Centerville staff on March 12 presented draft zoning-text changes to define and place body art facilities in appropriate commercial and industrial zones after City Council denied a Main Street application in February. The Planning Commission asked staff to research neighboring jurisdictions and public-health regulations before the city holds a public hearing.

Planner Mike Eggert summarized the request’s history: an applicant (Nicole Hutchins) sought approval for body-art work on Main Street, and council members raised concerns about location, differentiating “fine-line tattoos” from other tattooing, and legal and administrative issues. The council denied that application on Feb. 18 and directed staff to draft clearer code language that aligns with state and county nomenclature.

City attorney Lisa (surname not specified in transcript) told commissioners there is legal risk to an outright ban: she reviewed case law from the Ninth and Eleventh Circuits that has found blanket prohibitions unconstitutional and noted the Tenth Circuit (governing Utah) has not issued a controlling decision she found that resolves the question for Utah. For that reason, she said, staff recommended creating a narrowly defined, regulated allowance for body art facilities in appropriate zones rather than an across-the-board ban.

The draft ordinance (proposed Ordinance 2025-04) would adopt the term “body art facility,” align definitions with state and Davis County health regulations, and add conditional-use or permitted-use designations in particular zones (staff identified CVH, Legacy Crossing PDO, IH, and LVH as candidate locations). Commissioners asked for further research about specific conditions that the city could reasonably require (hours, odor/chemical storage, fire-safety compliance) and whether procedures such as microblading and other permanent cosmetics should be treated separately.

Commissioners requested staff prepare a comparative survey of nearby jurisdictions and Davis County health regulations, clarify the municipal code text for permanent cosmetics, and return with recommended language and suggested conditions for conditional-use permits. No public hearing or ordinance vote was taken; staff will return with a formal recommendation and draft code language for Planning Commission review.