A really silly reply.
It's not at all hard to find residents, business people, club owners, and restaurant owners who have had good experiences due to the effects of so many clubs concentrated in one area. The presumption that the area is an exclusively non-club district is obtuse. For example, there are far more restaurants in the same vicinity as the night clubs because of the amount of people that want something to eat after their night out. It's also a bit rich when people such as Adam Vaughan want to dictate how this important piece of downtown land ought to be used. If anything, the overconcentration of clubs has actually sped up the evolution into a more vibrant mixed-use city.
I say bring on the mixed-use city - including more clubs and more residents, stores, businesses and service.
It's funny how some people want to vote Vaughan in because he has noted the number of negative effects of having so many clubs in one area. The fact that he wants to disable the diversification of the city by kicking out more residents and businesses gets left behind or is neglected. These are economic generators, not just the same people that drink coffee's and walk around stores. It's also worth noting that the official plan for the area has always included that homeless shelter they put in to scare off business and residential development and intensification that nobody will buy into just because Adam Vaughan tells them to. As this happens, many more clubs will disappear, and be replaced by nothing.
The thing is, if the city would actually be enforcing laws more rigorously it's likely that this attempt at socializing business with nothing backing it up but deluded self-righteousness, Adam Vaughan's plan would be found to be undemocratic and his anti-business/anti-resident-that-doesn't-fit-his-demographic attitude would have already been put out of office.