Commission adopts new development code; keeps occupancy cap in 4–1 vote

Lawrence — The City Commission adopted a consolidated development code, Ordinance No. 10120, on second and final reading and separately approved Ordinance No. 10121 addressing residential occupancy limits after public comment and a brief commission discussion at the April 1, 2025 meeting.

The development code ordinance passed 5–0. A later vote on the occupancy‑limits ordinance passed with four votes in favor and one opposing vote; Commissioner Sellers registered the lone dissent.

City staff and public speakers framed the occupancy question as a housing‑supply and civil‑rights issue. David Baston, a member of the public, told the commission, “This ordinance hits everybody. Students, workers, roommates,” and argued that the cap is “arbitrary” and could be “unconstitutional,” citing Moore v. East Cleveland in describing legal risk. Baston said permits dropped in 2024 to 57 and warned the rule could shrink housing supply.

Ellen Johnson, who identified herself at the podium as a community member, urged the commission to modify the code to allow more sober‑living and supportive housing, saying existing occupancy caps “are preventing the establishment of necessary sober living environments and supported housing for mentally ill and drug addicted community members.” She cited Oxford House models and submitted research to commissioners in support.

An online commenter, Chris Flowers, suggested occupancy limits that scale by bedroom (for example, two occupants per bedroom plus one) and proposed addressing vehicle parking directly rather than using occupancy as a proxy for parking demand.

Commission discussion focused on legal exposure, community impacts and enforcement. One commissioner asked whether prior occupancy limits had been litigated; a staff member responded that the earlier 3‑and‑4 person limit had been challenged and “it was upheld by the federal court.” Commissioners expressed differing views during debate: several said they preferred fewer or no caps in principle but voted to adopt the blanket occupancy ordinance as presented. The mayor and members of the commission emphasized the ordinance is a second‑reading adoption and therefore a final legislative act for this process.

Actions recorded on the record included two motions related to D8A: (1) adoption of Ordinance No. 10120 (consolidated development code) and (2) adoption of Ordinance No. 10121 (occupancy limits). Both motions were moved and seconded by council members and carried (development code 5–0; occupancy ordinance 4–1).

Commissioners and residents repeatedly asked staff to provide data and enforcement metrics going forward. Several speakers said the planning commission had not presented studies to justify the numerical cap. City staff did not present new studies at the meeting and said implementation and enforcement detail will follow through the city’s normal administrative process.

The commission did not announce an effective date or additional implementation details for the ordinances at the meeting; those administrative steps were not specified in the record.

Votes at a glance: Ordinance No. 10120 (Development Code) — Mover: Finkle Dice; Second: Sellers; Outcome: approved 5–0. Ordinance No. 10121 (Occupancy limits) — Mover: Finkle Dice; Second: Sellers; Outcome: approved 4–1 (Commissioner Sellers opposed).

The adoption closes the legislative step on the development code and the occupancy provision; commissioners asked staff for follow‑up information on enforcement, any exceptions for licensed supportive housing, and data that could inform future amendments.