The Lowell License Commission voted Thursday to hold a public hearing on proposed revisions to the commission's licensing regulations that would establish a separate license category for bar-only businesses and limit admission of minors to those venues.

The commission set the public hearing after an extended discussion that brought questions from commissioners about how the change would work, how it would interact with a separate City Council proposal about kitchens for restaurant-license holders, and whether age limits should be set at under 18 or under 21.

The proposal, framed by the city law department, would allow businesses to apply for an "all alcoholic beverages, general" license for bar-only operations; by contrast, existing "all alcoholic beverages, restaurant" licenses would remain available to establishments that keep a functioning restaurant. "That would be 1 of the proposals that the law department is asking that the commission consider," Mr. Wood, a law department attorney, told commissioners. "We're trying to create a clear line between what is a bar and what is a restaurant."

The law department stated the proposed text currently suggests a bar-only license would exclude admission to persons under 18, but that the commission could consider raising that threshold to 21 during the public hearing. "So currently, our proposal is under 18. However, at the public hearing, the commission, if it is the will of the body to consider under 21, of course, that would be something that the law department would be willing to, consider and implement," Mr. Wood said.

A police department representative warned that allowing 18- to 20-year-olds into bar settings may not resolve the underage-drinking problems the city has seen. "If you are still allowing 18 year olds, 19 year olds, and 20 who are not able to purchase or handle alcohol privileges into a bar atmosphere, you're not solving the problem," the police representative said, adding that the police preference would be a strict 21 limit for bar-only venues, with a possible carve-out for occasional supervised "18 nights" requiring advance notice and wristbands.

Several commissioners emphasized the need for a public hearing so the public, the university and other stakeholders could comment. "The public ought to have a chance to discuss this, so I move that we adopt a public hearing before we make any decisions," Commissioner Craig said. The commission then voted to hold a public hearing on the proposed changes.

Commissioners and the law department also discussed an anticipated City Council ordinance that would impose kitchen requirements on restaurant license holders. Mr. Wood said the law department will send a separate proposed change to the City Council regarding kitchen rules; those City Council changes would take effect immediately if adopted, and restaurant license holders would have to comply.

Commissioners raised constitutional and implementation questions, including whether restricting entry by age could face legal challenges and how any change would be phased in. "There's a potential...I want to do a little bit more research on this to have a definitive opinion," Mr. Wood said in response to a question on constitutionality.

The commission approved the request to schedule a public hearing so the proposed revisions can be discussed publicly and stakeholders can present comment. No substantive regulatory change was adopted at the meeting; the item was referred to a public hearing for further consideration.

A public hearing will be scheduled; the commission did not set a final adoption date at Thursday's meeting.