The anti-purple line group - the "Friends" of the Capital Crescent Trail - have sued the Army Corp of Engineers arguing that a permit for the project was issued erroneously. When the Purple Line is complete it will also complete the Capital Crescent Trail between Bethesda and Silver Spring. Purple Line opponent Robert Dyer describes the lawsuit:
The federal water law required that the ACE demonstrate that there was no alternative transportation project that would improve east-west travel in the Maryland suburbs without disturbing federally-controlled waters and wetlands. Jim Roy, VP of Friends of the Capital Crescent Trail said Thursday that the ACE failed to evaluate alternatives and declare one to have the least potential impact on waterways.
And Bethesda Now writes
The Friends of the Capital Crescent Trail and two residents announced Thursday they filed a lawsuit in the federal district court of Maryland challenging the 2018 decision of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to permit the discharge of dredge and fill materials as part of Purple Line construction.
The lawsuit argues the permit issued is invalid and violates the Clean Water Act.
“We also point out in our lawsuit that even if some dredging and filling were necessary, the agencies also failed to evaluate, let alone choose, the least harmful of the alternatives as the law requires,” FCCT Vice President Jim Roy said.
FOCCT has so far not been able to stop the Purple Line project, but they have managed to delay it quite a bit.
“For a year, construction had been halted because of the lawsuit,” said Gregory Sanders, vice president of the advocacy group Purple Line Now. “It had always been a problem to try to figure out how they could get some of that time back.”
There were also reports that delays have added more than $200 million to the light-rail line’s cost.
I don't know if this is going to succeed in stopping or delaying the project, but it will definitely cost some money, and it won't save the trees - which was one of the main concerns of FOCCT - because those have already been cut down.
Lawsuits claiming that a project should be permanently stopped because of some failure to follow mandated procedure typically fare poorly. The courts rightly think that (a) the agencies need to be given some leeway in complex matters to proceed even if there are minor failures to follow procedure, and (b) a permanent, or even long temporary, halt to force the agency to go back and properly follow procedures only to wind up in the same place, is a poor result.
Posted by: Crickey | January 15, 2019 at 09:44 AM
I'm no planning expert but seems like that impact on all the waterways was studied in the original alternatives analysis. The one they've already sued over and eventually lost on.
So now they're saying because the ACE doesn't have that same analysis on their own letterhead is all bunk?
Posted by: drumz | January 15, 2019 at 11:12 AM
Man, I think the "Friends" lawyer is just milking them for billable hours. Suckers, could not happen to nicer people...
At least Ajay Bhatt's illegal fence has been torn down!
https://www.google.com/maps/@38.9978704,-77.0667491,117m/data=!3m1!1e3
Posted by: Zack Rules | January 15, 2019 at 11:40 AM
One more pathetic attempt to circumvent a project which will benefit thousands of people. Why is this brought up now months after construction began?
Posted by: sbg1 | January 15, 2019 at 01:51 PM
When I lived in Los Angeles, this all reminds me of what happened to the Cheviot Hills people and the Expo Line.
Sued until the very end. Now they have a rail near their property they can walk to.
Posted by: Brett Young | January 15, 2019 at 03:52 PM
Why is this brought up now months after construction began?
They'd been discussing this before, but then they were arguing that the permit had not been issued. My guess is that it was only recently approved, and so their arguing that it shouldn't have been.
Posted by: washcycle | January 15, 2019 at 04:09 PM
A couple years ago in one of the stores about the story one of the main opponents went on the record saying they're just going to sue over and over again until they find something that sticks. I think it was around the time the appeals court vacated Leon's original ruling.
Posted by: drumz | January 15, 2019 at 05:11 PM
This is getting beyond frivolous suits that would be obligated to reimburse court costs. If the "Friends" have run up the Purple Line tab by $200M, who would have standing to sue them and recover some of those damages? Might give them a taste of their own medicine.
Posted by: Shalom | January 15, 2019 at 09:53 PM