Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Transportation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Panama City review maps corridors for possible transportation impact fees
Summary
Consultants returned to the commission with maps and a candidate project list showing where transportation impact fees could fund turn lanes and targeted capacity improvements in Panama City proper and Panama City North; commissioners pressed for cost estimates, right‑of‑way checks and clearer rules on developer obligations.
City commissioners received a consultant update on potential uses for transportation impact fees, including targeted intersection and corridor improvements in Panama City and Panama City North.
Hadley Peterson, project manager on the impact fee study, said the team began the study in spring 2024 and was asked after the commission set the fee at zero to identify what capacity improvements impact fees could fund. "We started developing that project list with city staff in October, really working with public works and development services to show you what we have here today," Peterson said.
Vincent Spar, one of the consultants who walked commissioners through roadway maps, said the study focused on capacity‑adding projects that align with anticipated development and regional planning work. On the city proper map, he identified 11th Street as a recurring pinch point where targeted turn‑lane additions or localized capacity improvements — rather than full widening — could help. "Impact fees, if collected in that vicinity, would make a lot of sense if they were directed towards one or more of those projects," Spar said. He also noted potential improvements at 15th and 23rd streets and corridor work near Wood, Florida and 19th streets.
For Panama City North, Spar pointed to John Pitts Road, Adrian Road and the Liberty/Star Avenue area (including a Liberty signal tied to prior PUD commitments) as likely candidates for fee-funded work. He said some items may require partnerships with county or state agencies where those roads are not city‑owned.
Commissioners pressed on practical constraints. Commissioner Street asked whether Star Avenue (a county or state road) had been treated in the analysis; staff said partnership arrangements would be needed for non-city roads. Commissioners also raised right‑of‑way and environmental constraints on adding lanes, and Mayor noted safety and business-access tradeoffs on the MLK corridor and other neighborhood streets. "Many of those side streets are probably not something that would be suitable for a four‑lane road, but you could see options like turn lanes or one‑way pairs," Spar said.
Several speakers stressed the importance of cost estimates before finalizing a fee. Commissioner Street and others warned that fees set too low will never fund meaningful projects and fees set too high could stop development. Staff and consultants said the study’s next step is to attach cost estimates and refine the work program, then return with those numbers for further direction.
No formal vote was taken. Staff said they will continue one‑on‑one outreach with commissioners, provide clarified maps and cost‑estimate work, and follow up in the coming weeks.
Meeting minutes and the consultant project list show the city is treating impact fees as one of several tools — alongside development orders and negotiated contributions — to fund transportation capacity improvements while balancing development feasibility and neighborhood impacts.
