Zoning limits next step
The city council's effort to clean up the now focuses on zoning. Should strip bars be restricted to one part of town, or separated?
From Kentucky Citizen Digest, May, 1997

With the regulatory ordinance going into effect July 1, Lexington’s City Council will turn its attention to exploring how to use zoning laws to further restrict the city’s strip bars. There is the real possibility that new zoning requirements could become effective simultaneously with the first ordinance.

The proposed amendment to the zoning code began April 14 in the Services Committee where it passed favorably with some modifications.  It then moved to the work session of the full City Council on April 22 where it passed unchanged, making it likely to receive its first reading at the regularly-scheduled Council meeting on May 1.

Some expect both the first and second readings May 1 because it must still be examined by the Planning Commission once the proposed guidelines are approved by the Council.  After the Planning Commission s scrutiny and recommendations are received. the Council will have to affirm the final version.

The current draft of the amendment includes a 500-ft. restriction from any residential property, a 500-ft. restriction from any school? and a 500-ft. distance from other sexually-oriented businesses. The existing code required a 1000-ft. distance from other sex businesses with no proximity limitations from other kinds of institutions or zoning areas.

Another key component of the proposed amendment is that any permit request would be based on conditional usage, thus notifying neighboring businesses and citizens of public hearings that would determine whether the request was granted.

According to legal experts, current interpretations on zoning issues prohibits cities from simply passing ordinances that completely eliminate the businesses out of a city. Other zoning strategies can, however, be used to control the activities of strip bars.

One tool commonly employed is to use zoning rules that seriously limit the areas of town in which they can operate. Some cities, in order to protect children, have required such establishments to locate away from schools, day-care centers, parks and recreational areas. To protect families, residential areas and places of worship have also been included in the restrictions.

There is also the issue of whether to “cluster” such businesses or separate them. At first blush, it would seem that the best way to cut down on the ill effects of such businesses would be to restrict them to one areas of town. But there are some who have a different idea. In fact, the best thing may be to do exactly the opposite.

Experts now argue that restricting adult businesses to one area of town is the recipe for creating a “red light district.” Zoning laws that restrict adult businesses to certain sections of town can have the same effect as handing over a whole section of town to the sex industry.

A better option is to scatter them throughout the city. This would have several advantages. For one thing, it would cut down on “bar-hopping,” where men simply jump from one club to another. If the next club was 15 minutes away, for example, customers would be less likely to go from bar-to-bar and probably spend less money overall, driving down the profits of the businesses.

These kinds of zoning restrictions will have to be “grandfathered;” in other words, they could not be enforced on strip bars already in existence. They will, however, apply to any new businesses that open after a certain date.

If support for the zoning ordinance builds as it did for the regulatory ordinance, Lexington will strike a second blow to the sleaze business in the weeks ahead.
 

Key Family Foundation Contacts: Kent Ostrander, Executive Director Martin Cothran, Senior Associate Policy Analyst