Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission approves 80‑unit Shores Apartments affordable project after debate over historic tree removals
Summary
The commission voted to allow removal of most historic trees at the 9th & Vine development site to permit an 80‑unit affordable project with 40 permanent‑supportive units and 40 units at ≤60% AMI. Developers committed to enhanced replacement plantings, three‑times the specimen retention required by code, and 99‑year affordability on the site.
The City Commission approved a resolution on June 17 authorizing historic‑tree removal needed for an 80‑unit affordable multifamily development known as the Shores Apartments, after a lengthy presentation and public testimony.
Jessica Gow of Cobb Cole, representing the developer group, said the already‑zoned site has been vacant and heavily wooded for decades. The proposed development would set aside 40 units for permanent‑supportive housing (PSH) — targeted to residents referred from local shelters and service providers — and 40 units for households at or below 60% of area median income. The development team said the project has been awarded state funding (low‑income housing tax credit allocation and other Florida Housing awards) and listed a total construction and financing package that would support the build without a direct city subsidy.
The developer requested commission approval to remove a number of historic trees located in the interior of the parcel, arguing the trees’ locations conflict with building footprints, parking and required circulation; staff said the request was limited to live trees (dead/dying trees are exempt) and that the applicant had already exceeded many canopy and specimen‑tree requirements on the overall site. The project team agreed to conditions: reducing the removal request by one tree (saved via a retaining wall solution), up‑sizing replacement trees (4‑ to 6‑inch caliper where feasible), and providing more than three times the specimen‑tree retention required by code in other parts of the site.
Commissioners and members of the public debated the tradeoffs: speakers urged preserving mature canopies for flood mitigation and neighborhood character; supporters argued the project will deliver deep affordability, a large share of PSH units and long‑term deed restrictions. The developer said PSH units would reach very low monthly rents (examples cited in presentation: PSH one‑bed at ~ $263/month) and that the project’s financing had closed the critical gap needed to move forward.
After discussion, the commission voted 7‑0 to approve the tree‑removal request conditioned on the enhanced replacement plantings and the additional saved tree. Commissioner statements repeatedly emphasized the project’s rare financing package and the public‑benefit of long‑term low‑income housing in a neighborhood with services and transit.
Why it matters: The project places a significant number of very low‑income and supportive units into Midtown, where demand for deeply affordable housing and replacement public housing is high. The decision highlights a common municipal tradeoff — preserving mature canopy versus delivering permanently affordable homes — and sets precedent for mitigation and vegetation offsets on infill sites.
What’s next: Staff will finalize site plan review conditions, ensure replacement tree specifications and monitoring are in writing, and proceed to construction milestones following required permits and state financing conditions.
Source: Presentation and Q&A; motion and recorded roll call vote at the City Commission meeting, June 17, 2026.
