BRADENTON BEACH – Commissioners are abandoning the city’s efforts to rezone 23 residentially-zoned properties north of Bridge Street and south of the Cortez Bridge.
Instead, to address inconsistencies between the city’s zoning and future land use maps, city officials may redirect their efforts to amending the future land use map designations for those properties instead.
The city commission rejected Building Official Steve Gilbert and City Planner Luis Serna’s recommendation on Oct. 20 to rezone those properties from their current Multiple Family Dwelling District (R-3) zoning designation to a Mixed-Use District (MXD) zoning designation.
The commission also rejected the Planning and Zoning Board’s contrary recommendation to rezone those properties to R-2 (two-family dwelling) and change the future land use map designation to Medium Density Residential.
A letter sent to the commission and signed by planning board Chairman Ken McDonough noted five potentially impacted property owners oppose any commercial use in that residentially zoned area. The letter suggests the city poll all 23 potentially impacted property owners to get their input on these matters.
Working in unison, the zoning and future land use maps designate which type of development is allowed on a property. More than a year ago, the city commission directed Gilbert and Serna to begin addressing long-stand- ing inconsistencies that have existed between the maps.
Gilbert, Serna and the planning board have repeatedly discussed and debated city staff’s recommendations to rezone several properties throughout the city. In most instances, the planning board disagreed with the staff’s proposed rezoning recommendations.
City staff’s proposed mixed-use rezoning of these specific properties would have made their zoning designations consistent with the existing Retail/Office/Residential (ROR) future land use map designation.
The mixed-use zoning would have allowed ground-level commercial activities in what has traditionally been a residential area. The proposed mixed-use zoning would have restricted residential use for new construction to no more than 50% of a property’s buildable space while allowing no more than 80% non-residential use of the buildable space.
The now-discarded rezoning considerations applied to the properties shaded in orange that contain the number 4. – City of Bradenton Beach | Submitted
City Attorney Ricinda Perry told the commission downzoning those properties from R-3 to R-2 as proposed by the planning board could be considered a taking of existing development rights, which could potentially diminish property values and expose the city legal action, including the filing of Bert Harris claims seeking compensation for the diminished property values and/or loss of future revenues. Perry also said the existing inconsistencies between the zoning map and the future land use map could expose the city to legal challenges.
The zoning and future land use map issue is further complicated by the plans of the Chiles Hospitality group that owns the BeachHouse restaurant. Chiles Hospitality owns the currently undeveloped property at 109 Third St. N. The perimeter of that vacant lot is currently used for unregulated parking. In September, Chiles Hospitality applied for a special use permit that would allow that property to be converted into a private parking lot to be used predominantly by their employees. The R-3 residential zoning designation prohibits standalone parking facilities.
Public input
When addressing the commission, Chiles Hospitality Facilities Director Brooks O’Hara said, “We strongly urge you to support this rezoning to mixed-use and support giving the property owners more freedom in decisions regarding their property, and not less. We reserve the right to protect our rights legally and could consider a more restrictive zoning as taking, so we would be concerned about that.”
Perry said “spot-zoning” the vacant Chiles Hospitality property with a different zoning designation might be a potential solution to that concern.
In September, Chiles Hospitality submitted this proposed parking configuration for its property at 109 Third St. N. – City of Anna Maria | Submitted
Evelyn Stob owns the single-family home at 105 Third St. that sits between the vacant Chiles Hospitality property and the Chiles Hospitality parking lot to the west that now provides paid public parking. Stob expressed her support for retaining the existing R-3 zoning designation for the residential properties in question.
At the conclusion of Thursday’s lengthy discussion, the commission rejected the proposed rezoning ordinance and directed staff to revisit these matters with the planning and zoning board and the potentially impacted property owners.
BRADENTON BEACH – Planning and Zoning Board members have rejected a rezoning ordinance that would change some residential properties to mixed-use, asking that it be rewritten to reflect the board’s previous consensus to rezone to two-family residential (R-2).
The ordinance that Building Official Steve Gilbert and City Planner Luis Serna presented on June 15 proposed rezoning more than 20 properties from Highland Avenue to Gulf Drive and from Second Street North to Cortez Road. The properties are zoned R-3 (multi-family residential) and city staff recommends rezoning them to mixed-use (MXD).
Building Official Steve Gilbert and City Planner Luis Serna hope to make the city’s zoning and future land use maps consistent with each other. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
The building department is requesting the rezoning to create better consistency between the city’s zoning maps and the future land use maps contained in the city’s comprehensive plan. Gilbert stated previously that the existing map inconsistencies could potentially create legal issues for the city.
The current R-3 zoning designation allows for up to 18 residential units per acre, but those same properties also carry the ROR (residential/office/retail) future land use map (FLUM) designation implemented when the city’s comprehensive plan was amended in 2008. The zoning map was never amended to bring it into agreement with the amended future land use map.
According to Gilbert, the ROR FLUM designation allows for a small store or retail operation, a takeout restaurant or an attorney’s office on the ground level with residential units above. The current R-3 zoning designation does not allow for those commercial uses. Gilbert and Serna recommend maintaining the existing ROR FLUM designation and rezoning those properties to mixed-use consistent with the FLUM designation.
The properties highlighted in orange on the city’s zoning map currently carry a R-3 zoning designation. – City of Bradenton Beach – SubmittedThe properties highlighted in light purple on the city’s future land use map currently carry a Retail/Office/Residential designation. – City of Bradenton Beach | Submitted
During preliminary discussions in May 2021, the board recommended rezoning those properties to R-2 (two-family residential) with an amended medium-density FLUM designation.
The R-2 zoning designation allows one-family dwelling units, two-family dwelling units (duplexes), group homes, foster care facilities with less than five residents, family day care homes and private parks that include playgrounds and preservation and conservation uses. The R-3 designation allows one-family dwelling units, two-family dwelling units, multi-family dwelling units, group homes, foster care facilities and family day care homes.
“The mixed-use would allow for in- creased lot coverage and increased total impervious surface coverage. Mixed-use provides for residential over retail, so this would give the opportunity to put small shops on the ground,” Gilbert told the board.
Board members John Burns, Ken Mc Donough, Fred Bartizal and Dan Morhaus expressed their collective desire that the ordinance eventually presented to the city commission for adoption, modification or rejection should reflect the board’s 2021 consensus.
Serna cautioned that downzoning those properties from R-3 to R-2 could expose the city to future legal challenges – including Bert Harris claims seeking compensation for the loss of the development rights currently granted by the R-3 zoning.
Ordinance opposition
Burns adamantly expressed his oppostion to Ordinance 22-541 as presented during Wednesday’s meeting and he questioned why it didn’t reflect the board’s 2021 consensus.
“What I don’t understand is that we had a consensus. We had a clear recommendation. What I would be looking for is an ordinance that implements that consensus recommendation,” Burns said.
Regarding the proposed mixed-use zoning designation, Burns said, “The MXD zoning district has allowances for a couple other things. Instead of 35% lot coverage, it goes to 70% – twice the lot coverage. Any time you increase the lot coverage you decrease the spacing between the structures and that affects the general appearance of the area; and it can or cannot affect property values, as can placing a ROR bottom story retail/office down- stairs. Seventy percent lot coverage changes the character of the area as well. It’s expansion of, essentially, a commercial district. In addition, the maximum lot coverage plus impervious (surface) goes from 40% to 85%, which decreases the greenspace and affects the entire area in a different fashion.”
In defense of the ordinance language presented that day, Gilbert said city staff was originally charged with bringing the city’s zoning designations into agreement with the city’s existing FLUM designations, and the ordinance presented reflected that city commission directive.
Public input
A handful of potentially impacted residents and property owners attended Wednesday’s meeting. During public input, homeowner Herman Fernandez expressed concerns that mixed-use zoning would create additional parking issues and lead to the commercialization of those residential areas. He said staff’s proposed rezoning would not be a positive move for the permanent residents living in those areas.
Resident Herman Fernandez is concerned about the proposed mixed-use rezoning. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
“What is our goal here? I know things change as time goes on, but I’m not sure this is a good move,” Fernandez said.
Property owner Evelyn Stob said she likes the board’s proposed R-2 zoning designation better than city staff’s proposed mixed-use zoning designation.
Fernandez’s neighbor, Mark Heller, said he doesn’t want bars and restaurants being located in areas currently zoned for residential uses.
Gilbert said he doesn’t think the commission’s intent in 2008, before his arrival, was to allow for more bars and restaurants, but to allow for ground-level retail operations with residential units above.
In response to the board’s request for a revised ordinance, Gilbert said he’s not comfortable rewriting the ordinance without first discussing it with the city attorney. He also said changing the current FLUM designation from ROR to medium density residential would require a second and separate ordinance.
BRADENTON BEACH – The city is considering rezoning several residential properties between Second Street North and Cortez Road from multi-family residential to mixed use.
Building Official Steve Gilbert said the proposed rezoning would impact about two-thirds of the properties from Highland Avenue west to Gulf Drive, and from Second Street North to Cortez Road.
The Planning and Zoning Board will hold a public hearing on the proposed rezoning of those properties on June 15 at city hall at 1 p.m. The meeting is open to the public, with public input accepted.
The hearing will be followed by a public hearing before the city commission on Thursday, July 21. The proposed rezoning to be discussed at these hearings would require city commission approval.
Public notices were mailed to all property owners whose properties could potentially be rezoned. Notices were also sent to all property owners located within 300 feet of the properties proposed for rezoning. The notice references lot numbers but not specific addresses and includes a map that indicates where the potentially-impacted properties are located.
The properties located within the dotted lines on this map could potentially be rezoned from multi-family residential to mixed use. – City of Bradenton Beach | Submitted
“If your lot is inside the dotted line, those are the properties affected. It’s not changing anything other than those 20 to 30 lots listed on the notice,” Gilbert told The Sun.
Gilbert said the properties currently have multi-family residential (R-3) zoning designations that allow up to 18 residential units per acre.
“This is first step in getting our Zoning Map to be consistent with the Future Land Use Map that was adopted in 2008 when the comprehensive plan was revised. It’s taken this long to get to the point where we’re starting down the road of making our zoning map consistent with the Future Land Use Map,” Gilbert said.
“Back in 2008, when the city adopted the 2020 comprehensive plan, the Future Land Use Map set all of those lots aside to be retail/office/residential. You could have a little store, a pizzeria or a lawyer’s office on the ground level with residential above. Back when they were talking about this stuff, they wanted to make the downtown area a walkable community. How do we do that? We put mom and pop shops on the ground and somebody can live upstairs or rent a place upstairs. You don’t need to bring your car to go to Bridge Street. You can go downstairs and get a bite to eat and go back upstairs if you want. Currently those properties are all multi-family residential, and commercial and retail uses are not allowed,” Gilbert said.
The proposed rezoning from R-3 to Mixed Use would give property owners choices.
“It allows for the stand-alone residential use to continue in this district, even a new residential structure built according to FEMA’s flood plain and elevation requirements. Nobody’s losing the right to continue that use, but if you had a ground-level structure you’d have to rebuild with an elevated structure. There’s no way around that with FEMA,” Gilbert said.
“The developer could do a single-family dwelling or do what the Mixed Use zone district contemplates: A small commercial space on the ground, parking in the front, side or back and two stories of residential units upstairs. The alternate scenario is a developer buys four lots with old houses on them, tears all four houses down and can now do a storefront with multi-family residential units upstairs,” Gilbert said.
“There’s no impact to existing uses and existing owners. They can continue to use their property as is. Within the limits of the land development code, they can still renovate, repair or remodel their homes. There’s nothing prohibiting them from the continued use of the property as it currently sits and nothing takes this away as long as they own the property. And it should not affect resale values because the Mixed Use zoning gives the buyer more flexibility in whatever fashion best suits their investment needs or the return on their investment,” Gilbert said.
“If anybody has questions about how their property might be impacted, I encourage you to call the building department at 941-778-1005, ext. 210, and ask for Steve or Luis; or send an email to stevegilbert@cityofbradentonbeach.com. We’ll be happy to help you out,” Gilbert said.
BRADENTON BEACH – The Bradenton Beach Planning and Zoning Board (P&Z) has made several more recommendations regarding potential zoning and future land use map revisions.
The proposed revisions are intended to resolve inconsistencies that exist citywide between the city’s zoning maps and future land use maps. The proposed revisions could potentially impact property values and development rights for many residential and commercial properties.
As a follow-up to its April 21 discussion, the P&Z members met again on Wednesday, May 5. The map revision discussions will continue on Wednesday, May 19 at 10 a.m.
Building Official Steve Gilbert and City Planner Luis Serna are guiding the board through this preliminary review process. According to Gilbert and Serna, the existing map inconsistencies could expose the city to legal challenges because the maps are in conflict.
All P&Z and staff recommendations are subject to final city commission approval. No final decisions will be made until public hearings are conducted and potentially impacted property owners are notified.
Gulf Drive North
The P&Z members discussed three areas along Gulf Drive North that, for clarity’s sake, were referred to as 5A, 5B and 5C.
The areas numbered 5 and 6 on this map were discussed on May 5. The areas marked 2 and 4 were discussed on April 21. – City of Bradenton Beach | Submitted
Area 5A is in the 2400 block of Gulf Drive North, along the east edge of the road, between 24th and 25th streets north. Potentially impacted properties include the Bluegreen Via Roma resort and several residential/vacation rental dwellings.
Gilbert and Serna suggest amending the existing future land use designation to high-density residential. With member Dan Morhaus absent, the board voted 4-0 to instead recommend maintaining the medium density residential future land use that allows single-family dwellings and two-family duplexes and rezone those properties from their current R3 zoning (multi-family dwelling) to R2 (two-family dwelling).
Serna said the board-recommended zoning amendment would result in some of those properties becoming non-conforming with city code, which might impact how they could be redeveloped.
The board made a similar recommendation for the 5B map area along the eastern side of the 2300 block of Gulf Drive North. Potentially impacted properties include Las Palmas Beach Rentals, the Anna Maria Island Inn, Beach & Sun Villas and some residential/vacation rental properties.
Map area 5C encompasses the Beach Club at Anna Maria and other residential/rental properties along the east side of the 2200 block of Gulf Drive North. Gilbert and Serna recommend increasing those future land use designations to high-density residential. In contrast, the board recommends reducing the current R3 zoning to R2.
The triangular-shaped area bordered by Gulf Drive North, Avenue C and 22nd Street North includes The Anna Maria Island Inn at Tropic Isle resort. The board and staff recommend changing those future land use designations to high-density residential while retaining the current zoning.
Avenue A
By a 3-1 vote, with P&Z chair Ken McDonough in opposition, the board recommends rezoning 10 residential properties along the west side of Avenue A, between 23rd and 22nd streets north.
City staff recommends changing the future land use designation to medium-density residential, which allows duplexes. In contrast, the board recommends maintaining the low-density residential future land use and reducing the current R2 zoning which allows duplexes to the R1 zoning that does not. This area already includes duplexes at 2218 and 2204 Ave. A.
Board member John Burns proposed the zoning change as a means of preserving the residential character of that neighborhood. McDonough opposed the zoning change because it would make the two existing duplexes non-conforming with city code and prevent the future construction of duplexes in that area.
Regarding the board’s recommendation, Serna said, “The only caution we have in recommending for a downzoning is someone could say, ‘I had a right to do this and now you’ve taken it away.’ That opens the city up to some liability.”
The board made a similar 3-1 recommendation to reduce from R2 to R1 the zoning for the residential properties along the west side of Avenue A, south of 22nd Street North.
Beachfront, bayfront properties
The board and city staff recommend changing the Beach House Resort’s future land use designation from commercial to high-density residential while maintaining the R3 zoning.
Regarding seven elevated beachfront residential dwellings along the west side of Gulf Drive North, near 11th and 12th streets south, the board and staff recommend maintaining the low-density residential future land use while reducing the zoning from R3 to R1 (single-family dwelling).
The numbered areas on this map were discussed at the May 5 P&Z meeting. – City of Bradenton Beach | Submitted
The board discussed potential map revisions for the bayfront residential properties along Bay Drive North, from 10th Street North to 12th Street North – including the lot that contains the Summer Sands’ community pool.
As a starting point for future conversation with those property owners, the board and staff recommend changing the future land use designation to low-density residential, while maintaining the R1 zoning. Serna said some of those property owners may want to preserve their current single-family zoning and others may want to allow for more intense residential use.
Previous recommendations
On April 21, the board contrasted city staff when recommending the rezoning of the Sandpiper Resort mobile home park and several properties along the east side of Gulf Drive North. Those potentially impacted properties include Sharkey’s Seagrill, the Shell gas pumps, the Circle K convenience store, Club Bamboo, Studio 104, KW on the Water, Blooms by the Beach, Aluna Wellness Center & Spa and Wagner Real Estate.
UPDATED May 5, 2021 at 3:15 P.M. – BRADENTON BEACH – The city’s ongoing efforts to resolve inconsistencies between its future land use and zoning maps could potentially impact property values and the future use of many properties citywide.
The inconsistencies were created when the city adopted a revised future land use map as part of its 2020 comprehensive plan. Building Official Steve Gilbert and City Planner Luis Serna are now guiding the Planning and Zoning Board (P&Z) and the city commission through the early stages of the map revision process. The goal is to make the zoning and future land use maps consistent with each other.
The map revisions being considered are not intended to alter the current use of an impacted property but could become a significant issue if the property is sold, demolished by a storm, or redeveloped in a manner that differs from its current use, possibly impacting the property value.
During the April 21 P&Z meeting, the future land use and zoning maps for the Sandpiper Resort Co-Op were discussed in depth. The future land use and zoning map designations for several properties in the 2200 and 2500 blocks of Gulf Drive North were also discussed in depth.
Sharky’s Seagrill, the Shell gas pumps and the Circle K properties are among those that could be impacted by the proposed map revisions. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
The potentially impacted properties in the 2500 block of Gulf Drive North include Sharky’s Seagrill, the Shell gas pumps and Circle K convenience store, a vacant lot, Club Bamboo and the two-story structure occupied on the ground level by the Studio 104 salon, the KW on the Water real estate office and the Blooms by the Beach florist shop, with residential units located above. Similar map inconsistencies exist in the 2200 block of Gulf Drive that could potentially impact the Aluna Wellness Center & Spa and Wagner Real Estate properties.
Several other potentially impacted properties throughout the city have not yet been discussed by the P&Z board. The additional maps of these potentially impacted areas and properties can be viewed here. The board’s map revision discussions will continue on Wednesday, May 5 at 11 a.m., with the issue also expected to be discussed at the Wednesday, May 19 P&Z meeting.
The zoning and future land use designations for Sandpiper Resort property (at the top of this map) and the properties located in areas marked as #4 were discussed at the April 21 meeting. City of Bradenton Beach | Submitted
During the April 21 meeting, Gilbert said the purpose of that day’s meeting was for the P&Z members to review the proposed map revisions and make their recommendations to the city commission. The city commission has the sole authority to make any final decisions regarding map revisions.
“This is not a public hearing to formally adopt these maps,” Gilbert noted.
Sandpiper Resort
In 2008, the city commission amended the future land use map, decreasing the maximum units allowed on the majority of the Sandpiper property from 18 units per acre to nine. But the coinciding zoning map that establishes the M-1 (mobile home park) zoning district was not revised in 2008 and has not been revised since then. The number of lots allowed by the land development code on the Sandpiper property exceeds the density established by the current future land use map.
According to the future land use map, the majority of the Sandpiper property carries a medium-density residential land use designation. The portion of the property closest to the Anna Maria Sound shoreline carries a low-density residential land use designation.
Gilbert and Serna recommend amending the future land use map designation to high-density residential, which would return the Sandpiper’s future land use designation to its pre-2008 status.
P&Z member John Burns opposed that action and instead proposed revising the zoning map to match the nine units per acre allowed by the future land use map.
Planning and Zoning Board member John Burns does not support increasing density allowances to correct existing map inconsistencies. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
The board members expressed concerns that revising the zoning map to allow 18 units per acre could result in a more intense future use of the Sandpiper Resort property should it ever be redeveloped as something other than a mobile home park. Burns said reversing the 2008 future land use map amendment would double the allowed density.
In response, Serna said, “The intent is to reflect what’s on the ground there currently. This was a change that occurred in 2008, which is basically making those properties non-conforming. They conform to the zoning, but the zoning does not conform to the future land use. We’re really just trying to give them back what they had prior to 2008.”
Burns said he was not aware of any Sandpiper Resort property owners who objected to the 2008 future land use map revision.
City Planner Luis Serna cautioned against making any revisions that devalue property values. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
“I’m not sure what the public response was back then, but it is definitely something where the city is out of compliance with its own plan. That’s a concern,” Serna said.
Gilbert said the Sandpiper property has historically been zoned M-1, under the high-density residential criteria, and changing that zoning would have consequences.
“We would be taking away dwelling unit density from them. Which is why we’re recommending making this (the future land use map) consistent with the historic use and the current use rather than rezoning it and potentially causing damage to their property value by changing future land use back to what it was before this map was done,” Gilbert said.
Board member Bill Morrow asked if the Sandpiper Resort community is currently configured to nine units per acre. Gilbert said the current density is much higher than that.
“There are two choices to be made here: one is to revert back to high density for that entire parcel and a future developer could fit quite a few units in there. If you keep it the way it is, future developers are not going to be able to pack as many buildings or dwelling units in there. The second option is to change it (the future land use designation) back so that the mobile home park remains conforming to current zoning, but that also gives them the ability, if they choose to sell the property, to develop the property at 18 units per acre,” Gilbert said.
“I see no benefit to the city nor to adjacent properties in changing it back to the way it was,” Burns said.
The board voted 5-0 in support of Burns’ motion to recommend the city commission amend the zoning map to match the nine units per acre currently allowed by the future land use map, despite the recommendations of Gilbert and Serna.
Gulf Drive North
The board also discussed the map inconsistencies that exist in the 2500 and 2200 blocks of Gulf Drive North.
The future land use map currently designates those areas as R-2 medium density residential with a C-2 general commercial zoning designation.
“All the uses on the property are commercial,” Serna said of the existing property uses.
Serna and Gilbert recommended amending those future land use map designations to Retail/Office/Residential (ROR) in order to be consistent with the existing zoning and current uses of those properties.
Burns expressed concerns that commercially zoned property with an ROR future land use designation would allow new structures to be built with 90% lot coverage.
“You might have 90% lot coverage when you get done with the parking lot, but building coverage, no,” Gilbert responded.
Board member Fred Bartizal said he likes the existing zoning the way it is.
“Why change it?” Burns asked.
“Because the uses of the property are not residential,” Serna replied.
Serna said the Circle K property is zoned C-2 but the future land use designation is medium density residential.
“That’s where the inconsistency is,” he noted.
Burns asked if a new Circle K building could be built on that property if a storm or some other disaster destroyed the existing structure.
In response, Gilbert said, “Not really, because C-2 zoning is not consistent with the medium density dwelling as established by the future land use map. The future land use map says zero to nine dwelling units per acre and no commercial development is to occur there. It’s a residential land use. Your commercial zoning is not consistent with your comprehensive plan and the existing uses there would become non-conforming uses. In order to make them conforming, you either change the future land use map or you change the zoning. To preserve the character of what’s up there now, the future land use map goes to ROR and the zoning goes to mixed-use, rather than commercial.”
Building Official Steve Gilbert explained the map revision options and potential consequences. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
“The comp plan is saying that should be residential and what’s on the ground isn’t residential. That’s all we’re trying to fix,” Serna said.
“You’re opening a can of worms to fix it,” Burns replied.
Serna said not allowing commercial structures in those areas could subject the city to legal challenges.
“They could sue the city and that’s the concern we’re trying to address. We don’t want to take away anyone’s rights through down-zoning,” Serna said.
Regarding properties made non-conforming with city code due to past or future commission actions, Serna said, “They can exist as long as they’re not destroyed, but the owners of those properties could rightly come and say we’ve had a development right under zoning and now it’s being taken away.”
Board member Fred Bartizal expressed concerns about making zoning revisions that could potentially allow for more intense development.
“What worries me is there’s some pretty smart developers out there right now with some real smart lawyers. If we change any of them, will it make it easier for them?” he said.
Board chair Ken McDonough noted the challenge for the city is what happens if a property owner wants to develop a property where there are inconsistencies between the zoning and future land use maps.
“What do you do? Do you go by the zone map? Do you go by the future land use map?” he asked.
“That’s why we’re having this discussion,” Gilbert said. “There’s a vacant lot next to the Circle K. It’s zoned C-2. The land use is duplex and they want to put in shopping. If we follow the zoning it will become a duplex.”
The board unanimously supported Burns’ motion to recommend the city commission change the zoning map to match the current future land use map, which is medium density residential, R-2 – which allows single-family residences or multi-family duplexes and apartments, despite what Gilbert and Serna recommended.
Gilbert noted that before any final map revision decisions are made by the city commission, all potentially impacted property owners will be notified and will have the opportunity to address the P&Z board and the city commission when future public hearings are held.
