In part because there is only one hotel and no other lodgings in Ironton, an ordinance that would allow bed and breakfast establishments within residential neighborhoods has been revived.

After the original ordinance died last year, the Ironton City Council heard the first reading of an amended ordinance Thursday.

The ordinance was originally proposed in September by Chairman Jesse Roberts.

However, it was amended twice in the following months. The ordinance

eventually died because no one on council asked for a first reading after the second amendment, and Roberts withdrew his sponsorship because he disagreed with the second change.

The first amendment dictated that signs must be commercial grade, cannot be illuminated and must meet other city codes. In November, Councilman John Elam motioned, seconded by Jim Tordiff, to amend the ordinance to restrict it to allow only one bed and breakfast within a six-block radius.

Other than these two changes, the ordinance is the same as the one proposed by Roberts.

Roberts said he originally sponsored the ordinance after talking with a few people in town who had expressed interest in the idea. However, he says he can no longer support it after the second amendment.

"Limiting businesses when you are trying to encourage business is a double negative," Roberts said. "I do not support it as amended."

He said he is not so much opposed to the restrictions within residential neighborhoods, but thinks that the six-block radius is unfair as written because it may overlap into a business district, and would then inhibit a potential business from locating in an area it would otherwise be permitted in.

Elam said he does not think this will be an issue, and that residents will be more receptive if the establishments are not stacked too closely in one particular neighborhood.

"I think this protects the neighborhoods to where it is still ultimately the adjacent residents' decision," he said. "I am just saying I do not think there should be a bed and breakfast every block."

Elam said he does not think it will unfairly limit any potential establishments, and that maybe the city should rechannel their efforts into trying to attract a hotel.

Currently, the Lyle Motel at 1515 S. Third St. is the only form of lodging within the city.

The ordinance will be sent to the zoning committee to be reviewed and discussed in a public hearing. No date for a hearing has been set at this time.

It must also pass three full readings by council. If the zoning committee approves the ordinance, council can pass it with a simple majority. If the committee does not approve it, council would require six of seven votes to adopt it.

Regardless, only a few homes in the city could meet the requirements outlined in the ordinance.

Sixty percent of the adjacent property owners must agree, there must be sufficient rooms and off-street parking, the occupancy must be short-term, the owner must purchase a non-transferable $500 annual license and must also live in the home and operate it.

In other business, Council passed an ordinance that authorized the city to purchase a 25 by 440 foot strip of land behind the Ohio Department of Transportation's South Sixth Street garage,

adjacent to Liebert's facility, for $9,600 and another ordinance transferring the property to the Lawrence Economic Development Corporation for a sum of $1.

Cleary said the city agreed to donate it to the LEDC when Liebert began expanding two years ago because it would promote economic development and help ensure that no jobs were lost.

"Our original agreement was that we would buy that property and give it to LEDC with the promise that Liebert would do their 80,000 square foot expansion and maintain employment levels," he said. "The LEDC offered to pay us, but we think it is our obligation to fulfill the original agreement."

The property is needed so Liebert, who leases the building from the LEDC, can meet state codes and set far enough away from the property line. The expansion is virtually completed and this just finalizes the city's commitment to the deal, he said.

Liebert had a variation on its building permit to allow for the expansion while in the process of transferring property and needed it to be officially completed before the final inspection, Cleary said.