Report packet cc: Zoning File #: 05-136-773 Appeilant: Greg Lehman Applicant: Greg Lehman City Council Members District Councii: 9 Wendy Lane Larry Soderholm Allan Torstenson Peter Warner o �-��.� � f �> � � s,:; r� Ph[Ii� �A� ( APPLICATION FOR APPEAL Deparhnent af Planning and Economic Development zoning seaion I400 City Hall Anxer 25 West Fousth Street Saira Pau� MN SSIO2-1634 (651) 266-6589 rZ�t LS_N�AnI ?►� Sre e � Zoning office use on File # 0�' �� Fee: � Tentative Hearing Date: Or1'�' �� .'�� .-� Z APPLICANT S , j . �� ` c�ry � st. �� z�p SS 10 6 Daytime Phone C S� '�7b `Z�f 1,3 PROPERTY LOCATION Zoning File Address / Location .� �i o c L 1�jal� �Tn �� r TYPE Of APPEAL: Application is hereby made for an appeal to the: � Board of Zoning Appeals � City Council � �, � 1 6 Under the provision of Chapter 64, Section 7 d Z Paragraph � of the Zoning Code, to appeal a �ision made by the _ q-10� ZobS' (date of decision) GROUNDS FOR APPEAL: ZoNih� (3o�i'Lr� 20 � r . Fife Number: U S � 1 3� � 6� Explain why you feel there has been an errorin any requirement, permit, decision or refusal made by an administrative officia6, or an error in fact, procedure or finding made by the Board of Zoning Appeais or the Planning Commission. � K �`�3 y� � (attach additional sheet if necessary) Applicant'sSignature,/ � � Date�� ^�� City � r 9� �— �� GROUNDS FOR APPEAL Greg Lehman (OS-139-469) 360 Clifton Street, SE corner at Jefferson To whom it may concern, On or about 7uly 17, 2005 I spoke with Pahicia James (City Planner) and talked with her about purchasing a commercial building after the city Eminent Domain my old location. I explained that I wanted to open a Tattoo Studio at 360 Clifton Street. I explained how the commercial building used to be a Beauty Salon for 30 plus yeazs. Patricia Jaznes said "I would have no problem opening a Tattoo Studio at that location as long as the Seauty Salon hasn't been vacant for more theII a year.". She said she would send me the paper work (application for Non-conforming use) to get the ball rolTing. I received the paperwork on Monday, 7uly 25. I filied out the paperwork and sent it in with my $650. I waited about two weeks and decided to call the city and see how my application was doing. I spoke with Emily Ulmer (City Planner) on Monday, August 8, 2005. Emily told me that they were going to recommend APPROVAL of my application. I said"GREAT!" I was going to attend the West Federation (district 9) meeting on Monday, August 8. But with • speaking with, Emily, on that day, I had no reason to attend the meeting, as, Emily, told me they were going fo recommend APPROVAL of my applicafion. Then, two days later, (Wednesday, August 1�), I checked my answering machine and found a message from Emily, stating that they aze going to recommend DENYIl�TG my application. This was the day before they were to turn in their recommendation to the committee. I spoice with Emily, on that day. And she told me the reason they are going to recommend me for Denial is that a Tattoo Studio is more intensive use then a Beauty Salon. I said "How can that be, I am only one tattoo artist and the beauty Salon has four chairs vs. my one chair." Then Emily told me to e-mail pictures of the beauty salon with the four chairs. Luckily, the previous owner left the chairs in the salon. I sent the pictures to Emily on that day, to prove that the Tattoo studio does not genetate more business then the Beauty Salon. She had to converse with her superior, which is Patricia James. Then, they told me it was a zoning issue. I don't understand how a Staff Report done on Tuesday, August 2, 2005 which is recommending DENIAL on my application, on which I called the City, Monday, August 8 and spoke with Emily Ulmer and she said they aze going to recommend APPROVAL. ' Yet, the Staff report was done on August 2, 2005, whicfi recommends DENIAL. C� •_ .� � � [ A J A 1. I have Patricia James (City Planner) tell me thax "I would have no probtem opening a � Tattoo Studio at that location as long as the Beauty Salon hasn't been vacant for more then a year." Z. I spoke with Emily Ulmer (City Planner) on Monday, August 8, 2005. Emily told me thak they were going to recommend APPROVAL o£my application. 3. Then, the day before they turn in the'vr recommendation they tell me that they aze going to recommend DENYING my application! Somebody isn't doing/knowing their job! I purchased the building after the city EMAIENT DOMAINED my old commercial building at 732 White Bear Aveaue on July 17, 2005. So ... I bought a$150,000 commercial building which the city said I would have no problem opening a ta#oo studio. BUT, if the city had told me that a tattoo studio is not allowed at that location I would have NOT purchased the building! I paid $650 dollars for a non-conforming use application, � BUT, if the city had toId me that a tattoo studio is not aI[owed at that Iocation I would baue saved my self the $650 for the non-conforming use permit. Now, I ha�e to fork out another $435 for this appeal! Now, here I sit, with NO JOB, NO $USINESS, an EMPTY COMIVIERCIAL BUII.DING, $1085 out of my pocket, because somebody isn't doing/knowing their job at the City of Saint Paul! REMEMBER: THE CITY OF SAINT PAUL, PUT ME IN THIS PREDICAMENT, DILEMMA, QUAGMIItE SITUATION! Tn� YaL,, See you at the City Council meeting Greg I,ehman Tattoos From Grease Owners/Operator 360 Clifton Street � � r � L_J city ofi saint paul planning commission resolution file number 05-83 date September 9, 2005 � ' ,. = � .; . WHEREAS, Greg Lehman, File # OS-139-469, has applied for a change of nonconforming use permit from beauty salon to tattoo parlor under the provisions of §62.109(c) of the Saint Paul Legislative Code, for the property located at 360 Clifton Street, Parcel Identification Number (PIN) 11-2&23-13-0033, legally described as RAMSEY'S SUBDIVISION OF BLOCK 21, STINSON, BROWN AND RAMSEY'S ADDITION TO ST. PAUL LOT 34 SLK 21; and WHEREAS, the Zoning Committee of the Planning Commission, on August 18, 2005, held a public hearing at which all persons present were given an oppoRunity to be heard pursuant to said application in accordance with the requirements of §64.300 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code; and WHEREAS, the Saint Paul Planning Commission, based on the evidence presented to its Zoning Committee at the public hearing as substantially reflected in the minutes, made the following findings of fact: The property at 360 Clifton was formerly a beauty salon, with one practitioner. The appficant has applied for a change of nonconforming use to open a tattoo parlor at this site. The tattoo parlor will have one tattoo artist and a secretary, who will also pertorm body piercings. The Planning Commissio� may altow a nonconforming use to change to a use permitted in the district in which the nonconforming use is first allowed, or a use permitted in a district that is more restrictive than the district in which the nonconforming use is first atlowed, if the Commission makes the following findings: a. The proposed use is egually appropriate or more appropriate to the neighborhood than the existing nonconforming use. This condition is not met. A beauty sa{on is a service business which is fist permitted in OS and TN1 districts. A tattoo parlor is a more intensive use that is first permitted in BC and TN2 districts. The previous use was open from 7 a.m. to 4 p.m. from Tuesday through Saturday with extended hours on Thursday. The proposed tattoo parlor would be open from 12-8 p.m. Wednesday through Saturday. b. The tra�c generafed by the proposed use is similar to fhat generated by the existing nonconforming use This condition is met. The tattoo parlor would be a small business with only one tattoo chair. Tra�c generated from this business would be similar to the previous use. c. The use wil! not be detrimental to the existing character oi development in the immediate neighborhood or endanger the public health, safety, or general welfareThis condition is not met. A tattoo par{or is classified in the Zoning Code as a more intensive use than a beauty salon. Therefore, the proposed use would be detrimental to the existing character of development in the immediate neighborhood. d. The use is consistent wifh the Comprehensive P1an.The Land Use chapter of the Comprehensive Plan supports a compatible mix of uses. This area contains a mix of commercial uses on the north side of Jefferson and residential uses on the south side. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Saint Paul Planning Commission, under the authority of the City's Legislative Code, that the application of Greg Lehman for a change of nonconforming use permit from beauty salon to tattoo parlor for the property located at 360 Clifton Street, is hereby denied. moved by Morton � seconded by in favor Unanimous aaproval to deny against 05-9b� � Saint Paul Planning Commission Cily Hall Conference Center 15 Kellogg Boulevard West Minutes of August 26, 2005 A meeting of the Planning Commission of the Ciry of Saint Paul was held Friday, August 26, 2005, at 830 a.m. in the Conference Center of CiTy Hall. Commissioners Mmes. Donnelly-Cohen, Zimmer Lonetti, McCall, Morton, Porter, Present: and Trevino; and Messrs. Aligada, Alton, Bellus, Coletta, Goodlow, Gordon, Johnson, Kong, Kramer, and Mejia. Commissioners Mmes. *Fazicy, *Lu; and Messrs. Anfang, *Dandrea, and *Swtt. Absent: *Excused Also Present: Latry Soderholm, Planning Administrator; Allen Lovejoy, Emily Ulmer, Christina Danico and Kate Fleming, Department of Planning and Economic • Development staff. I. Approval of minutes of August 12, 2005 MOTION: Commissioner Dannelly-Cohen moved approva[ of the minutes ofAugust IZ, 2005, with an amendment to add a reference to [he letlers received as public hearing testimony regarding skyway signage. Comrnusioner Zimmer Lonetti seconded the motion. The mation carried unanimously on a voice vote. IT. Chair's Announcements Chair Johnson briefly reviewed discussion at the Steering Committee meeting this morning. Chair Johnson announced that Mr. Ron Brevig from Xcel Energy has offered to provide tours to Planning Commissioners and staffto see the old coal-fired power plant and where the new gas- fired ptant will be built. Mr. Brevig gave an update on the replacement of the High Bridge P3ant at last week's Comprehensive Planning Committee meeting. There aze three tour dates--September 2, 7, and 9, 2005. Commissioners can sign up for one or all three dates. If you are interested, plea5e contact Kate Fleming. Chair Johnson gave an update on the proposed Holman Field levee and how the floodway and flood fringe zoning maps need to be changed if the project goes ahead. III. Planning Administrator's Announcements • 05 n �� Larry Soderhotm reviewed the City Council actions on August 24, 2005, related to planning and zoning. The Council is not be meeAng neat week because August has five Wednesdays. IV. Zoning Committee Commissioner Morton gave the Zoning committee report, OLD BUSINESS #OS-130-499 - Raymond Condominiums - Change of Nottconforming Use from a� office to a beauty salon, with a variance of the pazking requirement (7 spaces required, 0 spaces requested); and a sign variance to pertnit 7 signs on the building { 1 sign permitted) with a total sign area of 229 square feet (30 square feet permitted). 856 Raymond Avenue, east side, between $radford and Long. (Emily Ulmer, 651/266-6591) MOTION: Commrssione� Morton moved the Zoning Committee's recommendafion to approve the change of no�xconforming use permit with conditions, to approve a sign variance jor a total oj I60 sq. ft. of sign area and 9 signs, and to deny the parking variance. The motion carried unnnimnusly nn a voice vofe. #OS-130-725 North East Neighborhoods Development Cor� - Rezoning from B2 (Community Business) and R3 (Single Family Residential) to RM2 (Multi-family Residenrial) to construct a � 30-unit condominium. 1149 White Bear Ave., 1758 Maryland Ave., SW comer of Maryland Ave., at White Beaz Ave. (Emily Ulmer, 651/266-6591) MOTION: Commissioner Morton moved to lay over indefinitely The motiou carried unanimously on a voice vote. NEW BUSTNESS #OS-133-730 W algseen's Pharmacy - Conditional Use permit for drive-through service accessory to a drug store/pharmacy, with modification of condifions that the drive-through not be iocated between the principal structure and a public street and that it be at least 60 ft. from a property line adjoining residential uses. 1587 Randolph Avenue, NW corner at Snelling. (Emily Ulmer, 651/166-6591) MOTION; Commissioner Morton moved the Zoning Comminee's recommendation to approve the conditional use permit. The motion carried unanimously on a voice vote. #OS-139-469 Greg Lehman - Change of Nonconforming Use Permit from $eauty Salon to Tattoo Parlor. 360 Clifton St., SE comer at JefFerson. (Emily Ulmer, 651/266-6591) Commissioner MoRnn repoKed that the Zoning Committee laid this case over to iheir ,September 1, 2005 meeting. _ � n � � Saint Paul Planning Commission City Aall Conference Center 15 Kellogg Boulevard West Minutes of September 9, 2005 0 5- g�� A meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Saint Paul was held Friday, September 9, 2005, at 8;30 a.m. in the Conference Center of City Hall. Commissioners Present: Commissioners Absent: Mmes. Donnelly-Cohen, Faricy, Zimmer Lonetti, Lu, McCall, Morton, Porter, and; and Messrs. Aiton, Anfang, Bellus, Coletta, Gordon, Johnson, Kramer, and Mejia. Mmes. *Trevino and Messrs. *Aligada, *Dandrea, *Goodlow, Kong and Scott. *Excused Also Present: Larry Soderholm, Planning Adminish Pahicia James, Emily Ulmer, Penny Simison, 7essica Rosenfeld, Shawntera Hardy, Christina Danico, Casey MacCallum (intem) and Kate Fleming, Department of Planning and Economic Development staff. � I. II. Approvai of minutes of August 26, 2005 MOTION: Commissioner ponne[ly-Cohen moved approvai of the mircutes ofAugust 26, 2005. Commissioner Coletta seconded the m6tion. The tnotion carried unanimously on a voice vote. Chau Announcements Chair Johnson discussed the role the Pianniug Commission has played in advocating for good bus service. As a frequent bus rider, he was troubled by the article in this morning's Star Tribune that said routes aze being cut by 3.5% due to budget skortfalls at Met Council. Buses aze used by a diverse population and some people are transit-dependent. Chair Johnson and Larry Soderhotm attended a workshop on water. resources in the Mississippi River corridor. It provided input to the Mississippi National River and Recrearion Area (MNRRA) staff. Participants ranked water quality, watershed management, and land use controls as key issues. Chair Johnson passed around a booklet on Environmental Pool Plans for the river that he got from Mr. Steve 7ohnson of the NINRRA staff. Chair Johnson reporEed on fhe Hamm's Brewery fire. Commissioner Faricy asked if the building tfiat was damaged was historically significant. Chair Sohnson responded that it was the aldest part of the brewery, about 150 yeazs old, but that the thick limestone walls may be salvageable. Chair Johnson gave a brief report on the tour last week of the Xcel Energy High Bridge Plant, and reminded commissioners that the tour will be repeated again this aftemoon. � �- �0 � -`g 6� �� Planning Administrator's Announcements Larry Soderholm reported on City Council busmess from last week and announced their agenda for ne� week Zoning Comuuttee NEW BUSINESS Commissioner Morton gave the Zoning Comauttee report. #OS-139-469 Gree Lel�man - Cfiange of Nonconforming Use from Beaury Salon to Tattoo Pazlor. 36Q Clifton St., SE comer at Jefferson. (Emily Ulmer, 651/266-6591) MOTION: Commissioner t4lorton moued the Zoning Committee's recommendation ta deny the change of noreconforming use permit The motion carried unanimnusly on a voice votw #OS-144-722 Altemative Homes of St, Paul Inc. - ConditianaI Use Permit to increase the number of sober house residents to 36. 97 0lcford St. N., between Ash�ai� and Laurel. (PatriciaTames, 651/266-6639) 3 MOTION: Commissioner Morton moved the ZonYng Committee's recnmmendation to de�y the condi[ional use permiG The motion carried unanimously on a voice vote. _ Compreheasive Pianning Committee Commissioner ponnelly-Cohen stated the next meeting will be held on September 27, 2005, guest speakers will be former Mayors Coleman and Scheibel. ��lte last meeYing was rescheduled to November 1, when Representative Hanson will speak on tlieproposed Robert Sixeet Transit Corridor. There aze no meetings scheduled foc Oct6ber at this time. Neighborhood and Current Planning Committee Commissioner McCali announced tfie ne� meeting wi21 be on September 14, 2005. The committee will discuss the Skyway Sign Policy. VII. Long-range Planniug Committee � Commissioner Bellus announced the next meeting will be September 22, 2005. �'III. Communications Committee No report ,_ _ . � 2 � � � MINUTES OF THE ZONING COMMIT7EE • Thursday, August 18, 2�05 - 3:30 p.m. City Council Chambers, 3rd Fioor City Haii and Court House 15 West Keilogg Boulevard PRESENT. STAFF: EXCUSED: Afton, Anfang, Faricy, Gordon, Johnson, Kramer, Mejia and Morton Christina Danico, Allen Torstenson, Emily Ulmer, and Peter Warner Donnelly-Cohen The meeting was chaired by Commissioner Morton. Q � ° � � � Greg Lehman - OS-139-469 - Change of Nonconforming Use from Beauty Salon to Tattoo Parlor, 360 Clifton St. Emily Ulmer presented the staff report wifh a recommendation of denial for the Change of Nonconforming Use. Ms. Ulmer aiso stated District 9 recommended denia(, and there were 19 letters in suppoR, and 5 letters in opposition. Commissioner Gordon noted that the tattoo parlor might be a less intensive use than the beauty salon because of fewer hours of operation and fewer customers at one time. Ms. Ulmer reported that the staff based that finding strictiy on what the zoning code determines is a more or less intensive use. esponding to Commissioner Anfang, Ms. Ufiner noted that tetters in opposition were primarily concerned that e use was incompatible with the residential neighborhood and that there would be increased traffic and loitering near the school. Letters in support stated that Greg Lehman is an excellent business owner"and that his shops have been well run, safe, and clean. The Commissioners discussed the staff report findings. Greg Lehman, the applicant, presented the Commissioners with his personal and professionai history as a business owner and landlord in St. Paul. He operated his tattooing business for ten years at 839 4'" St. in a four-plex in the Historic Dayton's Biuff neighborhood. After three years of operation at a new location at 732 White Bear Avenue, the City took his property by eminent domain in July of 2005. He purchased the property at 360 Clifton after consuiting with staff. Respondi�g to Commissioner Kramer, Mr. Lehman stated that he does engage in a limited amount of retail sales by selling cleaning products and jewelry associated with the body piercings and tattoos he performs. At the request of Commissioner Gordon, he submitted for the record a real estate document stating that the previous owner had rented 4 chairs at $125 each per week, or $2000 total per month. An employee of the applicant, Lisa Ramirez, 360 Glifton St, testifted that the business is mostly by appointment and would not increase traffic. She reiterafed the high standards of the applicant as a businessman and gave her support to the appfication's approval. Craig Bartlett, 545 N. Snelling Ave., represented a resident of 386 Clifton St., Bev Lutgen, who could not attend the public hearing. He distributed a fetter written by Ms. Lutgen and read it aloud. Ms. Lutgen's tetter � ited the potential negative impacts of a tatfoo parlor, expressing concerns about increased traffic and parking emand, gang activity, loitering, and drug use. Wendy Harteneck, 380 Fulton St., stated that she felt this type of business was an incompatibie use for a neighborhood with children. _ o �- �� Mr. Lehman rebutted that if his application were denied, he could convert the property into his home and run the proposed tattoo parlor as a home occupation_ He also noYed that neighbors have only discussed the • negative stereotypes of tattoo artists and their customers. The public hearing was closed. The Commissioners and staff discussed §62.109(c) and determined that there needed to be further legai guidance regarding the interpretation of the code. Commissionsr Stephen Gordon moved to lay over of the Change of Nonconforming Use. Commissioner Carole Faricy seconded the motion. The motio� passed by a roll call vote of 5-2 (Alton, Morton) Adopted Yeas - 5 Nays - 2 Abstained - 0 Drafted by: \ CL�� Christina Danico Recording Secretary Submitted by: � ��—+�/ Emily er Zoning Section Approved by: � / `.' "` :6 '�Fe� . e Gladys rton Chair � � ZC-Mi�u[ps.fim MINUTES OF T4iE ZONING COMMIT7EE Thursday, September 1, 20Q5 - 3:30 p.m. • City Couracil Chambers, 3rd Floor City Hail and Court House 15 West Keilogg Boulevard PRESENT: STAFF: 0 �' 965 Alton, Anfang, Donne4ly-Cohen, Faricy, Gordon, Johnson, Kramer, Mejia and Morton Christina Danico, Patricia James, Emily Ulmer, and Peter Warner The meeting was chaired by Commissioner Morton. Greg Lehman - 05-139-469 - Change of Nonconforming tlse Permit from Beauty Sa{on to Tattoo Parior, 360 Ciifton St. Emily Ulmer updated the Commissioners with regards to the recommendation of denial for the change of nonconforming use permit. Ms. Ulmer stated that staff met wifh the City Atfomey, Peter Wamer, to discuss the legal interpretation of the zoning code. She also noted that since the close of the public hearing on August 18, 2005, she has received 5 additional fetters in support of the appfication. Mr. Warner distributed a memo outlining the legal findings and interpretation of §62.109(c), the provision in the zoning code that allows the Planning Commission to consider changes in nonconforming use permits. He explained his interpretation of the language as it related to the case. Mr. Warner stated that, following the code, staff had reached the right conclusion by not approving this appiication, and that the staff decision was supported by reasonabfe findings. �e Commissioners further discussed whaf is aliowed in §62.109(c) and what the zoning code determines is a more intensive use." Commissioner Brian Alton moved deniai of the Change of Nonconforming Use Permit. Commissioner Richard Kramer seconded the motion. Commissioner Kramer aiso suggested that the committee should offer the opportunity for the applicant to withdraw his appiication. Commissioners A4ton and Gordon further discussed that because this Change of Nonconforming Use Permit could not be approved, the app(icant might alternatively look at running the business as a home occupation. The motion passed by a vote of 8-0. Adopted Yeas - 8 Nays - 0 Drafted by; Submitted by: Abstained - 0 Approved by: � '��,-�- � �i�f�--� �, . Christina Danico Emily I er �Gtadys M on Recording Secretary Zoning Section Chair • ZCMinutes.frm 05-g65 Interdepartmental Memorandum CI'TY OF SAINT PAUL DATE: TO: FROM August 30, 2005 Zoning Committee Peter W. Warner RE: Zoning File'No. 05-139-469: Application of Greg Lehman for Change of Nonconforming Use Permit from Beauty Salon to Tattoo Parlor: Request for Interpretation of First Paragraph of Leg. Code § 62.109(c) PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND At the close of the August 18, 2005 public hearing regarding the above entitled matter, the � Zoning Committee moved to lay over a decision on the appiication until such time as the Committee received from the City Attorney's Office an interpretation of language set forth in the first paragraph of leg. Code § 62.i09(c}. LEGAL BACKGROUND: NONCONFqRMING USES AUTHORIZED BY STATE LAW AND REGULATED SY CITY ORDiNANCE The Municipal Planning Act, Minn. Stat. §§ 462.351-.364, permits the Gity to regulate land use through the establishment of zoning ordinances intended to confine various classes of land uses to certain areas of the City., Minn. 5tat. § 462.357, Subd.i. Any land use lawfully established prior to the adoption of a zoning ordinance or a subsequent amendment of an existing zoning ordinance which converts the land use into an unlawful land use, is classified as a"nonconforming" use. Minn. Stat. § 462.357, Subd.1(e). Hooper v. City of Saint Paul, 353 N.W.2d 138 (Minn. 1984). � It is wefl established that the public policy behind the regulation of nonconforming uses is to eliminate nonconforming uses in order to promote land uses that are consistent with fhe underlying zoning classification of the land. See, County of Lake v. Courtn� 451 N. W.2d 338 (Minn. App. 1990), review denied (Minn. April 13, 1990). ft is equally well established that a nonconforming use undermines the goal of zoning ordinances to confine certain uses of land within certain zones. Nevertheless, the law also permits nonconforming uses to continue until they are discontinued or destroyed. Minn. Stat. § 462.357, Sutid.i (e), Subp. (1) and (2). AA-ADA-EEO Employer Zoning File No. 05-i39-469 Lega! Opinion RE: Leg. Gode § 62.109(c) Page 2 0 5- 9�5 In keeping with this principle, Saint Paul Leg. Code § 62.101 provides in part; "If is fhe intenf of this code to permit legal nonconforming ... uses to continue until they are removed." Leg. Code § 62.101 also provides the planning commission with the general authority to consider changing an existing nonconforming use to another nonconforming use stating in pertinent part: "The code recognizes that in some circumstances allowing nonconforming uses to be changed to similar or less intense nonconforming uses ... benefit the city and surrounding neighborhood. Some buildings have a long useful life and allowing their continued occupancy for nonconforming uses can be more desirable that requiring them to be vacant if they cannot be converted to conforming uses. Consequently, the code allows conversion of nonconforming uses to simi(ar nonconforming uses ... if regulated so as to be compatible with the surrounding neighborhood.° in light of Leg. Code § 62.101's stated policy objective to permit changes and conversions ot non conforming uses, the first paragraph of Leg. Code § 62.109(c), entitled "Change of nonconforming use" states: `The planning commission may al(ow a nonconforming use to change to a use permitted in the district in which the nonconforming use is first allowed, ora use permitted in a district that is more restrictive that the district in which the nonconforming use is first allowecl, if the commission makes the following findings: . . ." (emphasis added}. LEGAL INTERPRETATION OF PARAGRAPFI ONE OF LEG CODE & 62109(c� Adopting basic canons of statutory interpretation, an interpretation of Leg. Code § 62.7 09(c) must give ef�ect to the word "or" as it appears in the introductory paragraph to the section. GeFlerally, canons of construction state that unless the context of the language under interpretation reveals that the word "o�" should be read as a conjunctive, "o�" is to be read as a disjunctive. See, Amaraf v. St. C(oud Hosaifal, 589 N.W.2d 379, 385 (Minn, 7999) citina Berry v. Walker Roofing Co., 473 N.W.2d 312, 314-75 (Minn. 1991). (t is my reading of Leg. Code § 62.109(c) that the word "or," as it appears in the first paragraph of that section, is to be read as a disjunctive. Doing so gives effect to the stated intent of Leg. Code § 62.101 which allows the planning commission to consider permitting an existing nonconforming use to change to another nonconforming use under two separate scenarios which are discussed below. n.a-.sDn-�o �ioy� a �1 �J � � � � �� t ; ;� � Zoning File No. 05-139-469 • Legal Opinion RE: Leg. Code § 62.109(c) Page 3 Under the first scenario, Leg. Code § 62.109(c) provides that "[t]he p{anning commission may allow a nonconforming use to change to a use permitted in the district in which the nonconforming use is firstallowed." It is my opinion that this language aliows the planning commission to permit an exisiing �onconforming use to change to a new nonconforming use provided that this new nonconforming use would have been permitted in fhe most restrictively zoned district in which the originai nonconforming use was allowed. For example, in a TN1 district, a nonconforming TN2 use could be changed to another TN2 use. Underthe second scenario, Leg. Code § 62.109(c) provides that "[the pianning commission may allow a nonconforming use to change toJ . .. a use permitted in a district that is more restricfive than fhe disfrict in which the nonconforming use is first altowed." It is my opinion that this language allows the planning commission to permit an existing nonconforming use to be replaced by � permitted or nonconforming use, so long as the "new" use is cfassified as "more restricfive" [or "less detrimentaUless intense"j than the old nonconforming use. For example, an existing nonconforming RT2 use, focated in a R4 district, could be changed to a RT1 use. It does not matter whether the new RT1 use is conforming or nonconforming with the underiying zoning classification. It matters only that the new RT1 use fails within a"more restrictive/less detrimentaUless intense" use � classification than the ofd nonconforming use. Interpreting Leg. Code § 62.109(c) in this manner allows certain results. First, it establishes a"bright" fine that serves to place limits on proposals, to change nonconforming uses. The first clause of the paragraph permits nonconforming uses to change to other nonconforming uses provided thatthe new nonconforming use is classified or determined to be no more nonconforming than the existing nonconforming use. The importance of this limit is discussed +n the next section below. Second, interpreting the section in this manner allows nonconforming uses to be changed to allow new uses, notwithstanding whether the new use is conforming or nonconforming with respect to the underlying zoning classification, so long as the new use is more restrictive [or "less detrimentaVless intense"j than the previous nonconforming use. Such an interpretation is consistent with the policy set forth in Leg. Code § 62.101 of supporting use changes that will eventuaffy bring the use of a particuiar parcel of Iand into conformance with that land's underlying zoning c(assification, Finaily, the first paragraph of Leg. Code § 62.109(c) must be read as an enabling law. The paragraph gives effect to Leg. Code § 62.i01. It is my opinion that without Leg, Code § 62.109(c), a nonconforming use could only be changed to a use that conforms to the underlying zoning classification. � AA-ADA-EEO Employer t Zoning Fife No. 05-139-469 Legal Opinion RE: Leg. Code § 62.109(c) Page 4 � �— ��:� DEFINING THE LIMITS OF PERMISSIBLE "NEW" NONCONFORMING OR "MORE RESTRICTIVE" USES UNDER LEG. CODE & 62.109(c� AND APPLYING THOSE LtMITS TO THE PRESENT APPLICATION Having opined fhat the first paragraph of Leg. Code § 62.109(c) is applicable in two different zoning situations, it is necessary to determine the application of Leg. Code § 62.109(c) to the zoning application presently 6efore fhe Committee. In applying Leg. Code § 62.109(c) to the present application, it must be recognized that its application is not limited solely to examining the application under the language contained in the firsf paragraph of the section. As noted above, the first paragraph of Leg. Code § 62.109(c) enables the consideration of a change in nonconforming uses under two different scenarios. Whether or not the change will actually be permitted requires a determination of which scenario for change is contemplated. if it appears that the bhange is one permitted under the first paragraph of Leg. Code § 62.109(c), the next step in the application is to analyze the application against the standards specified under Leg. Code § 62.109(c)(1-4). Leg. Code § 62.109(c) reads in its entirety as follows: (c) Change of nonconforming use. The planning commission may allow a nonconforming use to change to a use permitted in the district in which the nonconforming use is first allowed, or a use permitted in a district that is more restrictive than the district in which the nonconforming use is first aflowed, if the commission makes the following findings: (1) The proposed use is equally appropriate or more appropriate to the neighborhood than the existing nonconforming use; (2) The traffic generated by the proposed use is similar to that generated by the existing nonconforming use; (3) The use will not be detrimental to the existing character of development in the immediate neighborhood or endanger the public health, safety, or general welfare; and (4) The use is consistent with the comprehensive plan. The planning commission's findings may be a general rule or findings in a specific case. tn the present application, it is proposed to replace an existing nonconforming use in a R4 zoning district with another nonconforming use. A proposal to change an existing nonconforming use to another nonconforming use clearly fits within the first scenario of the first paragraph of Leg. Code § 62.109(c). AA-ADA-EEO Employer � 1 r1 LJ � 0 5- �65 Zoning �i{e No. 05-139-469 • Legal Opinion RE: Leg. Code § 62.109(c) Page 5 The next step is to determine whether a change from one nonconforming use to another nonconforming use wouid be permitted in an R4 district under the standards established in Leg. Code § 62.109(c)(1-4}. In order to determine whether, in a R4 zoning district, a nonconfiorming beauty parlor can be replaced with a nonconforming tattoo parlor, it is usefu4 to refer back to severa{ provisions in the zoning code which add subsfance to the standards for considering a change in use under Leg. Code § 62.109(c)(1-4). Here, the underlying property is zoned R4. Leg. Code § 66.212 states that R4 properties are intended to "provide for an environment of predominantly low-density, one-famify dwellings along with civic and institutional uses, public services and utilities that serve the residents in the districts. Because of their residential nature, these districts are not intended for more intensive uses such as small confierence centers, private retreat centers, and reception houses:' Leg. Code Chap. 65, entitled "Land Use Definitions and Development Standards," states in part at Leg. Code § 65.001 that "For the purposes of this zoning code, ihe land use terms defined in this chapter shall have the meanings ascribed to then herein:' Leg. Code Chap. 65, Division 3, entitled "Retail Sales and Services" contains 18 different � use definitions covering a variety of retaif sales and service uses. Leg. Code § 65.553, entitled "Service businesses," states the following definition: Service businesses include provisions of services to the general public that produce minimal oif-site impacts. Service businesses include but are not limited to the foliowing: (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (9) (h) (i) Barber and beauty shops; Dry-cleaning pick-up station; Interior decorating/upholstery; Locksmith; Mailing and packaging services; Radio and television service and repair; Shoe repair; Tailor shop; and Watch repair, other smali goods repair." (Italics added) A thorough examination of the use definitions under Leg. Code Chap. 65 reveals that a tattoo parlor is not defined. � AA-ADA-EEO Emplayer o �� 965 Zoning File No. Legal Opinion f Page 6 05-139-469 tE: Leg. Code § 62.i09(c) Leg. Code Chap. 66, provides addifional information usefui to a change of nonconforming use inquiry pursuanf to Leg. Code § 62.109(c) because it assists in determining permissible land uses under the various use classificatiorts of the zoning code, even where a particular use is not specifically defined in Leg. Code Chap. 65. Leg. Code § 66.101, entitled "Use tables" states in pertinent part: Use tables in this chapter list permitted and conditional uses in the primary underiying zoning districts, and note applicable development standards and conditions. (a) Permitted uses. Uses specified with a"P" are permitted in the district or districfs where designated, provided that the use complies with all other applicable provisions of this ordinance. (b) Conditiona! uses. Uses specified with a"C" are allowed as a conditional use in the district or districts where designated, provided that the use complies with all other applicable provisions of this ordinance. Persons wishing to establish, change, or expand a conditional use shall obtain a permit for such use as specified in chapter 61. (c) Prohibited uses. Any use not listed as either "P" (permitfed) or "C" (conditional) in a particular district, or any use not determined by the planning commission to be substantially similar to a listed permitted or conditional use, shali be prohibited in that district. . . . . (emphasis in bold addedj An examinafion of permissible uses under Leg. Code Chap 66 reveals the following: The table under Leg. Code § 66.221, entitled "Principal Uses in Residential Districts" states the permitted and conditional uses in R4 districts. Beauty shops and tattoo parlors are not listed as permitted or conditional uses in R4 districts. 2. The table under Leg. Code § 66.32i, entitled "Principal Uses in Traditional Neighborhood Districts" state the permitted or conditional uses for TN districts. Under the category "Retail Sales and Services," service businesses which are defined under Leg. Code § 65.553(a) to include beauty shops, are listed as permitted uses in TN1 districts. More important, Leg. Code § 66.321 lists a tattoo parlor as a permitted use. However, in TN districts, a tattoo parlor, even though AA-ADA-EEO Employer � � � � 0�-��5 Zoning File No � LegalOpinion Page 7 .05-139-469 ° RE: Leg. Code § 62.109(c) classified as a Retail Sales and Services use, is first permitted in a TN2 zoning district. � � 3. The table under Leg. Code § 66.421, entit(ed "Principal Uses in Business Districts" states the permitted or conditional uses for OS-B5 districts. Under the category "Commercial Uses," Leg. Code § 66.421 first permits Service businesses [defined in Leg. Code § 66.553(a} to include "beauty shops"J in OS and B1 districts. And, just as in Leg. Code § 66.321, Leg. Code § 66.421 lists a tattoo parlor as a permitfed use. However, in business districts, a tattoo parlor is first permitted in a BC district. BC districts are less restrictive than the OS and 61 districts where beauty parfors are first permitted. It must be conceded that a use first permitted in a TN2 district is noi a"more restrictive" [or "less detrimentaUless intense"] use than a use first permitted in aTN1 disirict. lf the underlying properry here was zoned TN1, under a Leg. Code § 62.109(c) analysis of a change of nonconforming use application, an application to change a nonconforming use first permitted in a TN1 district to a nonconforming use first permitted in a TN2 district should not be granted. A TN2 use in a TN1 distr+ct is not the "more restrictive" use contemplated under Leg. Code § 62.109(c). A nonconforming TN2 use is not "equally or more appropriate" to a neighborhood than a nonconforming use first permitted in a TN1 district. Just as in the analysis of TN districts noted above, a simiiar conclusion can also be reached when examining Leg. Code § 66.421's regulation of permitted and conditional uses in Business Districts. Here, it is also reasonable to conclude, within the context of Leg. Code § 62.109(c)(1-4) analysis, that a nonconforming use first permitted in a BC districtshould not be considered as "equally or more appropriate" to the neighborhood than a nonconforming use first permitted in a OS or 61 districi. BC districts are less restrictive than OS or B1 districts. A non conforming tattoo parlor would not be permitted into a OS or B1 district because it is labeled as a more intense use. CONCLUSIONS 1. R districts do not permit beauty shops or tattoo parlors. 2. TN districts permit beaury shops in TN1 districts. Tattoo parlors are permitted in TN2 districts. Tattoo parlors are specificafiy characterized as more intense uses first permitted in a less restrictive district. 3. Business districts permit beauty shops in OS and B1 districts. Tattoo parlors are first permitted in BC districts. Tattoo parlors are specifically characterized as more intense uses first permitted in a less restrictive district, AA-ADA-EEO Emp3oyer Zoning File No. 05-139-469 Legal Opinion RE: Leg. Code § 62.109(c) Page 8 � �- ��5 4. Because a tattoo parlor is specifically fisted as a use in TN and B districts, the planning commission has no authority to make a"substantially similar" determination under Leg. Code § 66.101(c). 5. Under a Leg. Code § 62.109(c) change of nonconforming use analysis, a tatoo parlor, based upon the use classificafions under Leg. Code Chap. 66 is nof a"more restrictive" use. Accordingly, the staff recommendation to deny this applieation is in conformance with the zoning code. Therefore, adopting the staff recommendation would be reasonable. AA-ADA-EEO Employer � � � 0 � - 9�� • ZONING COMMITTEE STAFF REPORT FILE # 05-139-469 1. APPLICANT: Greg Lehman HEARING DATE: August 18, 2005 2. NPE OF APPLICATION: Nonconforming Use Permit - Change 3. LOCATION: 360 Clifton St., SE corner of Clifton and Jefferson 4. PIN 8� LEGAL DESCRIPTfON: 11-28-23-13-4033, RAMSEY'S SUBDIVIS{ON OF BLOCK 21, STINSON, BROWN AND RAMSEY'S ADDITION TO ST. PAUL LOT 34 BLK 21 5. PLANNING DISTRICT: � � 6. ZONING CODE REFERENCE: §62.109(c) 7. STAFF REP012T DATE: August 2, 2005 PRESENT ZONING: R4 BY: Emily Ulmer 8. DATE RECEIVED: July 27, 2005 DEADLINE FOR COMMISSION AC710N: November 24, 2005 A. PURPOSE: Change of Nonconforming Use Permit from Beauty Salon to Tattoo Parlor. B. PARCEL SIZE: 45.3 ft. (Clifton) x 118.625 ft. (Jefferson) = 5,373.71 C. EXISTING LAND USE: Commercial D. SURROUNDING LANQ USE: North: Spanky's Bar and Griil and Highway 35E (B2) East: Singie family residential (R4) South: Sing4e family sesidential (f24} West: Monroe Athletic Field (R4) E. ZONING CODE CITATION: §62.109(c) authorizes the Planning Commission to allow a nonconforming use to change to a use permitted in the district in which the nonconforming use is first allowed, or a use permitted in a district that is more restrictive than the district in which the nonconforming use is first allowed upon making certairt findings (see section H below). F. HISTORYlDISCUSSION: In 1950, the property at 360 Clifton was rezoned from "B" Residential to Commerciai for a confectionery store which sold school suppiies and snacks. G. DtSTRICT COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION: The District 9 Community Council does not support the change of nonconforming use from a beauty salon to a tattoo parlor. H. FiND1NGS: 1. Tfie property at 360 Clifton was formerly a beauty salon, with one practitioner. The applicant has appiied for a change of nonconforming use to open a tattoo parior at this site. The tattoo parior wiil have one tattoo artist and a secretary, who will also perform body piercings. 2. The Pianning Commission may allow a nonconforming use to change to a use permitted in a district that is more restrictive than the district in which the nonconforming use is first allowed if the commission makes the following findings: a. The proposed use is equalfy appropriate or more appropriate to the neighborhood than the existing nonconforming use. This condition is not met. A beauty salon is a service business which is fist permitted in OS and TN1 districts. A tattoo parlor is a more intensive use that is first permitted in BC and TN2 districts. The previous use was open from 7 a.m. to 4 p.m. from Tuesday through Saturday with extended hours on Thursday. The proposed tattoo parlor would be open from 12-8 p.m. Wednesday thsough Saturday. b. The fraffic generated by fhe proposed use is similar to that generated by the existing nonconforming use. This condition is met. The tattoo parlor wouid be a small business with only one tattoo chair. Traffic generated from this business would be similar to the previous use. Zoning File # 05-139-469 f1 � _ � / � � Zoning Commitfee Staff Report V f3 page 2 c. The use will not be detrimental to the existing character of development in the immediafe neighborhood or endanger the public health, safety, or generat welfare. This condition is m�t. The proposed use would reuse a smail commercial building. As a tattoo parlor, the business will be licensed by the Offce of License, Inspections, and Environmental Protection, protecting the heaith safety and genera( weffare of residenfs in the area. d. The use is consistent with fhe comprehensive plan. Tfie Land Use chapfer of the Comprehensive Plan supports a compatible mix of uses. This area contains a m+x of commercial uses on the north side of the Jefferson and residential uses on the south side. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Based on finding 2a, staff recommends denial of the change of nonconforming use permit from a beauty salon to tattoo parlor. � � NONCONFORMING USE PERMIT APPLICATION � � Department ofPlanning and Economic Development Zorzing Sec[iort I400 City Ha11 Annex 25 A'est FouKh Street Saint Pau1, MN 55102-1634 ` (651) 266-6589 APPLICANT PROPERTY LOCATION - ��5 �� —� Name� Address City (7b1'�1 .s Name of Owner (if Contacf Person (if }iM�.n/ v� to� ��St.�� Zip J�S��J DaytimePhone�o�/' Address / Location _ 36� Legal Description� ( . L77 � LJ . � 7. �U,3 Current (attach additional sheet if necessary) TYPE OF PERMIT: Application is hereby made for a Nonconforming Use Permit under provisions of Chapter 62, � Section 103, Paragraph �s of the Zoning Code. The permit is for: �.{ Change from one nonconforming use to another (para. c in Zoning Code) -" ❑ Re-estabtishment of a nonconfosming use vacant for more than one ysar (para. e) ❑ Legal establishment of a nonconforming use in existence at least 10 year (para. a) O Enlargement of a nonconforming use (para. d) SUPPORTING INFORMATION: Supply the information that is applicable to your type of permit. LG LOS@ � CHANGE IN USE: Present 1 Past Use 41 �� v� l 17 �� ✓A�-�B11�, �� dp. oR ).al�ooj ��20� G�2fi4Se �T�7Too �,o�2cose RE-ESTABLISHMENT: Proposed Use Additional information for alt appficatians (attach additionaf sfieets if necessary�: $�o`/t�j�� iJ tcarntne�c,%�� t3v�`1�� d . Lo , cc, � FTa t� CGrv�eY �ayrt�' of �en�rs��+ 1 G�2.IC� �1 creSs srre f l' �= i.°orw� s p•at� x y s t3A� �j (J�, � / loe�e) T,oi�oo ,o�� (1 ct�A�n� ttachments as required: ❑ Site Plan � Consent Petition ❑ Affidavit ApplicanYs Signature � Date �� Lb �Z�� City Agent � � � �r U K�fom¢1NCUPA Revised 10/5/04 � TRTX t Pa�e 1 of 3 , _ - 0� � � � � `' � A � ` :� � � - � _: _ '�---- --: : = . �:ar�b ._s .� �.c a?a�.=�� Home �_e��c My Matnx i Finance � Roster f Tax � Open Nnuse } History' Home Base i Hetp � Logout i . irii'i.')<...:�a � _.__ '__ _.. i3j. .1 . . � . ..._ ,.... _...�. _. Resuit 1 of 1. Checked 0.��,=ck a,l �. f I il} ;'vrep=�i= hort �_;�!ay_ � Sot_om � Osceala Avr_ St Clair A�e Lom6ard Ave Original List Pnce: $154,900 � Vl � r C � C c[ = i§nxac,G �. u aiiE � C� �..::.,.�.. °:i :!??OS,^,C" � Bet� Rd � ::: r'�te'° . - -u..^�.'d- :35D:Cliftan i,- .-' - ts �a l�fEf500 AVC 4. � � '�fl19CC �^ �, � N O 9 .f,' ;� �„ � Par1;- in a p � � o a •r'� o o = �° " )dI11P5 A4C �C` �V LL � a `t 6 �` ��R�� kve 38 °' `° �y�� i� � JUttli ,$V2 �.�� Idfi4A-A�lE � Property Full Display, CommercialJMixed Use, MLS :: 3059252 ^ 360 Clifton Street ,, Minnesota 55102 Status: Active List Price: $154,900 MLS Ared: 7�'8 - SP-Home CroB/W 7Th CMU Sty4e: Busin�s Opportunity Current Use: Eeaucy)sarber Sl�oq Commerclat Const Status: Previousty Owned Total Units: 1 Foundation Size: 1,440 Building FinSqFt: 1,440 Year 8uilt: 1950 Acres: 0,120 Lot Dimensions: .12 TAX IIVFORMATION Property ID: R122823130fl33 TdX �Yea�: 2DDb Tax Amt: $2,61fl Assess Bai: $840 Tax w(assess: �$2,850 Assess Pend: No Homestead: No List Date: 07J05/Z005 Received By MLS: 07lO6(2005 Days On Market: 7 CDOM: 7 G�nsra3 Froperty Inacrmatian Lega4 flescription�. Rams�y's Ss+b O4 B21 Stirrson ar Lot 34 855c 21 Counfy: Kamsey School District: 625 - St. Paul Comp4ex(Dev/Sub; Lot Description: Corner Lot Road Frontage: City Zartirtg: BusinessjCommercial OwnerOccupied: N Accessibility: Norte � Map Page: 12i Map Coord: Ei DifECLiOf15; 94 To Lexington S 2 Mites E On JefFerson 6 81ks To Ciifton R On Ciifiton To 360. hrip://matrix.northstarmis.com/Matri�display.aspx?c=AAEAAAD* �`* **AQAAAAAAA... 7/ll/2005 More ehotos are avaifabl2 ior this prooertv G'cOVISTA Ne�ahb Tour �(Click icon to add to Watched Ustings) �rxzx 0 5- g65 R2snarks Hqerrt Remarks: Pa�e 2 of 3 Estabtished Satan 9pp�0yvner receRtyy rehred �pter 3D-r yrs af n/hood presEnce.9aton has gmr pot.of 2000/ chair rental Aug appcox 125 wk.8lds has been updated & treshly painted in & out.Neat, clean & ready for new antrepeneurlAgt to verify all�measurements Public Remarks: Great opp for sm, business! Salon w/ 30 yr. n/hood presence & ciientele avaii immed. Neat, clean, rehabbed & Painted in & out! Chair rents Aug. 125 wk/gmr of 2000+ make this a money maker! Local 8c fed grant $$ Avail.High visibility loc. near 35E. t - 5�.*>ctur� Zn;orma"tian NeaL: Fo�Ced Air Exterior: Fuel: Natural Gas Fencing: AirCond: Central Roof: Garage: 2 Water: Oth Prkg: Z Sewer• Parking Char: Utifities: MisceAaneo�s: Safe Indudes: Appiiances; �NO. of Ranges: No. of Refrig: Basement: Pool : Amenities-Unit: Detached Garage Stucco None Asphalt Shingles, Pitched City WaYer - ConaeCed City Sewer - Connected Out Builtlings 8uilding, Bu�;ness, Fixture/Eqvipment Day{ight/Lookout Windows, Fufl, Sump Aump Tiletl Ploors Units No. of Efriciencies: No. of i Bedroom Un�ts: No. of 2 Bedroom Units: No. of 3 Bedroom Units: No. oF 1 Room Units: No. oF 2 Room Units: No. of 3 Rocm Urtits: No. of 4 Room Units: No, of 5 Room Units: No. of 6 Room Units: No. of 7 Room Units: Totai Units: i rinas�ciai , Cooperattrtg 8roker Compensatton 6uyer Broker Comp: 2,7% Sub-Agent Comp; 0.0°do Facilitator Comp: 0.0^/0 Variable Rate: Y List Type: Exclusive Right To Selt Existirtg Mortgage Informatiort Existing Mortgage Amt: $ Secondary Fnancing: Principal/Interes[: Loan Origination Date; Interest Raee: Fnancia( Remarks: Seiler Wiit Coosider Cd Terms/ Adj Grad Pmt W 15% Down. Avg. Comm Rents � ¢Sl-$13 Per Ft. For Area. Seflers Terms: Adj. Rate/Gr Payment, Cash, ConYract for Deed, Conventional �istirtg Fnartcinq: Free and Clear Agent is Owner?: No Expenses Owner Expense: Etectric, Fuei, Insura�ce, Taxes, Water/Sewer - Tenant Expense: 81ecYric, Fuel, Insurance, Lawn, Snow, Ta�ces, WaYer/Seurer Rnnual Etectric Expense: Annual Rapeir Expense: Mnual Fuel Expense: Annua! Trash Expense: Annuai Insurence Expense: Annua� Water/Sewer Expense: Annual Maintenance Expense: Annua! Caretaker Expense: AnnualGross Expense: Totat Rrtrtuat Expenses_ - Income Annual Gross Income: Annual Net Income: Monthty Rerrt, 1 Room Units: Monthly Rent, 2 Room Units: Monthly Rent, 3 Room Units: Monthly Rertt, 4 Room tJnits: Monthly Rent, 5 Room Units: $ $ knnual Rent, 1 Room Urtits: Annuat F(ent, 2 Room Unfts: Annual Rent, 3 Room Units: Annuat Rent, 4 Room Units: Annual Rent, 5 Room Units: , � � hup://matrix.northstarmis.com/Ma7i�display.aspx?c=AE`.EAAAD*****AQAAAAAAA... 7/I i/2005 Tax & Property Characteristic Information - Quick Info http://rrinfo.co.ramsey.mn.us/publidcharacterisric/Parcel.pasp?scm... 05-5�5 • {�,�[,1yp� InFormation &om Rarnsey County's Department of Property � Records & Revenue RRTnfo Home Tips Ta�c & Propertv Characterisric � Recorded Document Contact Us Tas & Property Characteristic Information � � New Propertv Seazch > Quick Informariou Back to Seazch Results Quick Info Property Information Ta�mayer Name and Address Value Information Value History Structure Description Sale Tnformation Special Assessments Property T� Pannent Inforznation Property Tax Pavtnent Historv Prouerty Ta�c � Go to E-Pay Property Identification 11.28.23.13.0033 Number (PI1V) Property Address 360 Clifton St St.Paul 55102-3402 Property Recorded As Assessment Date O1-02-2004 Tax Payabte Year 2005 TotalEsfunated Market $111,000 VaWe Total Taxable Market $111,000 Value Total Estimated Land $15,800 Value Total Est'unated Building $95,200 V alue Total Property Tas + $3,690 Soecial Assessments Property Class Descciption Commercial 01-02-2005 2006 $133,200 $133,200 $15,800 $117,400 Commercial 2004 Pronerty Tax Year Built 1950 StatemenUValue Norice # of Stories 1.00 PSnished SQ Feet 1440 Pavment Stubs Foundarion Size Mumesota State Form P1at or Section ! Township Ramsey's Sub Of B21 M1PR lRange StinsonBr ^ Legal Description Lot 34 Blk 21 Last Sale Date Price r Database Last Refreshed 08-16-2005 � Copyright 2063 Ramsey Countv Email: Propertyl'axInfo(�a,coaamsev.mn.us � � 1 of 1 8/16/2005 9:59 AM >----� �,�._ � ��. �� :� _��-��`-.` z; � �!"'� --.�„r' � �z STATE O� ttlINNESO�'A �EPARTfl�ENT Gr COM4IEACE &3 - 7° P+lAC£ �AST, SU1TE 3�� ST. FA�I, T/i"tNhiE50TA Sc701 •`,85 � ) 296 5319 � o �' �3�5� e�artmen! �sa Cr'„ Casmetology Sale;� =ee Qujdfied ter cesmeuc care Si3G ts the Saion'or,atad m a resiaence^ Yas (� Man?c�ra SaSon Fee 5136 Quaiified :cr ,„ smet�c carx or nails orty �'�o �7 � Estheticiar. Safnn Fee Sti3� � Cualified kx cnsma;:c care � of skin aNv , fie �ms acel.cati�n Sutm�7Ed for Late R°ne•Naf? Yes � No �7' If Ye:. pm�ri�e oure�t Safon G'censz Numper. �� ( �s mis epchcaton submit[ed due to: ' �• NEw Cuner Yes� NO � 1f Yes, o�ovioe Pcrmer Ssbn Gce �N�mher. �- Q � � Farmer Sabn Name anc Ad�ress �! �__ ��Q('�� 1 � �, : Nam n orme! Salcr. Owrer , � �Ae�a. �,� ��v . � � o cg�pR Reinatio�? Yes �� No� If Yes, pro•nde Famier ebr'Jcensa Numbx: � F�rmer3ab�NameandA6d2ss � �+ BI15 h '1@55 SfNCr.1tE � 1 es � No� lf Y=s. pronde former �a�en Lixr,se NumGzr: � �— �o�ma• 9u in s Str�cture G�� 3u �- F m O Curpo � ci O?artn �s a xh i B. SALON tNFOR141ATlON �7 Gp�+Le9a: Nane IiSad EWOw. 3]ac1 copy uf CmJrmle ol As:vmetl Yzmn rec aM uaraea OY �^a mcr.asota Suaecmy d S�am E9ti'95-ZY13� C�iO(IE ¢aa�tytor Tax IO r,umber. snWC I Countv of S21or, MN Rovem.e Oey.'c51-Y8T-S2251 1 Q A"n I Saion Ffi;nager Nam� 7 6ransej � SatonManag�license (�Aust ne emptayeC ai T,5 S�or, aiM must-ave a c�.,rre:N f t:nnas xa Manager Szton Manager Licensa ExpiraUon Sa�on Nours: C„ieck tne oays of tiyeek that ;aon wilt be opzr., anc Gst ihe sae�ific hours that salon is open each day. � Sunesy � PAorsdsY �7u�sd�y — �tJe e y �'i n a' J jj �rid _� '�'.Sa*. F4ss;rs� Hours }{a.�? �' --�---(Y- �L=1 t'� .,L_ Hours Hou:s: tix�s: hiuura: �C�e� by p�r�intm�nt Oniy If q�en by Apwintr.ient box s cna;,ced. applicant must tl�signste ti2 Gzyper month, Tue.±da)• • Fdday. j tcrtecx one) � � t praciittoner ; O Z ptaGtt;;Cners � � 3 p:aefltloners � Q a practitioner� f � 5 practilioners � ❑ _..prectitior,a:= 120 squarefex! 17C sauare fset Z20 square feet 270 sqvars feet 324 square £eet __sr,uare fee; AM 50'or ese� xCdinnal �icensxe 106 sqaare fae! 135 square feet 174 sGUare feei 245 sGuare E?e! <"40 sqaare feet l �quarz teet A�d 35 fi• saeM add:LOrai:fcerse^ 170 square teai ib� s4uare Feet 27Q s�uare feet 2E� sQs��afe>t 373 sqcvra feet �sq�:arE feet �ntl �Q io. en<n atld�4ora1 Lcerua Paq� t af � MAKE R COPY GF TH�S AF?ItCATION FOR YOUR RE�OR'JS ,' c. 0 �— PROFESSlONAL LIASIC)r{ iNgu�,j�E_ Axacn Cer�n�!e cf I.�surance showing $25,�pQ coverceleach daim ar,d S�O,CC� ccverzgee2ac.� poiicy year(eaw'± crt_�rcte�. ;N°m@ 3rtd aQd!@u ��',tts'-'2ff• mu;t be the sama as the name ar.a aadress o�licer.see •w^moan� - Cenmute xciaer secrion os Curlf,cata Nasur.nca Tus[svte: MH Commer'ce eJtens/nq pjvislort, B9- � pface caa:, St. Paul, NN 55}U!j Genera� Liaoility insuranc� caverzge wiil nat be ac�p CE�. :Vamecr!ns�ranceCompany t�w,cm.+e,u,��aas�,,,,,�� Policytvumbe: WOAKERS' C6MPENSkT�ON INSURANCE: � � A?ta:h Certifcate ef Insu2n :e stwwing Nforkers Compensation wverage. ;Mam.e ana ac�ress a 7nsured"¢r. Certif,de efrnsc:ar;ce.Te��x !ha sa,^ra as :;re name and aCdress cf company as lrsted in l.Ms!its�sa appfqiion. "Canificaee Xo;eer sac;fon of Cxqneaee of;asurarsea mus� r.m:.�N cor,>m�e uca�sm3 Drvas;on, as- ?°� pi� Ees�, se Pau+. Mx sstof) For iaforr.iatic� regardir;g wo�rters rampensation re��'vsmen;s, mntaci 8;e ;.tN ' �o: d Labcr &�ncusvy at 651-294-PA65. If exzmpt, a wr.H=n explanation of specific ezemo�on �s 2�uired, sign=d and date�i 6y �pllcant. Name cf ir.surance CompanY iw,,,,,,,,,,,,�,�,,,��„ OE :.� tnd `:VidUdl?i0�'ifI2Y7f t. Pro�a L?gal Nane af lndividual: Folicy Number 2- AttauS copy at C2rfiate of Assumed Name �f Saion Name is d;ffEZn; from Legal Nare of Individual. 3. A;+ach a campleted "8CA' form for the Individuzt Frop!ietor lis:ed above. 4. F�HG`I 87( �Eq�i.'?d CBRi11Wt25 of 4n5U�3fie& (Legai NaRe and any Aswmed Nam.e must aopear m'Ir.sured Yame" se�ion of CeriEC=te � L Carporation L AaviGe Legz; Name W, Corparatlan: �� 2. A�ach copy of Artic�es of , ncorporatian, fi}ed artd by Min?�sa,a Secretary oi Seate. 3• Attach complet?d "Disclosure of Owners. Psrtners, Office�' forzn. �. Attach a�mpieted'BCA" form for each indrvidual Sist_d ort tha "QisJosure of Owners, Parcners, O��"ficzre" ;cr.; �, u. ANach capy oi Certifrcate of Asgumed Name (f Saton Name :s diRerent Gom Legal Name of Cerpo2tion;. �_ Ah3cft e�� : LGUirEd Cefjjfic3tes �f 1n5Ufa'1c2. (Laga7 Name aeM arty Assurt;ed Na;ne must apxar �n'Insured ?lame' oection o: �ertifrcate ; � Partnership 1. Prov,ds Lega[ Name of Pernership: Chedc One: Gene21 Parhterf;ip'J' Limited r�artnarnip � E.imitad Liability Pa+tnership � 2 RC,�ch wpy of Business Orgsrrization documents. 3. Attac.h compfatzd "�isctasure of Owners, Partners, Ctfi�rs" form. 4. Afkach a cample;ed 'gC,�,° fortn fo� each indi�idu21 fisted on the "Disclasure oF Cwners, ?arfiars, Office!s' �o!m 5. Attach Ccpy Cf .r.ErtifiCata Cf Assumed Name (if Saan M<me s dEAe2n. hcn tega! Name of iRe Fartrtetship ar eaeh parhw�r's namel 6. Attaeh aA required Certlfcyte> of Insuanes. tegai t� eme ant any Ass�med Nane must aopear m'Insured Nama" sectien d Cr_Rif,cateJ ❑ OtherBusinessStrustvre 'I - P�vide Leg�; ;Vame ct 9�siness Chec:t One: LimiteC Gahiiity Company Q guginess Tmst O Govzmmertt Entity Q 2- Atta:t coGY of Business 6rgar,ization documers. 3. Attach ca.^„p(eted 'DisGosure of Owners. Partners, Offi;xrs^ form. �t;ier Q (g�er;ry: ) 4. Attach a compfeted'9CA" ;e.�n for each irdividuz! lisiad or th� "D�sdosure of Ovme;s, Partners. O{ficars' . 5- Attacht cOpy o� �e?tificate Oi ASE�med tvame ('rf 5alan Name is differeni fmm Legai Nama cf 6usiness E�firy) 5. Attach aa r��t!%d Certifi a(25 pf !�SU�811C8, iLegxl N�9 aid any AssumoC Name must appear in 9nsured Narr:�` sectlon o( CMificate.! � i � P�e1of3 / � / ,- t-<�� •. Acp!iczr.t m;s a�tach a c�py oi :he signeC, dated CertiFcaie of Occapancy i;,und b1 !he C�ty et Gour^ in :vi;ich U-�e � b�iidir,g i, located. 2 rlppi;cant atu<t aGacn sfatemart �ram Zonin3 QFciat th2*, s!cn is ir. compti�ncs with Zoning ord:r:an,es, or oDtasr � stgnature below: _ Signawrc o:2o(+iny C.fc�ai r�e Date rr,n! Varz Y Z��,ng ^(!ua1 r_„y a r�nN Name f � eiepnc?NU.mxr o; •�r;c:a � I � i i ! Che_k the appropr:afe box Se[ow, and atfach required documer.tation: j ,AROiicar.c Tust cneck one) !'�7 The 3uiic�i .g ;n which �his saion is located is new construction. ` u The buildfng in wh;ch this saion is tocatad is an exis.3ng 6uiSding. The App{�cant fias made imgrovernents � or changes to Lhe salon which require build�ng perrnib and zoning approval. �� i• Applicznt must attach a mpy ci the Huilding Perroi:s !ssued by the Ciry or County in wtiich the building �s �iea. � 2. AppGcan'. must attach statemeat from �ening Officia! that saton is in compiiance tivith zcning ordinances, or obtair, ; signat�re heiow: Swnature d Zon�ng O�FOm 0 5- 9�5 tlate Pnrtt Nama W, 7amnc GYfv:�'af Gry 9r Caunry Name t Ta�epncr � Nemtrer ot Offira� � 7he builoinq in yvhi�h this saton is Eocaied is an existing buiiding. No Euildirtg Permits or Zonin� Approvat ' were ra�sl re by the ity Count in which !his sa�on is ;ocated. � ' ��-„-:N�s�.��,�-c,�S � , �/, f� y � Si ature d�iry or Counry 0t5azl ';,Ie ef Ciry or ur.N �c� p� � s��.0 k'�.rz�,<<�`� /l �� 5�2 5i l, a.�-�- (�� /) 2G-��1�>b'7� iPrint Name M Ciry or Cocnty Offic.ai ^— r� � ..ry>r nty e TaixpaonehumoerotOraa� � I CER; SFY THAT ALL fNrJRIviATIGN CONTAlPiED IN THIS �FPLiCAT1Cn IS TRUE AND �G^nRECT, ANC Tf-�AT THIS �QC' EN? HAS NOT 6FEN cRED !N ANY MANNER �ROM THE EORM ADCPTEG SY TNE DFP7 4F COMMERGc. �� /�1!jZC� - , �� n.�l� l- ! - U5 »•�'�fi'�� 6landarory) ;tbe DatO �a3e 3 er 1 Page 1 of 1 Emily Ulmer ��! �� 4 � From: <tom.anderson@thomson.com> ' To: <emily.ulmer@ci.stpaul.xnn.us> Date: 4/8(2005 1:46:43 PM Hi my name is matt magnuson and I am writing in regards to greg fehman opening a tattoo shop. t don't understand why you would'nt let him open a shop not only does he do great work but he's by far one of the most clean and professional shops in the state. (reaily his shop iooks like hospital surgery room). i have known greg for about eight years l have heard nothing but great things from the people that f have recomended to him. Please make sure that you are doing the right thing when it comes to letting him open he shop. Our society is changing tattoos "are noP' about bad things like peopie put them out to be. Tattoos are art. If you need a good reference to what tatoos are and mean to people you shouid watch the show Miami Ink onTLC "the learning channel" not oniy is it a good show but it proves the meaning of tatoos. And it is the # 1 show on cabel tv Any questions Call matt mag�uson 651-774-1504 r� � � file:(lC:�Docuxnents%20and 9/9/2005 Page 1 of 1 � ° � �� • From: <tom.aaderson@thomson.com> To: <emily.ulmer@cistpaul.mn.us> Date: 9/8/2005 1:46:43 PM Hi my name is matt magnuson and I am writing in regards to greg lehman opening a tattoo shop. I don't understand why you wouid'nt let him open a shop not only does he do great work but he's by far one of the most clean and professiona! shops in the state. (rea!!y his shop looks like hospital surgery room). ! have known greg for abo�t eight years 1 have heard nothing but great things from the people that I have recomended to him. Please make sure that you are doing the right thing when it comes to letting him open he shop. Our society is changing tattoos "are noY' about bad things like people put them out to be. Tattoos are art. If you need a good reference to what tatoos are and mean to people you should watch the show Miami Ink onTLC "the leaming channel" not ortly is it a good show but it proves the meaning of tatoos. And it is the # 1 show on cabel N Any questions Call matt magnuson 651-774-1504 � � � file://C:�Documents%20an@%20Settings\Ulmer�I.ocal%20Settings\Temp\GW}00003.HTM 9/8/2005 Page 1 of 1 Emily Ulmer - Support for Grease o 5 g��3' �v t- I 3 9- `j 69 • From: Keith Metteer <lanetteer@yahoo.co�n> To: <emily.ulmer@ci.stpaul.mn.us> ` Date: 9/13/2005 10:17:58 PM Subject: Support for Cnease CC: <grease@tattoosfromgrease.com> Ms. Ulmer I would like to express my support for a tattoo artist that I hold in the highest regards. There is a need for an artist such as Grease in the community. He holds a talent and deserves the right to work and earn a living providing a service that is respectable and artistic. After the death of my grandfather 8 yrs ago, Grease tattooed a memorial for me so I'd always think of him. Since that tune, I've added a few more and each of them have a special significance to me personally. I consider them all works of art and done very respectful. To each person, it may mean something different and that's what malces it so special. I'm an educator and work in the public teaching seminars on health and fitness. Part of being healthy is to find a balance in your physical, mental, emotional, and spiritual health. Greg provides a medium that can fill those balances, individually. Ibe worked with a huge bariety of people ranging from the elderly, professional athletes, and millionaire businessmen and women. I'm proud of the work he's done and never afraid to discuss to the personaly � significance to me to anyone. Please note my support and allow Crrease (Greg) to open his shop in the St,Paul community. Sincerely Keith Keifh A. Mefteer MEd, ATC/R, CSCS Orthopedic Rehabilitation Specialist LifeStyle Management - Mineapolis Club Mobile phone 612-70$-1718 Work Phone 612-332-2292 VMail 952-808-4040 www.lifes �lemanagement.net Yahoo! for Good Click here to donate to the Hurricane Kah-ina relief effort. � file://C:�Documents°/a20and%20Settings\Ulmer\Local%20Settings\Temp\GW}00003.HTM 9/14/2005 Page 1 of 1 � �- �� os_(39-469 Emily Ulmer - File#OS-156-390 Appeal of Planning Comuussion � From: <Pasrick2939@comcast.neU " " To: <emily.ulmer@ci.stpaul.mn.us> Date: 9/25/20�5 726:42 AM Subject: File#OS-156-390 Appeal of Planning Commission September 25, 2005 I will be out of town and unable to attend the meeting on October 5 conceming Mr. Lelunan's request of appeal. I would just like to reiterate my feelings from my original letter sent to you for the first meeting. To open a Tattoo parlor in my neighborhood would be a travesty and an injustice. I am a grandfather of 3, all three live in the neighborhood. We also have had a lazge number of young pazents move into the neighborhood. The air is filled with the sounds of their children's joyful noise. There is also the grade school play- ground across from the proposed site of the tattoo pazlor. Now I lrnow that not all those seeking tattoos aze not "shady characters" but there may be some who would do our children hazm. One woutd be one too many. Plus, the near proximity of Spanky's Baz is another thing to consider. I have had to attend to unruly � behaviour from the bar for years, calling the police often. I would not like to think what might happen if you throw alcohol into the mix. , I have 6 registered voters living in my house. All have the same sentiment--Say No To The Tattoo ParIor. Thank you, Stephen R. Pastick 357 Falton St. (the house directly behind 360 Clifton) St. Paul, Mn 55102 � file://C:\Docwnents%20and%20SettingslUlmer�I,oca1%20Settings\Temp\GW}OOOOI.HTM 9/26/2005 Page 1 of 1 � � g � 5 oS-134- �{6a Emily Ulmer - TATTOOS F'ROM GREG'GREASE' LEHMAN � � From: "Jason Portinga" <revjason@comcast.net> To: <emily.uimer@ci.stpaul.mn.us> Date: 9l25(2Q05 11:30:07 AM Subject: TAT"I'OOS FROM GREG'GREASE' LEHMAN What is being done to Greg Lehman and his business, Tattoos From Grease;is nothing short of criminal. Mr. Lehman is a St Paul native who was just trying to live the american dream and be a cultural and financial supporter of the city he loves so much. He started with an idea, worked hard to make that idea a reality,establishes a successful business,all the while adhearing to all city,county and state laws concerning, running a small business.He is a lifelong resident who has payed more than his fair share of taxes to the city. How does our great city reward his hardwork and support of his community? They come in and take away his successful business and prime business location! That alone is just plain wrong? Despite this, he is determined to reopen his business in St.Paul and continne being a financial and cultural contributor to the city he has lived his entire life in.After finding a location that is suitable(but not even close to the prime business location that was taken from him)filing the correct paperwork, paying all the various fees to the correct government entities and speaking � to the correct officials who assure him there wiil be no problem reopening at the location in question. How does our great city repay him and all the tag dollars and community support he has contributed over a lifetime?? They try to refuse his right to earn a honest living. Why is this happening to a hardworking,lawbiding citizen? Noone seems to have an answer to that question.Why does a city that supposedly incourages business growth push away a well respected businessman and virtually destroy his business? Again, noone seems to be able to answer that question. The city of St. Paul is literally encouraging an established business, and all the tax revanue it brings in, to leave and go to another city,how could this possibly benefit St. Paul and its residents? I do know that its dissuaded me from opening a business here! Sincerely, REV.3ASON PORTINGA Lifelong resident St.Paul MN � file:1/C:�Documents%20and%20Settings\U1mer�L,oca1%2QSettings\Temp\GW}Q0003.HTM 9/26(20Q5 Page 1 of 1 o � - � � � � or-1�9-'/6`t Emity Ulmer - Tattoo Shop on Clifton � • From: "Daniel Unger" <dunger@nac-hvaacom> To: <emily.ulmer@ci.stpaul.mn.us> � Date: 8/22/2005 4:22:29 PM Subject: Tattoo Shop on Clifton Dear Ms. Ufiner, I am a previous customer of Tattoos From Grease. I have had nothing but good experiences with Mr. Lehman. He runs a very clean 6usiness and the clientele is not the stereotypical "tattooed people" that some may be tearful of. I think the city will benefit from having Mr. Lehman's shop at the location (360 Clifton St.) that he is pursuing. The business has not been open during ail hours of the night and i believe the traffic generated will be miniscuie in comparison with the bar across the street. Having lived in St. Paul for most of my life (and now a homeowner here), I would Iove to see more businesses like Tattoos From Grease in the city. i know that people have attached a stigma to tattoo shops, but please consider the history that Mr. Lehman has as a responsi6le business owner in the city of St. Paul before denying his application. Thank you for your time and consideration on this issue. Daniel B. Unger I�orihern Air Ccfrporation UirecK 6�t.z�5.3gx6 Fax G�t.49o.t6g6 Main 6gt.49o.9868 Email dungerCnac-hwaacum � C� file:ilC:V?ocuments%20and%20SetYings\U1mer�L.ocal%203ettings\Temp\GW}OOOOI.HTM 8/22J2005 Page 1 of 1 � : • * : �� _ .ro.�� _�..�.��., �,,.�. _ . -�m.� , , rd�. M.�,.�...,��r.�. �,,�� ., � �.xa.�.�,.�..��<� ...�,..�_. �..... . J From: "cindy" <jcbumsva@msn.com> To: <emiIy.ulmer@cistpaul.mn.us> Date: 8/27/2005 12:09:50 PM Subject: Tattoos From Crrease CC: <grease@tattoosfromgrease.com> I am writing in support of granting a license to Greg Lehman for his tattoo business to be located at 360 Ciifton in St Paul. I have known Greg for several years and must say that he always conducts himseif in a professiona! manner and takes pride not only in his work but also the cieaniiness of his studio. I am so pieased with the work fie has done that i wii( use no one other than Greg for my Tatfoos. (n fact he is so good at what he does fhat my wife and i have relocated several times and when ever we are back visiting in MN I stop in to see Greg to have some more work done. As far as I am concerned there is no one better in the industry and not to grant him a license would be nothing but injustice. Joe Bums Richmond, VA � � file://C:�Documents%20and%20SettingslUlmer�I,oca1%20SettingslTemp\GW } 00002.HTIv1 8/29/2005 Emily Uimer - TatYoo shoP_.. _.._n _ � . _ .._. � _.. � _ � _�_ _... ,.,_ ... __,,_.. ._ , page 1 0 5- 965 • From: To: Date: Subject: "Erickson, Ed" <ed.erickson@medtronic.com> <emf ty. ulmer@ci.stpaul. mn. �s> 8/18/2005 1:00:42 PM � Tattoo shop � os-t"j9-�i6`I I am a 42 year old professional who about two years ago wanted to get a tattoo. ABer checking many different shops i chose Grease Tattoos because of the cieanliness of the shop and the great personality of the owner. You denying him a right to make a living is the wrong thing for you or anyone elseto do ................................................. i i _ _. ._ � ___ __ __.__ - _, - - � Emil Ulmer- Greg Lehman's license request i � Page 1 0 5- 9b5 From: Sami Gabriel <sgabrie!@teamstersloca1320.org> To: <emily.uimer@ci.stpaul.mn.us> Date: 8/15l2005 830:14 A151 Subject: Greg Lehman's license request Dear Ms. Ulmer, I am writing to you in support of Greg lehman's request for a license for his tattoo studio in St Paul on Clifton St. I had a ta800 from Greg about 1 1/2 years ago and found his studio to be one of the cleanest studios I had ever been to. Greg is a fanatic about the rules in his studio, which is rare among tattoo artists. He ran his sYudio very professionally and I got treated with the utmost respect and care. His is a business that I wouldn't mind righf next door to my fiome. ( hope fhat you wiii grant his license request and allow a professional law abiding business man to continue being a good tax paying business owner. Thank you for your time, Sami Gabriei 7175 37th st Oakdale � °s- 139- �t6 q i � � � _ __ w.�� _ _.__ .._..w ___�_� _._ _ � .� _ _ �. _ - Emil Ulmer - A new I�cense Page 1, Y _. ... .,,. .. _,. �_....,..� _�___ .__ __.....��._.__ .___... _,___.___ r._. _�,� ___,.. �.. o �� .�C o S-1 �`1- `i L`t � From: To: Date: Subject: "Erik Salomonsen" <sa1o0003@go.century.edu> <emily. ulmer@ci,stpaul. mn_us> 8l17l2005 10:01:15 PM A new license To whom it may concern, This past March I was fortunate enough to recieve a tattoo by Greg aka "Grease". Unfortunately, on Monday August 15,2005 I recieved an e-mail sta6ng that Grease was not going to recieve a license for his new building. This is a very depressing situation because Grease is the best artist in this field of work, but now he can not serve our local communities. I send my deepest appologies to Grease and his kin in the hope that the city counciUboard wi11 grant Grease a new license. Thanks for your time, Erik F. Salomonsen � � Page 1 of 1 Emi�y Ulmer - Zoning for tattoo shop �� €? � From: "Lisa H" <lisa harhnan@comcastnet> To: <emily.uimer@ci.stpaul.mn.us> Date: 8l26/2005 10:39:18 PM Subject: Zoning for tattoo shop CC: <fortroadfed@fortroadfederation.org>, <wazdl-7@ci.sipaul.mn.us> Nello, I am writing in regards to zoning decision for the proposed tattoo shop at 360 Clifton. I strongly urge the city to permit Greg Lehman to open his shop there. I fived less than a mile from his previous shop on White Bear Avenue & Minnehaha Avenue and was saddened to see the cifiy's se%tive removai of the businesses and other properties on that intersection. I wns a repeat customer at Tattoos From 6rease ns it was convenient, clean, safe, welt run, nnd offered quality tattoo work. I was disappainted th4t Greg Lehman was moving from my east side neighborhood, but figured the drive to the other side of town would be worth it. I find it inconceivable that the city may deny the iicensure for Mr. Lehman to continue his business. Please keep this business in St Paul. There already are many bars and pizza joints in this town on just about every corner (ironically two of the businesses not affected by the new road improvements an Minnehaha and White 8ear Avenue), but it is difficult to find a business as high as caliber as Tattoos From 6rease is in producir�g a beccutiful piece of permanent skin art. Help keep St Pau! beautiful, by perm�ting Greg Lehmen to open his tattoo shop at 36Q Clifton. Thank you, Lisa Hartman � � � file://C:�Documents%20and%20Settings\U1mer�I,oca1%20Settings\Temp\GW}00002.HTM 8/29/2005 Tattoo Application Denial , - , ��—�� Page 1 of 2 o S —I 3q- �t G9 Emily Ulmer - Tattoo Application Denial for 360 Clifton Street From: "Santori, Terrance" <tjsantori@healtheast.org> To: <emily.ulmer@ci.stpaul.mn.us>, <patricia.james@ci.stpaui.mn.us>, <wazdl- 7@ci.stpaul.mn.us�, <fortroadfed�a fomoadfederation.org> Date: 8(1612Q05 8:11:45 AM Subject: Tattoo Application Denial for 360 Clifton Street CC: "Greg "Grease" Lehman (E-mail)" <grease@tattoosfromgrease.com> To Whom it May Concem: My name is Terry Santori and I am writing you on behalf of my Tattoo Artist, and friend, Cneg "Grease" Lehman. My purpose for contacting you is to inform you of the type of person Greg is, the type of business Greg runs, and more importantly mq feelings on his current situation. Greg himself is a friendly, knowledgably, extremely talented tattoo artist who, over the 8+ years I have been receiving tattoos from him, has evolved into one of my close personal friends. Greg is an upstanding citizen who is simply hying to run a business that he loves, while at the same time trying to make a living. We all should be jealous of Greg, in a sense. Greg has a job he loves, and is his own boss. In my book that tops the list. I am a retired Police Officer so I know what it is like to take orders. Greg resides in the city for which I worked. My department was never called to his residence for any problems and I wouid consider Greg a model citizen. Greg's morals and ethics are also higher than the average 3oe. He refizses to tattoo any person that is under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs and keeps his word on prices for custom pieces. Greg also throws in a free tin of "Tattoo Goo" with every tattoo he does. All you need to do is print off a free coupon from his website. This "Goo" helps heal the skin faster and more important, properly. This tin of "Goo" also has a$5 value, but Greg does this so his patrons skin heals properly. How many business owners do you know that give away product on a regulaz basis, regardiess of loss of profit??? Prior to me visiting Greg's shop for the first time T had a lot of visions in my head about what a Tattoo Farlor would look like. Most of those visions came from movies and/or television and where of a dark, dirty, back-alley type setting ti�at was a breeding place for disease, among other things. When I entered Greg's shop far the first time I was absolutely amazed with its cleanliness. Greg's shop was bright and inviting. It was safe and secure. There where not any "shady" chazacters hanging azound, and for that matter, never have been. It was right away apparent that this was a place of business that was well taken caze of and the type of place I wanted to get a tattoo from. Greg seemed genuinely interested in my vision for what I wanted my skin to look like, and overall made me feel comfortable about the investment I was about to make. Like I said, Crreg is the cleanest, most meticulous business person I have ever met. In fact, while getting one of my first tattoos, Greg accidentally spilled a little bit of blue ink on his signature black and white tiled floor. Greg stopped tattooing me and took almost 20 minutes to completely cleanup the spili and re-sanitize the area and himself before finishing my tattoo. Greg is this way with every aspect of his business. For these reasons, plus many more, I will continue to do business with Greg as long as I am able to. Greg is one of the most professional Tattoo Artist in the business, hands down! Besides, why would St. Paul not want Greg to open a shop in their city? Would you rather see people getting tattoos in an unclean, unsafe environment? I wouldn't. How many times has a business, of any type, been cited by the City for Health Code violations when the area of cleanliness? How many times has Greg's? NONE! Yet these business continue to operate and you deny Greg... � � � file://C:�Documents%20and%20Settings\Ulmer\Local%20Settings\Temp\GW}00OO1.HTM 8/16/2005 � From: 0 � ` " � � "pharaohsmn@netrero.neY' <pharaohsmn@netzero.net> To: <emily.ulmer@ci.stpaul.mn.�s>, <fortroadfed@fortroadfederation.org>, �,vardl- 7@ci.stpaul.mn.us> Date: 8l24/2005 12:07:13 AM Hello, My name is Steve I am writing this in regards to the possible denial of Greg Lehman,s Tattoo shop " Tattoos from grease . First of alt let me expla+n alittle about my self . I got my first tattoo trom what 1 was told a very reputable artist turned out he did a horribie job and now I am stuck with it for life . that was over 8 yrs ago. I had been looking for an artist for ali that time ta both fix it and give me others . i was told about Greg's shop by many friends. I was very apprehensive to say the least . But went down to check out his work and shop. I was very happy and surprised at how clean and friendly he was and his shop was.ln my opinion it looked iike a doctors practice completely painted white and extremely CLEAN when I met Greg he was wearing clean and pressed white uniform . When t went 7n to get my first work from him I tried to walk behind his counter where he does his work he quickly told me to please stay behind the counter until he was finished cleaning f! rom the last work he had done.This surprised me greatly and just backed up what 1 had been told and had seen about how he does his work. He was the nicest and cieanest artist. I have ever met and was more then willing to listen to my past problems. Very much UNLIKE the first person who tattooed me ( I don't caN that person an artist) Now I was told that the city of St. Paul has made him move from his oid location because they want to widen the street .And believe me he had no choice but move . Now I hear after the fact of him buying a new location he has been totd St Paui isn't going to allow him to have his shop in this new foca6on even though the old business was a hair saloon and there is a bar out his back door. I feel this would be a travesty and the wrong thing to do to a long time business owner in St Paui . I am wondering ifi this is how St Paul treats small business's ? I am basically disgusted with this and 1 feel it is very unfair seeing the way St Paul has already treated �, him making him move out of his old location!!!!! Greg is one of the nicest people I have ever met not just the BEST tattoo artist. He is always happy to see me and even remembers my name even though I only go to him once or twice a year. Thank you for your time in reading this I hope every thing goes i� Greg's favor if not St Paul might be loosing not only a great business owner but also one heii of a great guy. Stephen J Gullickson Forest Lake , Mn � Page 1 of 1 0 �- g�5 Emily i3lmer - 360 Clifton St. � From: "John Doiron" <doiron873@comcast.net> To: <emily.ulmer@ci.stpaul.mn.us>, "'Lisa H'" Qisa_hartman@comcast.net> Date: 8/27(2005 8:19:06 AM Subject: 360 Clifton St. " � Hello, I am writing in regards to the situation occurring to Mr. G. Lehman; a.k.a. "Grease". This man has worked very hard to earn a living running his own business. First, the city of St. Paul invokes "eminent domain", and kicks him out of his shop which stops him from eaming a living and feeding his family. Now when he has the opporiunity to re- open his business and once again earn a LEGAL income and feed his family, they (City of St. Paul) deny him from applying for a business permit. What are you (City planners) thinking???? Why do you wish to deny "Crrease" from earning a living by practicing his artwork, which I may say he is very good, at in his own tattoo shop? You (City of St. Paui) are refusing the man the ability to accomplish what the bill of ri�hts explains as; life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, or as the rest of "us" describe as, the American � Dream. If he is to open a business, he would ha�e to pay taxes, licensing fees,& wages to any employees he might have, all of this will increase the economy of St. Paul as well as providing a clean, sterile environment for anyone who wants a new piece of ariwork to display on their body. I think you people at the City planners office should leave it up to the paying-public to decide if the "Tattod s From Grease" business, will prosper ar fizzle-out, and quit trying to decide for "us" what YOU think we want and need. Do the right thing and let him proceed with business as usual...Thank You. Jake Doiron, just another taYpayer, voter, & concerned citizen... � file://C:\Documents%20and%20Settings\Ulmer\Local%20Settings\Temp\GW}00003.HTM 8/29/2005 _ _�. . .� _ _... . � , _ __ � ___ _ _. _ . _ _. __ Emi(y Uimer - Tattoos From Grease Zoning Permit Pa e 1; 05-��5 From: "Amy Zuniga" <amy82175@hotmail.com> To: <emify.ulmer@ci.stpaul.mn,us> Date: 8/27l2005 12:33:43 PM Subject: Tattoos From Grease Zoning Permit I am writing in regards of the possible deniai for a zoning permit for Greg Lehman tattoos studio — Tattoos by Grease. My husband and ! have been going to Greg for years to have our tattoos done. In the 7+ years we have never encountered any problems with his tattoo studio. This I just an average everyday guy just Yrying to make a living. I can understand the concems surzounding allowing a tattoo studio in the neighborhood. However, 1 must say those concerns are unfounded. Greg runs a very c(ean, professionai tattoo studio. His studio is probably cleaner than some hospitals. His studio is always very quiet and Greg has always been very professional whe�ever, I've worked with him. As for the concerns about the fact tfie tattoos studio would generate more business than the beauty saion that was previously there is untrue. He is the only tattoo artist and can oniy tattoo one person at time. Spanky's bar across the street has many more customers than he ever would. I am not what you would think of as someone who would have a tattoo. I am a married mother of hvo. My husband and I own a house in the northern suburbs. We are both middle class working peopie. 1 work in a very professionai environment for one of the largest financiai companies around. Yet I stiil enjoy having/getting tattoos. I feel it would be a huge mistake nof to grant Greg his permit. He is just your average guy trying to make a Iiving. His living just happens to inciude tattoo peopie. I sincerely hope you reconsider your decision to deny his request for a permit. Sincerely, Amy Zuniga A loyal customer � � � u r 1 L_J � � �� ,�� Emily Ulmer - 360 Clifton � Page 1 of 1 � �° �� From: "Zenner, Pau1" <paul.zenner@contractor.thomson.com> To: "'emily.ulmer@cistpaul.mn.us'° <emily.ulmer@ci.stpaul.mn.us> Date: 8/10/2005 332:49 PM Subject: 360 Clifton Emily-Thanks for taiking with me about 360 Clifton. i beiieve that potentially allowing a tattoo parlor on this busy corner wifl oniy server to degrade the neighborhood. Presentiy it is stifl a fairly strong neighborhood but that couid change rapidly with addition of businesses such as this. At this point, 1 beiieve the Districf Gouncil and Zoning Committee concur with my opinion. Thank you for your heip with this. PaulZenner(651-848-5211) file://C:1Documents%20and%20Settings\U1mer�I,oca1%20Settings\Temp\GW}00OO1.HTM 8/11/2005 Page 1 of 1 Emily Ulmer - tattoos from grease shop o� � � From: "Roger Herrera" <bluedemon7l@comcast.neU To: <emily.ulmer@ci.stpau2.mn.us> ^ Date: 8/22/2005 8:06:25 PM Subject: tattoos from grease shop My mane is Roger Herrera I am a good friend and customer of Greg I used to live across the street from his shop when it was on 4th street on the eastside of Sai�t Paul his bussiness was real clean and his clients are real respectfui noone hung out there just to hang out.No trouble came from his resident or his bussiness t think it would be a shame to deny his dream to create art and to do bussiness the thing that he loves.also I am waiting for the new shop so I can get my next tattoo please let this go threw so all his customers get be happy I know the city wili not regret the decision to let Greg and Lisa have thier shop be in this location � � file://C:�Documents%20and%20SettingslUlmer\Local%20Settings\Temp\GW}00004.HTM 8/24/2005 Tattoo Application Aenial � OS—t3q —'-t�9 � � — n G �Page2of2 7 CJ I was born and raised on the East Side of St. Paul and I am very proud of it! A majority of Greg's customer's aze natives of St. Paui. The neighborhood I grew up in was overrun with crime, but yet I continue to brag about being from the East Side. Until now! The fact that the City of St. Paul would " deny Greg a license to open a Tattoo Pazlor over "Zoning Issues," when there was a business operating out of there for 25 yeazs prior to him, makes me furious! Especially on top of the fact that for 10+ yeazs Greg operated his Tattoo Parlor in the middle of a residential neighborhood that the Ciry of St. Paul considers "historical." I woutd be extremely interested in the City's explanation of that... I ever never even entertained the thought of going someplace to get a tattoo and would never 1et any of my friends and/or family either. I have refened upwards of 20 people to Greg over the 8+ years I have known Greg and they ALL, ALL are completely satisfied with their experience and the results. I am quite sure that if you where to visit his new shop, wherever it might open, you would see what I am tallcing about and maybe even find yourself in the chair someday... Feel &ee to contact me via telephone and/or e-mail with any questions, at anytime day or night. T will be more than happy to further explain anything you would like... A Confused/Frustrated/Ilpset "St. Paulite," Terty Santori 651-226-5117 tjsantorina healtheast.org The information included in this e-mail message, including any attachments, is intended only for the person or organization to which it is addressed. This e-mail message may contain information that is privileged or confidential. lf you receive this e-mail message and aze not the intended recipient or ' responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, you may not use, disseminate, distribute or copy the inforxnation included in this e-maii and any attachments. If you received this e-mail message by mistake, please reply by e-mail and destroy all copies of this message and any attachments. Thank you. � file:llC:�Documents%20and%20Settings\Ulmer\Local%20Settings\Temp\GW}00OO1.HTM 8/16/2005 S ._. ». ...+ _ .. «._ . . ... .... . . � ... .,� � ,,.�� . �......<. ,. _�.. � r.. �_..._ . ...... � . Emil Ulmer - Tattos From Grease Page 1 � 0 5 -1'� `( - �l 6 � Frem• Jeff Lee �i eff1924@comcast.net> O � � � '" � To: <emily.ulmer@ci.sipaui.mn.us> ____ Date: 8H5/2005 8:19:46 PM Subject: Tattos From Grease i have done business with Greg for several years. i have found that he is a professionai in every sense of the word, he runs a ciean, well organized business and is courteous and honest in his dealings. I don't know why the City of Saint Paut would deny him a license to operate his busirtess at 360 CliRon Street. I would think that the city would be happy to have him anywhere, after all, it's a business that brings in money and quite a bit of that wouid be from outside the city Ifmits due to the nature of his business. i have an idea that, perhaps, there are some politics involved but I can't fathom what exactly they would be. I know that I will remain a loyai customer where ever he ends up but I feel that it would be a win - win situation for him and the city, to grant him a Iicense to operate here. Jeff Lee Tax paying citizen of Saint Paul • � Page 1 of 1' .� 65-13� Emily Ulmer - Support for Approving Application Q� Lj' � 5 r From: "Kristin Connelly" <kristin_home@msn.com> To: <emily.ulmer@cistpaul.mn.us> ` Date: 8/16/2005 1:03:59 PM Subject: Support for Approving Application Dear Ms Ulmer: This letter is being submitted in support of approving the application for business at 360 Clifton Street, owner Greg Lehman. As the city is aware, this property once held a beauty shop with four chairs. Greg Lehman is a one man ope2tion with one chair. I don't see how this would bdag in more tratfic rA the neigh6orhood. I would hope the Cty Planning Commission does the right thing by approving the application for Tattoos From Grease. Sincere4y, Krishn Connelly • St. Paul 651-578-1332 � file://C:�Documents%20and%20Settings\Ulmer\Local%20Settings\Temp\GW}00003.HTM 8/16/2005 Page i of 1 EmiIy Ulmer - TATTOO SHOP D5 � or_�3�- �� From: "Renae" <renae@prettybird.com> To: <emily.ulmer@ci.stpaul.mn.us> Date: 8/15/2005 9:12:30 AM Sabject: TATTOO SHOP To Whom It May Concern: r. i have know Grease (Greg) for years, my brother has several tattoos from him that are very tasteful tfiat Gregg had done when he first started out in the tattooing business. t myself have 3 tattoos and a couple of piercirtg one of which Lisa from Greg's shop had done for me. I find their business to be something that they share not oniy as a coupie but as a type of iife styie and commitment to others who like what they do, I find the deniai of the business to be a bad decision for everyone. Greg does superb artwork and people seek him out to have what we aIl know is Iife long done by him because of his talent. Greg is a good person and deserves to keep up his business, ! fhink it would benefi! the community and wel! (Spanky's) to be honest. So piease give iY more thought iYs not a bad thing its business. Renae � • C� file://C:�Documents%20and%20Settings\Ulmer�I,ocai%20Settings\Temp\GW}00002.HTM 8/15/2005 Page 1 of 1 � S�- 139—`1ea � Emily Ulmer - 360 Clifton �— � From: "Jason Schmidt" <schmidt12345@usfamily.net> To: <'emily.ulmer@ci.stpaul.mn.us'>, Cpatricia.jatnes@cistpaul.mn.us'>, <twazdl- 7@ci.stpaul.mn.us'>, <fortroadfed@fortroadfederation.org> Date: 8/17/2005 7:15:18 PM Subject: 36� Clifton - Please share this with everyone involved in making the decision on the properyt at 360 Clifton 1 am not sure exactly where to start so I wili just let you know a littfe something about myselt. My name is Jason Schmidt and even though I don't know Greg very weii I respect what he has done in the past and whaf he it trying to continue for himself for the future. i don't have any tattoos myself and currently have no desire for that to change. Nowever I know many peopfe that do have tattoos and some done by Greg in his clean professional shops and others done by other people in less than professional atmospheres. i have been in both his shops on Fourth street and Whitebear Avenue. As far as I was concerned They were both very clean and organized shops. Something that { can only describe as more like a dentists office rather than a tattoo parfor other that all of the art work on the walls. I know that Greg grew up in St. Paul and all he is trying to do is operate a Iegal business and live a healthy and fruitful Iife in the city that he grew up in. This tells me that he is a man who is proud of where he comes from. i would imagine that is growing harder for him to feei every time that the place that he calis home apparently wants nothing more than to make him suffer and put him out of business. Everything that I have seen and been told about him is that he is an honest hard working professional who takes care of his customers in a way that is slowiy becoming obsolete. The man provides a level of customer service that 1 am embarrassed to say most of my employees are incapable of grasping. I aiso run a business my"self, it is just down the street from Greg's old shop on Whitebear Avenue where he was forced out of. It was here where I enjoyed Greg and Lisa as customers of mine. Both were very pleasant and friendly every they came into my shop. They were an asset to the community as far as I was concerned and not only was his shop taken from him you took a quality cusfomer away from me. For that I wou{d like to very sarcastically thank you. Like f said before, I do not have a singie tattoo on my body either way they are still legal. I don't even think that Ramsey Counry or city of St. Paul currently has a ban in effect on having a tattoo or giving them for that matter. Personally I have been very disappointed in the city of St. Paui for some time now for decisions much like this one Wnen its business are concemed. This city, for some reason would sooner heip a bunch of welfare recipients a�d immigrants get ahead in life before it wiif support its locat business and 6usinessmen who have lived and worked their whole lives here. t am sorry that 4 wilt be unabie to attend the hearing on Thursday but I felt that if my voice can not be heard at least my fealings could be shared. I would also like to add that if you choose to deny the use of his new site you should all be ashamed of yourseives especialy anyone that is going to have the nerve in the future to hypocritically say that Yney suppoR local business. Jason Schmidt --- USFami�.Net - $8.25/mo! -- �Iighspeed - $19.99/mo! --- • file:flC:�Documents%20and°/a20Settings\Ulmer\Local%20Settings\Temp\GW}00004.HTM 8/1812005 Page 1 of 1 Emity Ulmer 0 5- 9b5 � oS-13`t-4 From: "Ben Doran Foundarion" <m�tgueritte@bendoranfoundaticin.org> To: <patricia.james@cistpaul.mn.us> Date: 8/13/2005 t 1:12:43 AM Ms. James- i am wri6ng to you on behaff of my friend Greg Lehman, who owned fhe Tattoos From Grease shop at 732 White Bear Ave, until the city forced him to move. Greg is an excellent artist and has worked very hard to be seif employed at what he does best-skin art! Why would the city treat him like this? He now is possibly being denied another location at 360 Clifton near Spanky's Bar and Gritl. i am in full support of my friends Greg and his partner Lisa to have their business in Saint Paui. How can Saint Paul send away honest hard working tax paying individuals and businesses? Maggie Doran Executive Director Ben Doran Foundafion 2325 Endicott Street Suite 202 W Saint Paul MN 55114 651-487-9246 � L.J file://C:�Documents%20and%20Settings\Ulmer\Local%20Settings\Temp\GW}00001_HTM 8l15l2005 Page 1 of 1 �'o r'i39-469 Emily Ulmer - 360 Clifton � � - L. �, � • -- From: "Zennar, Paul" <paul.zenner@contractor.thomson.com> To: "'emily.uimer@cistpaul.mn.us"' <emily.uimer@cistpaul.mn.us> Date: 8/10/2005 332:49 PM ` Subject: 360 Clifton Emily-Thanks for talking with me about 360 Clifton. I believe that potentially allowing a tattoo parlor on this busy comer will only server to degrade the neighborhood. Presently it is stiii a fairly strong neighborhood but that couid change rapidly with addition of businesses such as this. At this point, i believe the District Councii and Zoning Committee concur with my opinion. Thank you for your help with this. PaulZenner(651-848-5211) C� �� file://C:1Documents%20and%20Settings\Ulmer\Local%20Settings\Temp\GW}OOOOI.HTM 8/16/2005 im sorry to kere tkati naiv hb�r you feel �vere i�v in va roanoke thay wont let me open a shop neather so i knowe how you feel.were is the location of were yon are hying to open at?i wish i chould help i hate to see a nother artist not beable to do his orher job as an artist..iv been hying to open a shop now for two yeazs and have not yet done so.i hate the new laws that cama out.its macldng it realy hard to do any thing.please let me kttowe if there is any tlung i can do.tim wilson � �-' o r- t 7 a-'�'�l `t °i � 05'�� r� • � � Tattoos By Grease Page 1 of 1 Emfly Ulmei - Tattoos By Grease 0 � y�� 4 S-I 3 R- y b`� • From: "Bushinger, Brandi" <brandi.bushinger@CO.RAMSEY.MN.US> To: <exnily.ulmer@cistpaul.mn.us>, <patricia.james@cistpaul.xnn.us> Date: 8/15/2005 10:07:18 AM Subject: Tattoos By Grease CC: <fortroadfed@fortroadfederation.org>, <wardl-7@ci.stpaul.mn.us> Helio I am writing this email to you on behalf of my tattoo artist, Greg Lehman. I just found aut that after having the City of St Paul close down his business at his previous address of 732 White Bear Avenue, he found a new ptace at 360 Clifton but is now told ihat the zoning committee is going to recommend Denial. I have been going to Tattoos from Grease for over 6 years. I have recommended him to many of my family and friends, who now go there as well. He runs a clean, sterile, respectabie and well organized business. I have never seen or heard of any problems occwing at his business. I believe that if the CIty of St Paul doesn't allow him to open his business again they will be losing a very honest and fair businessman in their city. � Please consider that this business is something that Greg has worked �ery hard at for many years to have the customer base that he has. I know that T w711 not get a tattoo done froin anyone else. He is a skilled artist and deserves to have the business that he's worked so hard for. I can't think of any valid reason why he should be denied to re-open at the 360 Clifton address, and hope that the decision to Deny him wi11 be seriously reconsidered before making the ftnal recommendatioii. Thank you, Brandi Bushinger • file://C:�Docutnents%20and%20Settings\U1mer�I.oca1%20Settings\Temp\GW}00002.HTM 8/15/2005 Emil Uimer- FW: Tattoo ° _,d.� . _. ,..rv � . ,._�.. __. __ _ ._ . Page � :. 0 5 965 . �__os-��Y- �� From: To: Date: Subject: "j.ellis@mn-one.com" <j.eilis@mn-one.com> "'grease@tattoosfromgrease.com"' <grease@tattoosfromc�rease.com> 8/14/2005 10:22:13 AM ' FW: Tattoo � —Original Message— From: j.eilis@mn-one.com [SMTP:j.ellis@mn-one.com] Sent: Sunday, August 14, 2005 10:10 AM To: 'patrieia.james@ci.stpaul.mn.us' Subject:Tattoo Please dont deny Greg Lehmans request for a buisness Iiscense. I have known and been tattooed by Greg for 12 years now. He runs THE CLEANEST & MOST PROFESSIONAL shop in the cities. Greg has been in buisness in St. Paul for a long time and he deserves to sYay in S!. Paul. In the time i have been getting tattooed with Greg I have never seen or heard any bad things come out of his shop. You will be doing the city a diservice if you deny his buisness the right to operate here. Greg's previous shops have never been a hang-out for peopie fo toitfer around ifs all about the ink and thafs if. i'M sure with further consideration you will see the positives much outweigh any negatives. Thank you for your time JOSH ELLIS � � o � �1 � 5� 05- t3q- �{�a � From: "Rachel Douglas" <rcdougfas@hotmaii.com> To: <Qaficia.james@ci.stpaul.mn.us> Date: 8l14/2005 1:3429 PM Subject: 360 Clifton Street - Tattoos By Grease Dear Patcicia, I understand fhe concems in regards of allowing Greg Lehman to open Tattoos >From Grease shop at 360 Ciifton Street. The media has stereotyped the tattoo business as a hangout and hideout for drug related incidents and non-iaw abiding individuals. It is important that we evaluate businesses on . individuality, fairness and the true nature of art in ail actuality. Greg Lehman is a respectable, law abiding citizen who has chosen to become a professional tattoo artist. Yes, he will have customers, and hopefu4ly many - this is his living and means of income. But he has capacity restrictions. He has rules, ethics and morals. The amount of money and time that Greg has invested in his profession should in no way or form be belittled or misjudged because of people stereotyping the tattoo industry as a whole. Please take the time to investigate Greg's professional business history. You will not only find that Greg has no illegai dealings or complaints, but you wili find that Greg is an upstanding professionai trying to make an honest living. It is imperative that we stand up for ourselves as individuals thaYs what � makes our Country number one. Freedom of speech - freedom...piease don't base your decision or aitow other to base their decision on a stereotype. AR is art and there are upstanding, safe, law abiding citizens trying to practice their profession in a safe and sterile environment. How wouid you like your mother, sister, daughter, brother, husband,etc. who truly enjoy the beautiful art of tattoos to end up in a back ailey getking a tattoo in an unsterile, unsafe, shady environment? Look around you - the percentage of people that have tattoos has increased dramaticaliy from teens to grandparents. This doesn't mean that they're "dirty", non-law abiding citizens. IYs art in its own form. It is so important that we don't miss this critical point. Keep it public, keep it local, keep it safe, keep it sterile. Don't force law abiding professionals out of the business, so ail that is left is underground, unskilfed, unsterife, practicing tattoo "un-professionais" Sincerely, Rachel Dougias 507-381-2271 CC: <9rease@tattoosfromgrease.com> ! ' �.J � 0 5— l30 — �19 R o �— � � � To; Emily Ulmer CC: District 9 council City Council Members August 15, 2005 Deaz Enuly- I am writing in reference to the concems regazding allowing Greg T,ehman to open Tattoos From Cnease at 360 Clifton Street I have been a client of Greg Lehman's for the last 3 years, as well as his partner Lisa Ramirez. My understanding is that one of the concems surrounding the opening of a tattoo shop is that it would bring too much traffic to the azea. My question is; is it really the quantity of traffic that concerns the neighbors? Since there is only one tattooist and he will only be open 4 days a week from noon until 8, this can hazdly be the case. Maybe the real concern is the quality of the customers that concern the neighbors? I personally have several tattoos and piercings as do several of my friends and co-workers. There is a stigma that surrounds body art such as tattoos. People still believe that tattoos aze for cruninals and drug users/dealers so therefore the businesses where they aze created MUST invite this type of individual to frequent. This is not the case anymore, for the Rip Van Winkle who still believes that, iYs time to wake up in the yeaz 2005. Tattoos have become mainstream. Go to any gym, any offrce building, you will fmd tattoos on just about any type of person. Mothers and fathers get tattoos as a way Yo honor their childrett. Sons and daughters may wish to be tattooed as a memorial for their pazents. Tattoos aze not about showing your toughness, they are an individual expression that may mean nothing to the stranger standing neat to you at the grocery stoze, but to the individual who weazs the art, it may be about a deeper expression of their love'or their life. As for Greg `Grease' Lehman, the business owner, I implore you to look closely at the history of Grease's business, He is an upstanding individua( in the community. Until the city of St. Paul enforced eminent domain and forced his business to close, Mr. Lehman � �J � �� oS-I ��- �i44 Q �- 9�� r � � was living the American dream. He operated a very clean, sterile tattoo shop, he paid his taxes, and T'm sure if you look at the record of police calls to the shop, you would find less police calls to his business, than a lot of St. Paul homes. He can only remember having to cail the police one time. He doesn't tolerate patrons who are obviously under the influence of drugs or alcohol. One visit to Mr. Lehman's shop and it is obvious that he takes great pride in his well-kempt business. I am asking that you allow Mr. Lelunan to open his tattoo shop at 360 Clifton. It would be such a loss to lose a tattoo shop where you can feel comfortable about the sterility of equipment, as well as comfortable knowing that the only tattooist is going to be there next year, not just next week. It would be such a shame for the city of St. Paul to lose or force out an honest, taY paying, business owsier such as Mr. Lehman. Piease reconsider your recommendation to deny his application. Sincerely, Michelle Anderson 2190 Reaney Avenue Saint Pau1, MN 55119 (651)497-5519 � �Of— t3`i—`�G Y o �- ��S � To whom it may concem, I am writing in regazd to the license of operation for Tattoos by Grease on 360 Clifton Street, owned by Greg Lehman. I was a customer a few months ago and also live on Minnehaha Avenue just down the street from where his business was located. Greg nms a very clean, professionai business. He takes appointments just like any other business and as a neighbor, I have never found anyone just hanging around the building or causing any trouble. I support the business and tuink you should too. Jennifer Bennett �1 � � � . _ . . � _. ,_... � __.. . _ �,Emily Ulmer - Re: My_SiYuation, Please„�c ive me feedback! �� Page,1�� .__. _. _____.____. ,.._ __ _,._,._ �__ _.__. _ _ __ . _ ._.,.._ � as-13a-�t�`t � From: "Dave Thune" <Dave.Thune@ci.stpaul.mn.us> To: �grease@tattoosfromgrease.com> Date: 8/12/2005 10:32:24 PM Subject: Re: My Siivation, Piease give me feedback! G� �� . Did you meet with the west seventh federation? f spoke with some of your fiends in w7th who recommend you highiy. dave »> "Greg "Grease" Lehrrian" <grease@tattoosfromgrease.com> 08/12/OS 8:45 PM »> Helio, My name is Greg "Grease" Lehman. I own, or did own a Tattoo Studio located at 732 White Bear Avenue.Tattoos From Grease <www.tattoosfromgrease.com> <www.tattoosfromgrease.com> The city Eminent Domained my building on July 17, 2005. I was tattooing at that location for about 3 years. Before I was at that location, I was tattooing at 839 East 4th Street. I was licensed at both locations. I was at the 4th Street address for over 10 years. It is in the Residential neighborhood. I did find a new building located at 360 Clifton street. It used to be a Beauty Salon, 25plus years. It is across the street from Spanky's Bar and Grill. I am sure you know where that is! About 250 feet from my building. (360 Clifton) i talked with the ciry planner ,Patricia James, in July before I purchased the 6uilding (I closed on the building August 1st) and she said "We wouldn't have any problems getting zoned for a Tattoo studio, as iong as the beauty salon has not been out of business for over a year.". The beauty salon ciosed about 9 months ago. The previous owner died. Patricia said " i had to appry for a nonconforming use permit" i also spoke with Emily at city planning and she said "They were going to recommend my Tattoo studio." I spoke with Emily on Monday, August 8th. The day (8-11-2005) before they were to turn in there recommendation to the planning committee, she said "They are going to recommend Denia!" First they said it was that a Tattoo studio generates more business then a Beauty Salon. But how can that be? The beauty salon had 4 styling chairs, 3 wash stations, and 4 sit down hair dryers. Everyone has hair. My tattoo studio has 1 tattoo chair. f am the oniy artist. ANvay have been, alway will be. Not everyone has a tattoo! Then they said that the zoning wouldn't allow it. Page 1 of 1 Emily Ulm - License 1 bS-13k- 46� r � �J �.-� � �w�� . �. t�,,— ._�: .=�.��,,.�.�..��.�:� —�,�.. , �..�.. From: sue davis <me no like u_sue@yahoo.com> To: <emily.ulmer@ci.stpaul.mn.us> Date: 8114/2005 11:47:04 PM Subject: License Deaz Exnily I'm writing to you concerning Greg " Grease" Lehman. T haue had a few tattoos done by him as well as my daughtar,sister, nieces and many friends have. He is a very honest, professional business man. He also runs a very clean shop and makes you feel welcome. I don't know why the city would deny him a license to operate. It is so rare to fmd someone like Greg. I think you would be doing a GREAT disservice to the city of St. Paul to deny him a license. Sue LeToumeau Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection azound http://mail.yahoo.com . • file://C:�Documents%20and%20Settings\U1mer�I,ocai%20Settings\Temp\GW}00003.HTM 8l15/2005 .�Emii 'Ufiner -Tattoo shop .�_ � � � ' � . �� Page 1 0 5- 9�,� � From: To: Date: Subject: "Erickson, Ed" <ed.erickson@medtronic.com> <emify. uimer@ci. stpaul. mn. us> 8118/20Q5 1:00:42 PM Tattoo shop �' o S—�� 9 — �165� i am a 42 year oid professional who about two years ago wanted to get a tattoo. After checking many diEferent shops 4 chose Grease Tattoos because of the cleanliness of the shop and the great personality of the owner. You denying him a right to make a living is the wrong thing for you or anyone elsefo do ................................................. • � SeF-01-05 12:57P � s�_ � �� oS_t3q-- �t6g LINDA A BRQST AT'CORNEY AT LAW 420 OHIO STRI:N'C ST. PAUI.. MINTIESUTA SS1Q7 September 1, 2005 V1A FACSiMiLE b51-2�Z8-3314 Zoning Committee Of the 5aint Paul Planning Commission Ciry Council Ct�ambers Third Floor City Hali St. Paul, Minnes�ta AT"TENTION: Emily iJlmer RE: 05-139-469 — Greg l.ehman 360 Ctiftun, 5t. Paul, MN September 1, 2005 Hearing To Whom It May Concern: TelephonefFax: G51-298-1942 My mother, Mildred Root, owned the building at 360 Clifton and she and her business paRner operated The Beauty tiut Saton fUr over 30 years. Due to mother's death and the retirame�t of her partner, the building was renovatcd and then sofd to Mr. Greg Lehman. 1 submit these comments in support of Mr. [,ehman's apptication. T was out of town umit late last evening and apologize for the timing of these comments, There aze several findings in the Zoning Committee Staff lteport which are based upan errpneous facts. i believe it is importam fot the 2oning Committee to the corrut facts upon which tu base their decision. � First, the Staff Report finds that "Che property ar 360 Clifton was formerty a beauty sa3on. with one practitioner." (Staff Report, Findings Hl). This is not eorrect. During normal operations there were 3 to 4 beauty operators pmviding seivices to the neighborhood. The Beauty Hut has 4 styling stations. Many customers were coming and going with street parking an Clifton and Jefferson. There is also off-street parking in the rear ofthe building for sta{�. The Beauty tiut was a busy place. T am not aware of any neighhorhood cumplaints. Second, the Staff Report critically finds in Pazagraph H2a thaf "A tattoo parior is a more intensive use. ." and uses ihat finding to recommend denial. The Staff Report then relies pn the hou�s of operation to support this finding. Simple math using the Staff Report r_vi � � i F �r oS-��a Page 1 ofl Emily Ulmer - tattoos from grease Q�- 7,:, � • From: "daphyn nordeen" <dmdaphynnordeen@msn.com> To: <emily.ulmer@ci_stpaul.mxLUS> Date: 8/30/2005 11:47:26 PM Subject: tattoos from grease To who it may concern: I m writing on behalf of the former owners of "Tattoos From Grease", Greg and Lisa. I do not understand why the city of St.Paut is being so unfair to them. Greg has been licensed over 10 years now. Ne does not deserve to be denied something fie fias worked very hard for and has loved to do for years. Greg has proven before to the city of St.Paul that he is a professional at what he does and has maintained a well-organized business for years. If St. Pau1 denies Greg a license, it shows a bias and that hard work reatly doesn't mean a whole Iot. Tattoos from Grease were a safe, clean, and comfortabie environment and hopefuliy will be again. Tattoos From Grease was also very affordable, which is not the case for many other shops that i have been to. People will not always want to pay a huge amount of money for a tattoo and a lot wiil go to Yhe undergrou�d scene of tattooing. But in most cases the underground comes with unclean conditions and not as nice work. Tattoos From Grease was doing all the right #hings in running a good tattoo shop and i reaily hope that I can continue going there. Thanks • Michetle Nordeen � file://C:�Documents%20and%20Settings\U1mer�I.oca1%205ettings\Temp\GW}00002.HTM 8/31/2005 -�'os-� � �-Y6 � 0� � patricia..hi im writing in b�half af greg lel�an "tatooes by grease" grease ri�ss a vez3� cl� and sterile tatoo shop ive had most of my tatoos done by grease and my kids have also have there tattoos done by grease..why wonr you license him he has been one of the best tattoo shops in the twin cities..ttris is un fair first you take his building and now dont wantr to license he 1�as the right to legatly opsn a shop hes licensced clean and the bes..im a tax payer .. my kids aze ta7c payers..fhis is the USA give him hes right as a citizen to do Iris job thankyou teresa post � � �y c� � � s'i- - t 0 �- ��5 • 5UBJECT: Tattoo Parlor at 36Q Clifton St. . FII,E # OS-139-469 August 10, 2005 Dear Zoning Committee, I live direcfly behind the above mentioned properiy. My addtess is 357 Futton St. 'Fhere are sis adults, all registered voters, living in my house, all of whom aze in opposition to tlais proposal of putting a Tattoo Pazlor in our neigttbarhood. In addition I have 3 grandchildren Iiving with us too. Their ages aze from 2 to 6. Long haue we had to put up with the baz across the Street--Spanky's Bar. Having to call the police many times, and dealing with unruly, dnxnken behavior, &om which I have to protect my fawily from. And now a Tattoo Pazlot: Naw I know that a11 people who get tattoos are not undesirables, but I feel that there will be an undue amount of "savory characters" that will now be lingering around my house and my neighborhood. This wiil not be a good thing. But worst of all is that the property at 360 Cfifton fronts the playgtound of Monroe Public Grade School. I will be worrying for the safety of these cfiildren as we11. And this is � where my grandchildren will be going to school. This is not right It is not a good thing that will be a"good" for my neighborhood. A � residential area does not need or deserve this kind of business. A Tattoo Parlor belongs in a business zone. We all hope you will do the right t.�ing and de� this application. Respectfiilly, Stephen R. Pastick ��Q 357 Fulton St St. Paul, Mn. 55102 'd"�"'"` �' f�� Phone: 651-222-2939 ,� Bazbara A. Pastick�� .-{ , �� Gi.a��: Nicholas F. Pastick - �� Qq � � G!� ` �� C�� V � � � Noah S. Pastick %�.e S � Andtew P. Pasrick �� MaryR.Pastick-'��(��Jn�'�jg��} g ��-�.— t% ��CS�x-�i Page 1 of 1 Emily iTlmer 0 � — �e�"'� � �S_ � 39,- 'f 6 `i �� From: "sweetride67@juno.com" <sweetride67@juno.com> To: <emily.ulmer@ci.stpaul.mn.us> Date: 8/18/2005 10:00:14 AM Resident Response to File #05-139-469 Purpose: Change of Nonconforming Use Permit from Beauty Salon to Tatto Parior This permit should not be approved for many reasons. First of all, this is a neighborhood where families are raised and children play, not a business dishict where a threatening business such as a tattoo parlor should be placed. I have owned a house neaz to the property being discussed for a little over a yeaz now. The neighborhood is quit and safe as long as it is daylight. However, at nightfall, Spanky's baz located across the street brings people into our neighborhood and the problems start. I have endured personal properry damage, 2 cazs broken into, one car stolen, witnessed fights where one ended in near-death and a cruninal hiding in my backyard. Besides Spanky's, you could travel east on 7efferson and not find another business for almost a mile to the best of my knowledge, and 8 blocks east on Jefferson and not find another business unUl McDonalds. Again, this is a neighborhood, not a business district, and the proposed properiy is neaz many homes containing people raising families. Also, one block south of the discussed properiy is Monroe Elementary School. Although one block is azguably enough distance to keep the children of our neighborh! ood safe, keep in mind that their recess is held in the pazk, directIy across the street from the discussed property. Speaking possibly narrow-minded, but more importantly from experience displayed above, the types of people that a tattoo par2or/body piercing parlor wouid bring in to this neighborhood is not something that we need and should be avoided. The original pemut was granted for a candy store/bookstore for children. I cannot imagine that the original permit would have been granted to turn it from a residential properiy into a tattoo pazlor. Another issue is the value of this neighborhood. The people in this azea aze hazdworking and do not deserve to have a tattoo parlor bringing down the value of their homes that we work so hard to support and maintain. Why should we have to pay to bring negative attention to our neighborhood and to place our families in danger. This Cannot Happen..... To be Submitted Confidentially � . file://C:�Documents%20and%20SettingslUlmer�I,oca1%20Settings\Temp\GW}00OO1.HTM 8/18/2005 • Members ofthe committee, o � — � � � • � My nasne is Beverly Lutgen and I reside at 386 Clifton St., which is four doors down from 360 C}ifton St. I have lived here since May of 1978 and before that I was raised - just a few blocks away and attended the schools in this neighborhaod. I also have raised five children here. The progerry at 360 Clifton St. has been a beauty salon for as long as I can remember and as far as I know, no trouble has ever arisen because of it's presence there. At the opposite end of the block is the Monroe Schooi, K-8. Directly across the street is the playground, n�r,n;ng track, and soccer field for tke school. Changing the use pernut to accommodate a tattoo parlor on this block will undoubtedly have a very negative impact on the quality of life in this neighborhood. Let's nat kid ourselves here, we ali know the kind of clientele this kind o� establishment is going to attract. One would have to e�ect an increase in traffic on Clifton St. and presumably would include motor cycles and young people in faSt cars. Further mare, in this day and age we live in, increased gang aetivity, gang colors, and gang violence is an issue that must be oonsidered as a possible reality. Also the likelihood that people will congregate outside with loud car stereos, tobacco use, and the probability of illicit drug use cannot be and should not be ignored.This neighhorhood abounds with ctrildren on bicycles, skates, and skate boazds. Will a child have to be struck and killed by a car or severely injured, or God forbid shot before someone on this zoning committee looks back and says, "this was a bad idea". I'm here today to tell you that 'THIS IS A BAD IDEA! There is no shortage of available retail space less than one mile away on the West Severnh Street comdor. Cu�rently there aze no fewer than si�c storefronts that are for rent, lease, or for sale between Grand Avenue and Otto that already have sommercial `�� "' � � � zoning. If Mr. Lehmans goal is to find a suitable retail space to operate }us tattoo and giercing paz there is a storefront property located At,i I01 W.7'� Sueet that is r ` cwrently for lease. If however Mr.Lehmans main objective is to own commetcial property in order to operate said business, then the property direct7y Adjacent Yo 1101 W. 7�` Street (Wild Bills Cycle) is currently for sale. Either of ttxese locations would undoubtedTy be a more appropriate locarion than on the comer of a block in a residential neighborfiood. My neighborhood. The street that I live on. i was told that Mr. Lehman feets that because Spanky's Bar is across the street, it gives his pursuit of a ahange of use pemrit legirimacy. Ladies and geutleman of the cominittee,it does n�! To use this azgument is the same as trying to compare apples to qrauges. Spanky's is located on the north side of 7efferson Ave. and has it's own pazking lot with aznple space to accommodate their clientele. Their customers come and go via Jefferson Ave. and has little or tto effect of traffic on Clifton 3treet. When Monroe School is in session, on street parking, to say the least, is a wmmodity. Pm oRen unable to pazk my car in front af my own house. It is my understanding that the hours of operation will e�ctend until nine P.M. There is no doubZ that tivs will be a disruptioa to the quality of life we enjoy on this block and in ttris neighborhood. My family and I do not warn this or any other tattoo parlor on our block. Consider the first line of the Public Hearing Notice: Purpose: Change of Non-conf"orming Use Permit from Beauty Salon to Tattoo Paz1or. Ladies and Genttemen pf the committee, you must admit, that is a big leap. If Mr. Lehman is detennined to pursus tlri,s change of use permit then let it be known that i am equally detennined to fight it and will do so with all the legal means at my disposal. Ladies and Gentlemen of the committee, I implore you to vote no on Mr. I,ehmans � C� � � 5 - � ��: 5 � Request for the change in use permit. Once again, 'THIS IS A BAD IDEA and nothing good will come from it. Thank you for the oppommity to speak to you today on this very, very, important issue. Beverly L. Lutgen 386 Clifton Street St. Paul � � WesT7FederaTion 6512985671 r 08Y16/05 06:27pm P. [�➢aZ �'bS- (3q- Y�R � �° 9�� West 7thlFort Road Federation 974 West 7th Street - S'aint Paul, Minnesota 55102 � (612)298-5599 August lb, 2005 To: Zoning Committee o£ St,Paul Planning Cottunission Ftom: West Seventt�/Fort Road Federation Re� Nonconforming Use Permit for 360 Clifton St. At The Augusi 8, 2005 meetir�g of the West Seventh Federation the boazd vofed against the nonconforming use permit for 360 Clifton St. The surrocmding area is residential. Monroe Commwaty SchooI is one bloek away and Monroe playgound is across the street from 36Q Clifton St Tbe proposed use is not an appropriate use, and we ask yau to vote against this application � �� Caoperating Ehnd Drive Member Af�irmative Action/Eqctat Opportunity Employer Page 1 of 5 0 �- 9�� Emily Ulmer - pictures of 360 Clifton St. Tattoos From Grease • � ... .� -� �,..� From: "Crreg "Grease" Lehman" <grease@tattoosfromgrease.com> To: <emily.ulmer@ci.stpaul.mn.us> Date: 8/11/2005 8:48_41 AM Subject: pictures of 360 Clifton St. Tattoos From Grease Emily, Here are the pictures. • � file://C:�Documents%20and%20Settings\U1mer�i,ocal%20Settings\Temp\GW}00002.HTM 8/11/2005 ?�[ � �t� �. ; � N �� . �° L ] i � '.S'. }'�_ M2`� { y� � ' � �_� � Y � ' 4 � � ...� ��, �5 3 '�, x T' ``x•� � a ' , � -, aa �^ e: e a r' . � ` S' a... �"� ".x� a ` > .*�. `"�: �. r � +, �4',�'�j.: "-.`x�`.�s,.;�� .�'. ;y,�e,� � �3 � e +�` ' ° ' i � �,.� . s> , � �, *.- + . . u. . T t � .� � . , � �''' a a �. �sv ' _. ' . � , ',ds � �.� �' . - - t.? : � . �� , � � s K e 3� ° � � �� 3 ` > s a " � r : � + e.,_ �� 3 ' s � .. h:t; � r Al � , y~. � _� � .av.:a�..:,tv-era» "., � �� .. �.._.w. ,. ^rc Page 3 of 5 Li �� i�� i � • file://C:�Documents%20and%20Settings\U1merlLocal%20Settings\Temp\GW}00002.HTM 8/11/2005 Page 4 of 5 . � � file:/!C:\Documents%20and%20Settings\U1mer�L,oca1°/a20Settings\Temp\GW}00002.HTM 8/11/2005 Page 5 of 5 n C_ n t C � u � file://C:\Documents%20and%20Settings\Ulmer\Local%20Settings\Temp\GW}00002.HTM 8/11/2005 ��°�� Zoning File OS-139-469 Front of the site on the comer of Clifton aud Jefferson. • � u � Zoning Fi1e OS-139 North side of the building. � :�- i:�� o �- �� Zoning File OS-139-469 Reaz of site facing west. � .�,.�: i .. R �� :=` . - „ �, .: � �° `�� Zoning File OS-139-469 Single family residential homes on fhe south side of the site. � � � Zoning File OS-139-469 Across from the site facing nortl�. V � � v� 9 � � '-� � ��> ' �.,� � � s� � � U 0 � I � �: , r .' ...... � ��'��: _.. �: ,1. � � � � �. � � �' !v '�� `. t� �' �t � �i..... r�. o �- �� :�_ � � � � � � � � � , � ;� � � � i � - -' �* . i� ' v� �� i •' ,s �'' j.i: `� � C'•,',�1 �'. F �;�� - ��= �. �� ' �� g ` F t- �. e r �= �� , - ° ?.� b !, ,. �� `� � z �� _ � ' A :. t �� ^ . ��l� i � - ' i � t : `ff � : ,: �- � � . t , � ',� ; ��:= <. ` -.�� ; y �� ii; � � �. ,�,.SF � ; 3 ` ,;r,„ � . 2�' ' .`; g - �' .. . . t . ". . �F�: g �� . _ � �` �s��. ''r?_ � �G � � �� + � �� i a „" . .« _K;� _ -�.-�� ''' ._,, x�€��t • � y; � ; 'r� �x ` �� l �� •` � � � ' f � � .� � , �� _�� . , . � t� .. -.�.,.. �.. � � �;� .::..:: � � � � � � � � � � —� O {D � � W � � � Z � C13 2 �m � o � � a�r:,� :;; _" - £_., �_ _. %� f r ------ �. .� _ i i �,� ,,., , -. '€�s,;xwm:=� ^ s, ��, � __ � _ � �� . �;� .. :- _�`:� �:;� e:._,� � � ��,� _ . -a� � ;: ��,, ,<. . .. "` � � O .Y � aJ � , . �. ,'}�- �. ``' . ., . _.... :; ;: •-+_� ''�.�` � ._�.'� ' . .,_ "� t �. � i _ -��---.x.-�- �.f ,,� a � � & w �;� ',`_ �. `- � ' { � _ ;� '"3`� � �'-+� �w " �- ��" .� . �, . 3 � � -+�.- � � ��- - ---�`€ i z.' x � , " , �� _ _ t � � �F S'w a � 9 � Y � , - �`e -.�..�.�" � .... _ _ . .: �. "" ' .. .. . � � Photo of ;�H� � i • � �- � . � � _ �_� . .� � � �� r 2 � � 3� . � v � } � p. . ��r� +-'U' ��jYi � . The building the City Eminent C�omained from me on 7-17-2005! � �� i CI7IZEN PART?CIAqTFO D?5.4?G7S ��°��5 � i �� . � ��° , � ! i ! ; i � CITIZEN PtlR71CIFAT.IO�I PLANNING 4ISTRICTS 1.SUNRAY=B�T7LECREEK-HIGNWOQD 2.GREATER EAST S.IDE 3.WEST SID�" 4.DAYTON'S BLUFF . S.PAYNE-PHALE�! - fi.NORTH E�� , - I,.THOMAS=DALE $,SUMMiT-UNSYER5ITY 9:�(EST SEVENTH 10. Ct7M0 1i.HAMtIF1E-MIQWAY � 12_ ST.. ANTNONY 13.MERRIAM PK.-LEXICt6T6N HAMLINE 14..GROVELAND�MACRtESTER 15 . H I 6H LAN D 96:SUMMIT HILL 17. DOWNT�WN a �- �� DISTRICT 9 0 � � �� F�L� �-ta°{-`t�1 �. � � � � f / \� � �, � � o�000ao 1 _ � � � �, �� Q o c c� ; � l' o��c�o �c ��,o �._� ;� --.: - � i � � '; G ��. , � b a Q � � ;o ,� � ;�,;, AP?LICADIT_�l r�Vf. L+fNNN'�M. ._ P�1�°OSE C� NG� � , Q�..-13 �1 —�ftrfc n�,re �' 1 a d;Si_.�S_� P.tAP r Z�_ � tC��E 1" = 400' `° LEG�ND � � � � � �. ° !QI� O — - 2on�ng d�stric( tvundary ��1�� su5jz�prop:,;y 0 ona (zmlly � p:ro (ami(y �t-�Q muitipizfamity � • + . -E r, iu:i°;'� '�S - F'.. � � � �� • t. b i .. � � �� ' � ,' . � �, � 0 � � � � �� O;O;��Q;c i , nG o,�t`_.... • + ^ comm:;:tz: 0 ._._, industria'. L' vzcen; .. ' ' -- _, . . . . . . . � . ..�� LJ � � � :t ._. � Consideration of the assessment for Excessive Consumption of Inspection Services at 1751 Bush Avenue; owner: Dennis Peabody. 7� •