Agenda - Planning Commission - 09/03/1996

Home

Z.B. August 1996 --Page 3 welfare and nearby property. No evidence supported the neighbors' arguments of environmental consequences. Matter of Greco v. Denison~ 599 N.Y.S. 2d 761. Matter of First National Bank of DownsviIIe v. City of Albany Board of Zoning Appeals, 628 N.Y.S. 2d 199. Adult Entertainment -- City wants to close business that unsuccessfully khallenged ordinance . City ofRamsey v. Holmberg, 548 N. W. 2d 302 (Minnesota) 1996 : Holmberg operated an adult business in the city of Ramsey, Minn. The Store sold adult books, magazines and novelties. It also had video booths that ~showed adult movies. When the store opened, the city had no ordinance regard- ing the location of adult businesses. i- The city hired a professional city planner to study how adult businesses affected neighborhoods. The planner wrote a report based on information from 'the city and articles, reports and background materials from throughout the -country. The city analyzed the planner's report along with studies from other cities that had similar businesses. The City Council concluded adult businesses produced negative "secondary effects," such as increased crime, lower prop- erty values and general neighborhood decay. - The council amended the city's zoning ordinance. The ordinance limited the areas in which adult businesses could operate, but did not ban them. It separated adult businesses into two categories: "adult use principal" and "adult use -- accessory." An adult use was a business that emphasized the display or description of certain sexual activities or anatomical areas. "Principal" businesses had more than 10 percent of their stock or floor area allocated to, or more than 20 percent of their gross receipts derived from, an adult use. "Accessory" businesses had 10 percent or less of stock or floor area devoted to, or 20 percent or less of their receipts derived from, adult-movie rentals or magazine sales. Principal businesses had to be at least 1,000 feet away from certain protected places (including daycare centers, churches, schools and liquor stores). Holmberg's business violated the new ordinance because it was a principal adult use within 1,000 feet of residentially zoned property, a daycare center, a church and a bowling alley that served liquor. He challenged the ordinance in federal court, claiming it violated the First and 14th Amendments. Ordinances were valid if they were content-neutral and designed to serve a substantial governmental interest that did not unreasonably limit alternative means of communication. The court upheld the ordinance. Holmberg eliminated the video booths and added non-adult merchandise so only 25 percent of the stock and floor area was devoted to adult-oriented material. Nevertheless, the city asked a state court to issue an order preventing Holmberg from operating his business. It asked for judgment without a trial.