Oklahoma tornado death toll currently 24, not 51, medical examiner says
Iowa City debates whether police officers belong in schools
Southeast Cedar Rapids shooting under investigation
Linn County casino campaign cost $3.43 million, final figures reveal
Severe storms blow through Eastern Iowa
Interactive: Shelter from the storm
What should qualify as an ‘adult entertainment establishment’?
Related Stories
The Simply Sensual shop next to a laundromat and a Mexican grocery store in a west-side strip mall doesn’t seem like your old-fashioned adult bookstore or strip club, long ago relegated in Cedar Rapids to a few spots in or near industrial areas away from residences, schools, day cares, parks and churches.
Even so, shop owner Patricia Edmonds finds herself doing battle with the city’s Building Services Division, which has concluded that her mix of retail merchandise qualifies her business as an “adult entertainment establishment.” And as such, the shop is violating the city’s zoning ordinance because its sits in the wrong zoning area and is too close to a residential area, church and day care, city officials say.
Edmonds, 47, said the city is incorrectly characterizing her business, which she said is a haven for women older than 40 who want to buy lingerie from a similarly aged woman and not from a teenager working in a high-traffic shopping mall store.
How would you define what qualifies as an “adult entertainment establishment”?
-u20042.png?1366232523)
A store that sells PORN! They should leave this lady alone. She’s only trying to earn a living!
“What should qualify as an ‘adult entertainment establishment’?”
Not sure I can define it, but I know when I see it. The do-gooders need to find productive work and get off this lady’s back… Immediately!
I would classify stores that sells alcohol for human consumption on premises or otherwise as being more of an adult store then this lady business is,
From what I read it sounds like this store is not much different than a Victoria Secret store you find at the mall.
I think someone has too much time on their hands if they dont have anything better to do then hassle this women!
I have not been to this location, so I will make no comment as to whether or not it fits the definition of an adult entertainment establishment.
The line has to be drawn somewhere though. Is that line the porn section at family video? Is it the novelties at Spencers gifts? Is it this lady? I don’t know. Like most people said, you know it when you see it.
This lady is providing a great service for couples or individuals wanting a safe and less “dirty” feel of that of a sex shop. The accusations of that of the city would mean that ALL THE MOVIE RENTAL STORES, most of which rent pornographic videos should all also be shut down. Dont forget that SPENCERS IN THE MALL, sells the same products of this nature and children can easily go into this store. This situation reeks of discrimination and vendetta of somone on the council.
Whatever the definition, that it is too close to a “church” should be irrelevant. Churches should not have any special status in this issue.
As for residential, adult shops should be treated no differently than any other retail establishment. Same with schools & day care facilities.
What is the govt protecting the children from?
As we have learned of late, visual images, ie. video games have zero affect on game players, so seeing ‘something’ in this retail business cant have any affect, can it?
Let’s give it the Republican acid test- “Jobs-Jobs-Jobs!” OK, that should do it, it should stay put and the churches should move!
That area needs more businesses not less. This area has gotten really bad with crime and drugs. This city has a lot pertinent issues then this one. Like someone said a vendetta seems to be at play here.
If the idea behind the ordinance is to keep children out of dirty book stores, then the very fact that this is, as kids would see it, an old ladies’ underware store is enough to keep them out.
Leave this woman and her business alone
From all the comments it appears what is happening here is govt running amok with regulations and enforcement that the people have no desire for. This is just one small example of the govt existing for the purpose of govt, and not the people.
Multiply this by the county, the state, the federal. Then throw in multiple agencies of all this govt subsections that overlap their self defined jurisdictions, and we have a too large, too intrusive, too abusive, govt.
Here is another example of city regulators flexing their power. As I stated before these are just simple examples.
It also points out the rule of unintended consequences when elected bodies set out “to do something” in response to any given supposed problem. Poorly worded and ambiguous rules and regulations.
In the end they hurt people and kill business. No business…………..no tax revenue…………Hmmmm
I forgot the link
http://bostonherald.com/news_opinion/local_coverage/2013/01/hub%E2%80%99s_%E2%80%98drinking_game%E2%80%99_ban_puts_taverns_bind