SIMI MAY DESIGNATE ADULT DISTRICT; PLANNING PROPOSAL FOR BUSINESS ZONE ADDRESSES SUIT.

Byline: Lisa Mascaro Daily News Staff Writer

Simi Valley may soon have an X-rated business zone - on the far western edge of town, where officials hope residents will not be bothered by the commerce they have fought for years to ban.

A sweeping pair of ordinances before the Planning Commission next week would relegate all adult businesses in one area and put operators under strict regulations - including an annual work permit for strippers.

Drafted in response to a federal court ruling that the city's ordinance was unconstitutional, the new rules could end years of controversy and open the door to Simi Valley's first adult business.

``We're trying to satisfy the business owner and we're trying to satisfy the residents, said City Councilwoman Barbara Williamson. ``This is about as close as we're going to get to it.''

The council imposed a moratorium on adult businesses in July 1997 while it drafted a law to replace the ordinance challenged by businessman Philip Young, who had been trying to open a nude dance club in the city.

The moratorium is set to expire next month, and officials hope to have the new rules in place by then.

Young's attorney, who had not seen the proposed ordinances, said his client still hopes to open a club in Simi Valley and is concerned the new adult zone would be too far from town.

``It has to have a reasonable chance to operate. If they pass an ordinance that doesn't do that, it's unconstitutional,'' said Roger Jon Diamond, an attorney specializing in the adult entertainment industry. ``When the smoke clears and the dust settles, Simi Valley's consenting adults will have a nude theater and they will thank us for it.''

The pair of ordinances calls for establishing a sexually oriented business overlay zone on the west edge of the city and putting in place regulations on club operators and performers.

The new overlay zone would provide the only location where adult dance clubs, bookstores and other sexually oriented businesses would be allowed to operate in Simi Valley. It would be south of the railroad tracks, north of the Arroyo Simi, west of the intersection of Easy Street and Los Angeles Avenue and about 1,800 feet from the western edge of the city.

The zone would limit the number of businesses in the area and their proximity to one another.

The other ordinance calls for regulating club performers and operators by requiring them to apply for permits with the Simi Valley police chief and sets out rules regarding the kinds of dancing and nudity allowed at the clubs.

The Police Department would conduct background checks on applicants to determine whether they had prior convictions for sex-related offenses, and would be able to revoke permits if applicants were charged with prostitution or other sex crimes while in business, officials said.

The proposal was welcomed by Steve Frank, a local activist who had led protests against Young's business plans.

``It creates a family-friendly city,'' said Frank, who lauded plans to register club operators and performers. ``It minimizes the potential of anti-family activity being brought to the city.''

The battle between Young and the city began in 1993, when Young sought to open the Dancing Bears, a nude dancing club in the Westgate Center at 999 Los Angeles Ave. He was initially given zoning clearance in January 1993, but was then denied because of parking concerns.

In April 1993, the City Council approved an ordinance regulating adult businesses that required businesses to obtain special permits and limited their operations near parks, schools, youth activities and places of worship - an ordinance that later became the subject of Young's lawsuit.

In 1996, Young was denied plans for the Mirages Cabaret, a nude dancing club at 585 E. Los Angeles Ave. in the Madera Center. The denial was based, in part, on the fact that it was too close to the Joshua Institute, a Bible study group opened by now-school board member Norman Walker after Young's permit for the club had been filed.

Young filed a $1.5 million suit against the city in 1994, claiming his rights were violated because the ordinance prevented him from doing business. Last summer, U.S. District Judge William Rea ruled against the city, agreeing that its ordinance violated Young's rights. That ruling is on appeal.

CAPTION(S):

Map

MAP: Simi Valley's proposed Sexually Oriented Business Overlay Zone