From buckslocalnews.com
Posted on Wed, Aug 27, 2008
Developer sues Morrisville over strip club rejection
By Petra Chesner Schlatter
Stockham Interests, LLC, the developer, which proposed a gentleman's club in Morrisville Borough, has filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court in Philadelphia, claiming their First Amendment Rights have been violated.
Damages are being sought by Stockham Interests in excess of $75,000.
An application for a variance by Stockham Interests was unanimously denied by the Morrisville Zoning Hearing Board in May.
The property in question is the historic Stockham Building. The tall structure is located across the street from a statue of Robert Morris, financier of the American Revolution.
The Stockham Building is located at the corner of Bridge Street and Pennsylvania Avenue in the old business section. Morrisville leaders have been leading a revitalization of the area in recent years.
Morrisville Borough Council Solicitor James Downey said this week in an interview, "It's a little out there. The lawsuit alleges that they are precluded from putting up a gentleman's club."
The lawsuit says Stock-ham Interests "violated their First Amendment rights with inappropriate restrictions on adult entertainments," Downey said.
"Under Pennsylvania Law, the applicant has to prove hardship," Downey said. "They didn't appeal to the Bucks County Common Pleas Court.
Downey noted, "There is a gentleman's club right down the street." Downey stressed that the lawsuit states Stockham Interests was precluded from operating an adult entertainment facility.
Morrisville Borough has referred the case to its insurance carrier, Integrated Management in Chester Springs, Pa. for defense. The insurance carrier has referred the defense to a law firm.
Downey said Stockham Interests came to the zoning board and followed a procedure.
"In place of filing the appropriate process and procedure to appeal the denial to the Bucks County Court of Common Pleas, they filed a complaint in the U.S. Civil Court, claiming their civil rights were violated," said Downey.
Downey said the federal district court "moves pretty fast" and estimated a decision would be made in about six months.
"We all have rights, but we have a duty to respect the rights of others," Downey concluded. "But, they haven't done that."
Todd Colarusso, president of Stockham Interests, LLC of Princeton, N.J., said after the May meeting that he would appeal the decision in Bucks County Common Pleas Court. Instead, he went to the federal court.
Colarusso had threatened there will be a strip club as he stood outside on the steps of borough hall.
When the strip club variance application was denied by the Morrisville zoning board, residents said they were happy.
Residents, especially the clergy, voiced their opinion not to allow a burlesque-style theater with topless women in their town.
Colarusso had said during the hearing that he would drop his original application for a zoning variance to establish an adult club on the second floor of the building on the condition that the board allow a 1,000-square-foot hanging nylon sign for the west side of the building.
However, the board rejected that request. Colarusso said the sign would first be made available to tenants of the building, including a health club. He said the sign could be used by area businesses.
Pastor Gary Taylor of the 1st Baptist Church said he was concerned for the moral content of the sign and whether it could be controlled in the future.
Taylor said there would be adverse effects on the community because "Morrisville would be known for that particular establishment."
The applicant said he would not allow advertisements for alcohol, tobacco, condoms or abortion.
Friday, August 29, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
Steve (or any other Councilpersons out there),
Please look into getting this lawsuit thrown out. That property is up for auction for non-payment of taxes. They don't deserve their day in court if they don't pay their taxes.
Yeah, come on, there's gotta be a way to make unsubstantiated loose affiliations with bad people or things on this one. For example, can they be linked to Dolphin & Bradbury? They're both in the Western Hemisphere, after all. Or the land on which the Stockham Building sits - wasn't that primordial swamp during the Myassic Period? Or was it the Jurassic Period?
This town has proven quite adept at killing even good projects - this one should be a cakewalk! Remember when that SkyKing fireworks store tried to put down roots here? Why, we showed 'em what fer, and they skeedaddled it right on outta town! What's that, they actually built their store here, on prime land between the Holiday Inn Express and the 7-11 strip mall, or what used to be the Vulcanized Rubber Mill? And we were powerless to stop them? Oh my. Sorry - I think we may have good reason to be worried.
Maybe we should look into offering classes at MHS in pole dancing for the girls and placement of dollar bills in g-strings for the boys.
Jon, I was not trying to play Abbott to your Costello (not this time, anyway).
This was a sincere request. I know there are council members that read this blog and was hoping one would take this info and run with it.
It is ridiculous that these people would wrap themselves in the flag and fight (thump thump) for your right (thump thump) to paaaaaaartyyyyyy.
Peter, I know you were sincere. I didn't mean to steal your (Tropic?) Thunder. I hope one of our "leaders" responds to your perfectly reasonable inquiry. Even a simple "I can't speak much about this matter because it's in litigation, but thanks for the feedback. Keep in touch." would be nice.
Unfortunately, our "leaders", both national and local, seem to need an enemy, and we must be it.
I've been thinking about the 1st Amendment argument and have a question I'd like to put out there for debate.
What if this were not a strip club? What if it were a an art gallery that had on display some controversial art? Would this change your position on the situation?
I'm not sure a controversial art show at a mainstream art gallery rises to the same level of community disgust. I would take the movie house that showed one porn movie a year over the porn theater that showed "Mary Poppins" once a year.
Its the intended use that counts as the main focus. Its like comparing football to Michael Vick's dogfighting. There both bloody contests. One is acceptable and the other is not.
As long as elephant dung is not involved, the controversial art at least has some potentially redeeming quality. The strip joint??? Not so much..
Post a Comment