Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Land Use topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Lebanon council approves special‑use permit amendment to allow horses and other animals at 218 North Kerman Street

Lebanon City Council · August 11, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Council voted to amend a special‑use permit for 218 North Kerman Street to add horses and clarify animal allowances; members debated maximum counts, acreage and the nontransferability of special‑use permits before approving the ordinance by roll call.

Lebanon City Council voted Aug. 11 to amend a special‑use permit for 218 North Kerman Street to add horses and clarify per‑animal allowances, approving the ordinance in a roll‑call vote.

George, who moved the ordinance, told the council the draft adds horses and lists per‑animal maxima so the permit would allow, at most under the ordinance example, "eight horses, eight cows, 30 chickens and 18 goats." He said the new language was prepared to mirror existing per‑animal allowances and to make the permit clearer for plan‑commission review.

Council members and members of the public pressed for clarity on total maximums and whether the draft should require minimum acreage or spacing standards for different livestock. Several speakers noted that earlier versions of the zoning language did not state a single total maximum and that that lack of a consolidated cap contributed to uncertainty.

A councilor reminded the meeting that special‑use permits generally do not transfer automatically when property changes hands; a new owner typically must seek Plan Commission review and a variance or new application, so any future owner would need to reapply for the same activity.

The ordinance was referred to the Plan Commission process during discussion as one option for developing recommended numeric limits and implementation details. The council completed a roll‑call vote and recorded an affirmative outcome for the amendment.

The council did not adopt additional animal‑space standards or a citywide numeric chart at the meeting; members said those technical requirements could be examined by staff or the Plan Commission and returned to council if needed.

The council indicated next procedural steps: the amended ordinance will become part of the zoning record and, if questions remain about detailed animal‑space requirements, staff and Plan Commission work would follow.