Unstable Kings Landing As Height Comparator for Live Local Causeway Cove?

Under the Live Local Act, a qualifying project may rely on the highest height allowed within the City or County, and the City’s own Causeway Cove justification statement identifies King’s Landing as the highest allowed height within one mile of the site at 11 stories. That same statement explains that the Live Local Act height cap is measured by the highest currently allowed height for comparable commercial or residential development within one mile of the proposed site, or three stories, whichever is higher. Letter of Justification Causeway Cove Site Plan Application

In April 2026, city officials stated that Live Oak missed a required deadline for hotel vertical plan submittal, which triggered a default notice under the development agreement of the Kings Landing Project. The missed milestone involved submission of the hotel vertical plans for DPCR review by February 25, 2026.  wqsc

King’s Landing’s default status creates at least three legal concerns as it relates the the reliance of the height application of Causeway Cove.

• First, the default demonstrates noncompliance with the project’s milestone obligations, which undermines its reliability as a present comparator.
• Second, the project schedule was still being renegotiated through a proposed fourth amendment, meaning the approval framework was not final and settled when the benchmark was being invoked. To date, there is no public documentation on the fourth amendment of of the project agreement.
• Third, a project still subject to amendment, cure, or enforcement cannot reasonably be treated as equivalent to an active, fully compliant height entitlement.

For those reasons, the City should not rely on King’s Landing as the Live Local Act height benchmark unless and until the record clearly shows that the project remains a valid, enforceable, and uncured height approval.  If the City wants to proceed, it must first make a clear legal finding that King’s Landing remains an operative benchmark despite the missed deadlines and pending amendment process.

Should the City instead do one of the following:

• Reject King’s Landing as the controlling height comparator for Causeway Cove under the Live Local Act.
• Defer any height finding until the default is cured and the amended agreement is finalized.
• Require a legal memorandum explaining why a defaulted project remains a valid benchmark under the Live Local Act

But the first question be.... How does an 11 story building justify the height requirement for a 17 story building???

The King’s Landing hotel was reported the project’s tallest building as 11 stories / 137 feet, so how does Causeway Cove justify 200 feet?