Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the West Beach Drive Path topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
West Beach Drive path plan faces FDOT-design, right-of-way and grant-timing questions
Summary
Residents and a transportation critic pressed city staff for the factual status of the FDOT-backed West Beach Drive multiuse path — how much of the $8 million grant remains, how much has been spent, whether revised plans comply with FDOT right-of-way limits, and a looming grant extension deadline.
A widely advertised $8 million grant for a West Beach Drive multiuse path drew sharp public questions at Panama City’s town hall about how much money remains, what work FDOT will approve and whether the project timeline is in jeopardy.
A citizen who identified himself as a project critic asked three practical questions: what FDOT has said the city can or cannot build in the state right-of-way; how much of the $8 million grant has already been spent; and the status of revised plans that staff say are under FDOT review. He told the commission he had filed public-records requests and found no evidence of recent engineering invoices or quarterly reports to FDOT, and he urged the city either to re-purpose the funds now or to press FDOT and the legislature for time extensions.
Commissioners and staff answered that the original $8 million grant included design, surveys, environmental work and a water-line component; staff said about $1 million had been expended for initial work and that roughly $7 million remained in the award. Staff also noted the grant has one existing extension for construction-delivery deadlines and said an additional extension — or re-scoping — may be necessary if FDOT will not accept the revised plan.
The citizen raised a technical point the commission took seriously: on portions of West Beach Drive the FDOT-owned right-of-way measured about 43–45 feet, leaving only a narrow construction footprint; he said the state-owned width makes it infeasible to place the planned 8– to 12‑foot path plus required buffers along some segments. City staff agreed to prepare a written memo answering the outstanding questions and to circulate it to interested parties. The city manager told the meeting he would provide a memo by Wednesday (close of business) summarizing money spent to date, design status, and the FDOT review timeline.
Commissioners asked that the memo also report whether contractors have invoiced for recent work (to clarify the accounting picture) and whether quarterly reports required by the grant have been filed with FDOT. The committee-level exchange made clear that the grant’s scope includes more than just path paving — design, environmental and water-line work were identified as part of the original $8 million — and that the commission expects a concise public accounting before agreeing on next steps.
Staff also reiterated that design and wayfinding signage typically follow major roadway construction; staff told the room it would be premature to place permanent wayfinding while roads are yet under construction.
The commission did not take a formal vote at the town hall, but by consensus asked staff for a short written status report and for follow-up with FDOT and grant administrators so the commission can assess whether the city should continue design revisions or seek republication/repurposing of the grant funding.
