Bernson’s Plan : Hearing Slated on Adult Shop Locations

San Fernando Valley residents will have an opportunity to comment at a hearing Wednesday night in Reseda on a proposal by Councilman Hal Bernson to require existing adult businesses throughout Los Angeles to move away from residential areas.

Bernson, who represents the West Valley, has proposed a citywide prohibition against adult bookstores, massage parlors, X-rated movie theaters and other sexually oriented establishments within 500 feet of homes, schools and religious institutions. No breakdown is available on the number of such businesses in the Valley, but city planners say most are located in North Hollywood and Studio City.

The council in 1982 approved a similar measure by Bernson to apply the 500-foot buffer to new businesses. Because of legal questions raised at the time by the city attorney, however, Bernson held off on seeking to apply the restrictions to businesses already in operation. The city attorney advised that forcing businesses to move may be an unconstitutional denial of due process.

Two Years to Move

Bernson said he believes his new proposal will resolve that issue by allowing existing adult businesses two years to move to a site that conforms with the 500-foot limitation. Alternatively, he said, his proposal would allow a business to obtain approval from a city zoning administrator, after a public hearing, to stay at its location if it could prove the move would cause economic hardship.

The city attorney’s office said that the two-year period was necessary to give businesses time to recover their investments.

Bernson said he will attend the hearing, to be conducted by Planning Department staff members, from 7 to 10 p.m. at the Reseda Women’s Club, 7901 Lindley Ave. Public testimony will be included in a report to the Planning Commission, which is expected to forward it to the full council by summer.

The Los Angeles law is patterned after a Detroit ordinance upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court several years ago after being challenged as a violation of First Amendment guarantees.