Agenda - Planning Commission - 01/08/2015

Home

Zoning Bulletin November 25, 2014 I Volume 8 I Issue 22 regulation." The court concluded that "the under -inclusive nature of this size and height restriction defeat[ed] [the Town's] assertion that the bylaws truly served a substantial interest in maintaining rural aesthetics." The court also found the zoning bylaws were equally under -inclusive as re- lated to traffic concerns. The court found that the Town failed to clarify how the traffic effects of adult -entertainment businesses were in any way distinct from the traffic effects that would be caused by any other large, commercial business that might choose to locate in the same area. The court concluded that the Town's reliance on traffic concerns was "tellingly under[ -]inclusive," revealing that the Town's alleged substantial interest was not actually furthered by its bylaws. See also: National Amusements, Inc. v. Town of Dedham, 43 F.3d 731 (lst Cir. 1995). See also:The Florida Star v. B.J.F., 491 U.S. 524, 109 S. Ct. 2603, 105 L. Ed. 2d 443, 16 Media L. Rep. (BNA) 1801 (1989). See also: Ward v. Rock Against Racism, 491 U.S. 781, 109 S. Ct. 2746, 105 L. Ed. 2d 661 (1989). Case Note: In 2008, the Town's general bylaws were also amended so as to forbid the granting of alcohol sales licenses to any adult -entertainment business and to ban the consumption of alcohol by patrons within any such business. Showtime also challenged the ban on the sale and consumption of alcohol on the premises, alleging that it violated Article 16 of the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights (Mass. Const. art. XVI) (the free speech provision of the Massachusetts Constitution). The -court concluded that circumstances warranted certification to the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court of the question as to whether the bylaw banning the sale and consumption of alcohol at adult - entertainment businesses violated the free speech provision of the Massachusetts Constitution. ©, 2014 Thomson Reuters 7