Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Transportation Funding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Panama City Commission opens Sweetbay transportation funds beyond three roads, directs priority for Frankfort Avenue
Summary
Panama City commissioners voted 5-0 on Jan. 14 to approve an amendment to the Saint Andrew Bay (Sweetbay) developer agreement that expands where a previously promised $3.1 million transportation fund can be spent and requires the city to prioritize Frankfort Avenue improvements.
Get email alerts on the Transportation Funding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Panama City commissioners voted 5-0 on Jan. 14 to approve Addendum 2 to the Saint Andrew Bay Land Company LLC developer agreement (known locally as Sweetbay), changing where a developer’s $3,100,000 transportation contribution may be spent and adding an express direction that the city first look to use funds on Frankfort Avenue right‑of‑way and paving work.
The change, presented by city staff as a follow-on to earlier negotiations, removes a narrow list of previously prioritized roads and substitutes a “plan perimeter” — a geographic area shown in the agreement’s exhibit — in which the developer’s contribution may be used. Commissioners, however, adopted a separate insertion specifying that the up‑to‑$3,050,000 portion intended for paving be applied first to Frankfort Avenue and associated right‑of‑way improvements, then to other locations inside the plan perimeter.
City Manager Jonathan Hayes summarized the background: the original commitment dates to a 2013 agreement in which the developer agreed to pay what was then called a transportation impact fee that would be spent after the development produced traffic. Highway 390 and Baldwin Road were the presumed recipients then; both roads later were built by state and county agencies, so the city and the developer negotiated subsequent addenda to redirect the money to other local needs. “This simply takes the previous promise for the $3,100,000 for those three roads and allows us to use it elsewhere inside the plan perimeter,” Hayes said.
Commission discussion emphasized two practical points. First, commissioners told staff they want Frankfort Avenue work completed before other discretionary projects in the perimeter — partly because residents had been told previously that Frankfort would be addressed. Second, elected officials pressed staff and the developer to clarify how the city would handle a deteriorating bridge on Frankfort: engineers said the bridge needs attention and that, if full replacement were required, it could consume a large share of the $3.1 million.
An engineer from Dewberry, identified in the meeting as John Sklarski, told the commission Sweetbay has done initial examinations and geotechnical work and could perform some of the construction under the developer’s design and build approach if the city consents; doing so could speed delivery. Staff said estimates provided by the developer show, excluding the bridge, the Frankfort work could be roughly $1,000,000. City engineer comments at the meeting noted preliminary assessments that the bridge remains serviceable for roughly four to five years but that a detailed bridge analysis would be required to determine corrective measures and costs.
Commissioners adopted the addendum after negotiating specific text. Staff said the amendment will read, in part, that the $3,050,000 relating to paving and right‑of‑way improvements “shall be first expended on Frankfort Avenue right‑of‑way and pavement improvements located within the plan perimeter,” then applied elsewhere in the plan perimeter as determined by the commission.
The vote was 5-0. Staff said the revised agreement preserves the city’s future discretion over project selection inside the plan perimeter but commits the city to evaluate Frankfort Avenue work first and to seek additional funding sources where appropriate.
What’s next: staff will finalize the addendum language to reflect the commission’s instruction and return the executed agreement to the record. The item does not itself authorize specific construction; any individual road project will require separate design approval, bidding or developer‑led work with city oversight, and funding authorization.

