Permanent Cosmetics: Zoning Beyond Skin-Deep

Justin Silva • July 30, 2019

Zoning Challenges for Permanent Cosmetics

It is not uncommon to find that tattooing or tattoo parlors are effectively banned within many cities, municipalities, and villages, or permitted in restrictive zoning districts. This prohibition exists because these local zoning codes do not define “tattooing”, nor do they include tattooing or tattoo parlors as a permitted and conditional use within their applicable use tables. Generally, if the use (permanent cosmetics) or similar use (tattooing) is not listed as a permitted or conditional use, then that specific use simply not allowed.

This was the case for one of Shapiro & Associate’s clients, a highly regarded business owner, and permanent cosmetic technician and instructor, who was experiencing great demand for permanent cosmetics procedures. However, she was effectively prohibited for engaging in these types of procedures because tattooing, of any type, was not an enumerated Use Type within the local municipality’s zoning code. In addition to providing permanent cosmetic procedures, our Client desired to operate a specialty school and training facility for those seeking to become Certified Permanent Cosmetic Professionals.

Tattooing: Permanent Cosmetics vs Traditional Body Art

Permanent cosmetics, often referred to as permanent makeup , micropigmentation , or microblading , is a cosmetic procedure which generally involves tattooing a highly visible areas of one’s face, such as above the eyes, eyelids, and lips, to enhance or artificially produce certain facial features , such as eyebrows.

Further applications of permanent cosmetics are increasingly used to disguise scars or traditional tattoos no longer desired, and areola repigmentation following a mastectomy or other invasive breast surgery. While some seek permanent cosmetics to enhance their facial features in a more permanent way, cosmetic tattooing is often a solution for those with eyesight impairment or medical conditions such as Parkinson’s, multiple sclerosis, arthritis, paralysis, or a host of other problems causing physical restrictions when applying cosmetics.

Permanent cosmetics utilizes muted pigmentations, which are unlike traditional tattoo inks known for vibrant colors, and deposits pigments under the skin’s dermis, often using a digital rotary device. Any time pigmentation is placed into the skin with any device, the medical community, including the Illinois Department of Public Health, define it as a “form of tattooing”, however, it is different than traditional body art tattooing due to its intent and desired purpose . Permanent cosmetics helps those who desire to blend in with societal norms . In contrast, traditional body art tattooing seeks to standout and express one’s speech.

SAL’s Solution and Client Success

After discussions with our Client and the local municipality, we decided on a two- pronged approach:

Proposed Text Amendment to add “Permanent Cosmetics” as a Conditional Use

First, we would seek a text amendment to the zoning code defining “Permanent Cosmetics” and adding it as a conditional use type. By categorizing permanent cosmetics as a Conditional Use, the local municipality would have significant control over the Use Type and require public hearings when this type of use was to be considered. Moreover, it allowed the municipality to tailor the language of the text amendment to allow the restriction on more traditional body art tattooing.

Apply for a Conditional Use Permit for Permanent Cosmetics

The second step, which was subject to our success with the proposed text amendment, was to seek, and ultimately be granted, a conditional use permit to allow for permanent cosmetics and the related specialty school.

After numerous public hearings before the Plan Commission and Board of Trustees, and with the perseverance of our Client and guidance from the Municipalities’ Staff, Shapiro & Associates Law is pleased to have assisted our Client with obtaining unanimous Village approval of its conditional use permit for permanent cosmetics and the related specialty school.

< Older Post

Newer Post >

Mail

Recent Illinois FOIA Decisions: Insights and Implications

October 24, 2024

By: Dawn Goldhirsh

Shapiro & Associates Law Congratulates Edward Rose & Sons

By Dan Shapiro • September 4, 2024

69 Acre Land Acquisition

AI and Law: A Few Considerations

By Dan Shapiro • June 20, 2024

Introduction Last summer, an attorney filed a legal brief he had written with the help of the generative AI platform, ChatGPT. The document included citations to a series of legal cases that seemingly offered precedents that supported his client’s position. There was only one problem. As the judge in the case discovered, six of those cases did not exist. Instead, they were dreamed up by the online tool. This was only one of several high-profile incidents in which new technology has sometimes embarrassed the lawyers using it. Yet many legal experts believe generative AI will also change the legal profession in ways that will aid lawyers and their clients. Lawyers must be accountable for how they use AI. Not only must they carefully assess any bias inherent in algorithms before using it, but they must also consider ethical and fairness issues. AI holds tremendous promise to free legal professionals from the most time-consuming tasks, work more efficiently than ever, and empower them to focus on strategic projects that truly matter. Still, there are many ethical considerations of AI to keep in mind. Ethical Issues Depending on your jurisdiction, there may be formal ethical opinions addressing the use of AI. Be sure to confirm the existence of these ethics’ opinions or guidelines and how they apply to the use of AI. Bias And Fairness AI uses trained algorithms to analyze vast amounts of data. These algorithms can collect biased historical information, which means that the AI system may also inadvertently produce biased results, leading to questionable outcomes. Algorithms can be difficult to interpret, and it can be challenging to understand how they arrive at their decisions or source information. Privacy AI systems often rely on sizable amounts of data, including highly sensitive and confidential information, and may store personal and conversation data. When using the technology, lawyers need to ensure that AI systems adhere to strict data privacy regulations. For example, lawyers using ChatGPT must familiarize themselves with its Privacy Policy and Terms of Use before using the service. Additionally, they must make sure that the data is only used for the specific purposes for which it was collected. Lawyers must also consider professional obligations relating to privacy and information-sharing when providing any information with AI systems to ensure they are not running afoul of confidentiality obligations (to clients or other parties) or otherwise disclosing information improperly. Responsibility And Accountability As a rule of thumb, AI should be used as a complement to work, and not a replacement. While AI can streamline time-consuming and mundane tasks, strategic decision-making, complex legal analysis, and legal counsel are all examples of responsibilities that it simply cannot take over. As a result, lawyers must be proactive in establishing clear lines of responsibility and accountability when implementing AI in their firm. Summary As the use of AI in law firms becomes increasingly widespread, it is important that legal professionals address the ethical considerations surrounding it and ensure the technology is being used responsibly. By doing so, lawyers will be able to enjoy AI’s benefits while maintaining an ethical practice at the same time. In the end, AI has its benefits but it should not be relied upon to accurately apply the law to a fact pattern in the context of giving sound legal advice. Accurate legal advice includes understanding the context in which the law exists, experience and human thoughtfulness.