Planning director outlines Causeway Cove 'Live Local' application; public raises infrastructure and review concerns

Planning Director Keff Freeman told the Fort Pierce Planning Board on July 13 that the Causeway Cove application was submitted under the state’s Live Local Act and is therefore administratively reviewed rather than handled through a local public hearing. Freeman cited the applicable statutory citation read in the presentation and said, “that section and the following verbiage mandates that public hearings are not part of the process… If staff and the agencies find that it meets the requirements of the city code, then we have no option but to approve it.”

The presentation described a large mixed-use proposal that staff says meets statutory eligibility: a 43-acre site with roughly 1,300,000 square feet of floor area, about 913 housing units (approximately 365–366 affordable units under the Live Local set-aside), two hotels (204 and 203 rooms), about 72,000 square feet of retail and a marina with 218 slips. Freeman summarized negotiated transportation mitigation required by the Florida Department of Transportation and consultants, including a westbound right-turn overlap at US-1 and Seaway Drive, potential signalization or directional access changes, and commitments for multimodal connections such as a water taxi, future transit stop and a shuttle service.

Why it matters: the Live Local Act removes the traditional local public-hearing step for qualifying affordable-housing applications and prescribes numeric thresholds that limit local discretion. Board members and residents said they were troubled by what they described as limited local control and concerns over the scale of growth in a compact area. One board member cited a county study and staff numbers and said the project could generate roughly 6,700 vehicle trips per day and a population increase the board calculated at about 2,657 people in the immediate census tract — a board remark the speaker described as a roughly 77% rise for that tract.

Board members pressed staff on enforcement and monitoring of the statutory affordability requirement (the project must maintain statutory affordability for 30 years). Freeman said the state statute does not prescribe a specific compliance-monitoring methodology, so staff added a condition that the developer must use a city-acceptable monitoring platform and report annually (by Jan. 31). On enforcement, he said noncompliance would render the approved use inconsistent with the development order and that the city would then have enforcement options, including requiring a different planning approval.

On transportation and safety, Freeman said federal and state agencies retain control over technical approvals: FDOT must grant access management approvals and will review evacuation-route implications. He said certain mitigation commitments must be financially secured before the first certificate of occupancy for affected phases. "They required that a westbound right turn overlap phase at the intersection of US 1 And Seaway Drive is to be constructed," Freeman said during the briefing.

Public reaction: dozens of speakers during the later public-comment period and several board members framed the Live Local process as a loss of local control. Residents raised questions about submerged lands being counted in density calculations, beach capacity and how public amenities (parking, restrooms, trash collection, public-safety staffing) would be paid for. One public speaker said the statute’s effect felt like "a degradation of home rule" and urged citizens to contact state legislators; another flagged potential soil- or contamination risks and asked whether all required environmental and FDOT approvals were actually in hand.

What’s next: Freeman said the presentation was informational only and that the planning board and city commission will not vote on the Live Local application; external agency approvals and building-permit reviews remain required. He also said staff would follow up by email to address specific public questions, including submerged-land calculations and the breakdown of mitigation responsibilities.

Reporting note: direct quotes and specific numeric claims (unit counts, square feet, marina slips, hotel room counts, the statutory citation) are taken from the staff presentation and the public record of the July 13 planning-board meeting; assertions about long-term impacts and legal framing reflect questions raised in the meeting and not new factual findings.