Panama City staff seek feedback on proposed transfer of 447 Harrison breezeway; developer to invest $500,000

City staff brought a draft proposal to the Panama City Community Redevelopment Agency DRE workshop asking commissioners for feedback on a possible fee-simple transfer of 447 Harrison to a private developer while keeping an 8-foot permanent public pedestrian easement.

Jonathan (title not specified in the transcript), speaking for staff, said the developer — identified in earlier materials as Virtuous Cycle — proposed a nominal purchase price (a draft figure discussed was $100) and would commit a minimum of $500,000 in private capital for build-out and activation. “The developer is committed to investing a minimum of $500,000 in private capital commitment in construction build out and activation,” Jonathan said. Staff confirmed its expected ongoing city role would be security and maintenance for the easement, and that the CRA would not fund building construction.

Why it matters: the property sits between a downtown parking area and Harrison Avenue and staff and commissioners described an easement cut-through as a way to improve pedestrian access downtown. The transfer would also return property to the tax rolls, which staff estimated could yield roughly $12,000 a year in tax revenue plus potential merchant-fee income from future retail tenants.

Commissioners pressed staff on the property’s valuation and the broader fiscal tradeoffs. Commissioner Hughes and others noted the city paid a higher value when the building was acquired and cited recent appraisals. Staff reported the property’s acquisition value was $582,000 in the earlier swap-and-acquisition transaction; a more recent appraisal performed in April 2025 returned roughly $340,000. “We did an appraisal, and it came back at 399900… Oh, sorry. 339,” Jonathan said in the meeting, and later clarified the April appraisal was about $340,000. Commissioner Street and others said a transfer at a nominal price would require stronger justification given the decline from the earlier valuation.

Public restrooms and maintenance emerged as the primary practical concerns. Multiple commissioners said downtown needs public restrooms and that building restrooms would be required for retail tenants under local assembly code. Commissioner Alan said public restrooms serve events and everyday visitors: “Public restrooms help, not just the mom that has the kid that says I need to use the bathroom right now. It helps the events.” Commissioners debated whether restrooms in the breezeway should be publicly accessible or reserved for retail tenants; the developer’s expectation, as described by staff, was that retail spaces would include restrooms but the parties had not agreed whether they would be publicly accessible.

Commissioners also discussed the mechanics of a deal. Suggestions included valuing only the portion of the building the developer would acquire (for example, calculating per-square-foot value of the deeded portion and subtracting the value of amenities the developer would provide, such as public bathrooms). Mayor Branch and others noted that if the city retained an easement, the appraised taxable value would reflect that encumbrance and the county property appraiser’s office would determine the taxable value and qualification of the transfer. “The property appraiser will have a note that says it's not arm's length or it's qualified… the property appraiser office would determine the value of this piece property encumbered by the [easement],” a staff member said.

No formal vote was taken in the workshop. Staff asked for direction and said it would return with a formal proposal for the Sept. 2 CRA board meeting.

Ending: Staff will draft the formal agreement, including proposed deed type and maintenance language, and present it at the CRA board meeting on Sept. 2 for possible formal action. In the meantime, commissioners asked staff to clarify the appraisal history, tax implications, exact maintenance responsibilities, and options for bathroom access and operations.