02-22-2012 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES CITY COUNCIL FEBRUARY 22, 2012 ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT - ADULT - ORIENTEI) BUSINESS USES The foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Keis. Ayes (4). Nays (0). Resolution declared adopted. Montour opened the Public Hearing to consider a Zoning Ordinance Amendment to update regulations in Section 903.130 relating to adult - oriented business uses in Commercial and Industrial Districts, and amending the Zoning Map to reflect the adopted regulations. It was noted that the Planning Commission recommended approval of the amendment. The City Planner reported that the over time as the City's land uses and zoning have changed, the areas eligible for adult - oriented business uses have been impacted. The City is required to maintain some stock of property that allows for these types of uses as a First Amendment protection. The current code allows adult uses in the B -2 District and previously these uses rolled over from B -2 into the B -3 District. The roll- over of the use to B -3 no long exists, so the eligible areas have decreased. The conjunction with allowing the use in certain areas, the Code also provides a 500 foot buffer from sensitive uses, such as churches, schools, residential areas, etc. The Planner indicated that when applying the rules to existing land use patterns, the City is falling short in meeting the threshold allowance for these uses based on court cases. The Planner reported that he looked at decreasing the threshold, but that did not resolve the issue. After further review, the solution appears to be adding the allowance for adult uses in both the B -3 and the I -1 District. Most of the properties zoned I -1 are located in areas where the buffer zone would have little impact and tend to be properties with the least exposure to sensitive uses. The Planner reported that adding adult uses to B -3 and I -1 and retaining the 500 foot buffer, the City's stock of properties eligible for adult uses rises to about 4 %. Court cases have talked about 5% or a little less as providing these businesses with reasonable opportunity without violating their First Amendment rights. The Planner noted that another way cities have defended these cases is to use the number of lots available. Courts have upheld this method even if the percentage of properties was closer to 2 %. The Planner indicated that with the changes proposed the City would have 30 plus properties eligible for adult uses and approximately 4% of the area of the City. The Planner felt that this was a defensible position. There was no one present from the general public wishing to comment on this matter. 15