Panama City commission rejects Saint Andrew Bayview development agreement after residents seek lower heights and historic protections

Panama City commissioners voted 5-0 on Jan. 14 to deny the proposed Saint Andrew Bayview Development Agreement, a contract that would have reserved special development rights and preserved a higher height allowance on an eight‑parcel block in the St. Andrews neighborhood for 10 years.

The proposed agreement, filed under Florida Statute 163.3225, would have allowed the property owners, acting as a single project, to develop buildings up to 100 feet tall plus a 25‑foot allowance for roof and mechanical structures on most of the block, while limiting parcels within 100 feet of Beck Avenue to four stories. Planning staff had recommended approval and the Planning Board (local planning agency) had previously recommended approval by a 2‑1 vote.

The item drew heavy public turnout and sustained public comment. Dozens of residents, business owners and preservation advocates urged commissioners to preserve St. Andrews’ historic character and keep the neighborhood scale to four stories. Speakers cited a petition circulated in the community; city staff later confirmed it contained hundreds of signatures. Common concerns included overshadowing, parking and infrastructure stress, potential increased taxes and the loss of the neighborhood’s working‑waterfront character.

Kevin Obos, attorney for the property owners, told the commission there was no high‑rise proposal and that the owners were willing to negotiate. “We can go back and actually revise the agreement a little bit, sort of negotiate against ourselves and do, you know, six stories on Bayview, four on Beck, get it fully executed,” Obos said, offering to table and rework the text with property‑owner signoffs before returning.

But many local residents said a high threshold in the agreement — the ability to build up to 125 feet in some places under the draft language — would be out of character for historic St. Andrews. Speakers noted recent planning work, including a neighborhood plan and Dover, Kohl & Partners community planning work, that had produced recommendations for lower heights and design controls; several said the planning process and public outreach had established expectations for narrower height limits.

After public comment, one commissioner moved to deny the proposed development agreement. The motion passed on a roll call vote, 5-0.

What the decision means: Denial rejects the development agreement as proposed. The developer asked to table or withdraw and indicated willingness to return with a modified, fully executed instrument that would reduce allowable heights and address community concerns; commissioners said such a revised proposal could be considered later but must follow ordinary public review steps. The commission also signaled that the pending neighborhood plan and map updates will be adopted on the posted schedule, which will set new zoning limits for the area.

Commissioners and staff said the next steps include continued public engagement, potential negotiation between property owners and neighbors, and the scheduled adoption process for the neighborhood zoning map updates, which the city expects to consider at upcoming meetings.