Agenda - Planning Commission - 03/02/1999

Home

Page 2 -- February 10, 1999 Z.B. Supreme Court Update m Supreme Court lets stand New York City crackdown on adult entertainment As noted in the Jan. 25 issue of Zoning Bulletin, on"Jan. 11, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected two separate appeals in which adult businesses had argued New York City regulations violated their free speecfi rigl~ts'. The Court's decisions gave the city a green light to continue its crackdown on adult businesses. Background In 1993, the New York City planning department began studying whether the city should regulate adult businesses through zoning. After examining adult entertainment in New York City and considering studies conducted in many other cities, the commission concluded adult entertainment was a serious and growing prgblem. The other cities' studies documented numerous "negative secondary impacts" such as increased crime, depreciated property values, and the "deterioration of the quality of urban life." This was consistent with the areas of New York City with high concentrations of adult entertainment busi- nesses, including its popular Times Square area. Based on the department's study and public hearings, the city planning commission found the city's cSncentration of adult businesses had substantial adverse effects, including: a negative impact on economic development, de- creased property values, increased criminal activity, the proliferation of illegal sex-related businesses, damage to neighborhood character, and increased police costs. The council approved a zoning amendment regulating adult businesses. The regulations The city's new zoning regulations prohibited sexually oriented businesses from operating in certain areas of the city and, with certain exceptions, prohib- ited them from being within 500 feet of any school, daycare center, house of worship, or residential area. The lawsuits Soon after the city adopted the regulations, about 100 adult businesses (and their customers) filed several lawsuits'challenging the regulations. The busi- nesses claimed the regulations would force the relocation of 84 percent of the city's 177 adult businesses. According to the businesses, many of the sites the city identified as relocation sites weren't appropriate because they currently housed long-term occupants, such as public utilities, that were unlikely to move, lacked necessary infrastructure, or were on unsuitable wetlands. In February 1998, New York's highest court in a decision that combined several lawsuits -- upheld the city's adult entertainment zoning regulations. The court determined that the regulations weren't an impermissible attempt to regulate sexual expression, but rather were aimed at the 'negative secondary effects caused by adult uses. The regulations, said the court, were a coherent regulatory scheme designed to attack the problems associated with adult entertainment. By preventing adult businesses from locating in potential residential areas while allowing them in manufacturing and commercial districts, the regulations