Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Site Plan Revision topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Applicant submits revised site plan removing Eunice Road access; fence-height condition remains unresolved
Summary
At a Jacksonville agenda meeting staff said an applicant submitted a revised site plan and written description that removes vehicular access to Eunice Road and that an outstanding condition about fence height (6 feet vs. 8 feet) remains to be resolved; no formal vote was recorded.
Get email alerts on the Site Plan Revision topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
At a Jacksonville agenda meeting, Dylan, a staff member, said the applicant provided a revised site plan and written description that removes access to Eunice Road and that the committee would consider an amendment to replace the exhibits with the revised materials.
The revised exhibits “eliminates the access to Eunice Road,” Dylan said, and he added he had emailed the revised plan to members and would provide a paper copy. He told the chair that “the amendment will be to have the revised exhibits which is the revised site plan and the revised written description,” language staff said would eliminate the need for some planning commission conditions.
Dylan said the planning department had asked for a 6-foot fence during the planning commission review, while the planning commission recommended an 8-foot fence. “The planning commission wanted an 8 foot tall fence and the applicant was agreeable to that,” Dylan said. The transcript does not show a final decision on which height will be adopted.
Meeting organizers said the amendment to substitute the revised exhibits would be handled when all committee members are present; no formal motion, mover/second, or vote tally on the amendment appears in the recorded transcript.
Background: the revised site plan and written description were presented as a change intended to address access and some planning commission conditions. The planning department’s original condition and the planning commission’s stronger fence recommendation remain on the record as contrasting positions.
Next steps: staff indicated the committee will restate the amendment when additional members arrive and proceed from there; the transcript records no final outcome on the exhibits or the fence-height condition.
