michaelskis said:
What about the content of music? What would happen if someone set up a movie projector and showed porno on the side of their house? In some places the speaking of profanity is illegal, so is the playing of recorded profanity any better?
Two separate isssues here, Michaelskis. On the one hand, Seagirly is asking about what a community can do to "regulate intensity and type" of music. I understand that really she's implicitly asking is what controls an ordinance should put into place to
encourage or discourage certain performance venues and their attendant impacts. For instance, one could set lower noise level limits, smaller seating capacties or gross floor areas, parking standards, etc. to encourage more intimate venues more suitable for acoustic performances than, say, rock but I think we'd be running seriously afoul of the 1st amendment if one were to adopt an ordinance prohibiting the performance (i.e. "content") of rock or hiphop but allowing jazz or christian contemporary music in certain zones. No legitimate governmental interest exists to justify the prohibition of certain forms of expression, so in this sense there is no way to regulate the 'type' of music performed.
On the other hand, a community
could adopt a law/ordinance prohibiting 'profanity'. I personally don't like the idea, but it is not an uncommon practice. However, the regulation of this specific form of expression is not a land use consideration and therefore should have no place in a zoning ordinance.
I would agree that the operation of a theater (projecting porno movies on the side of the house) could conceivably be interpreted as a land use consideration....
