On Friday, January 10, the D.C. Superior Court denied our request for an injunction but at the same time placed a ten-day "stay" on any demolition activity to give us time to file our appeal of this decision with the D.C. Court of Appeals.
This is complicated.
Recall that we originally challenged DCRA's August issuance of a demolition permit at the Court of Appeals, alleging that the District had failed to abide by this language in that Court's May 2019 decision:
The Applicants are not at liberty to begin demolition or subdivision, however, unless the appeal of their PUD approval is favorably resolved and the Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs independently determines that they possess the ability to complete the project."
The judge said that she saw no evidence that the District had independently determined that this had been done, but ruled against our injunction request because of questions concerning the proper venue for this case. So we're going now back to the Court we originally wished to hear this case, on this very same issue. And extending the ten-day "stay" from the Superior Court to allow the D.C. Court of Appeals time to consider our case will of course be part of our appeal.
In other words, this is arguably a desirable outcome in a very real sense, because we will now bring the fact of the alleged violation of the Court of Appeals instructions back to the Court that issued those instructions.
The judge today read her decision and we thought that a written decision would follow. But we have just learned that the Superior Court will issue no written order and merely updated the court docket on this matter. That updated docket is visible HERE, and the key quote from it is:
Motion for preliminary injunction is DENIED. The court will enjoin the District of Columbia from commencing demolition for 10 days in light of the petitioners' ((FOMP's)) indication they intend to appeal.
The Superior Court will rule on two other matters in judge's chambers on February 7th but we're preparing to go back to the D.C. Court of Appeals now.
The Washington Business Journal has published what we think is a fair and clear article on what happened today that is visible HERE that you may wish to see for more details.
Interestingly, after the judge concluded her remarks and asked the parties if they had anything to say, our side stated that the District had recently not only moved a lot of dirt around (claiming that that was "pre-demolition" activity and not demolition) but also had destroyed parts of the so-called Olmsted Walk that runs along the site's perimeter (the picture in the WBJ article clearly shows removal of dirt AND destruction of the Olmsted Walk above cell #10 at the corner of 1st St. NW and Michigan Ave.). You may recall that restoring or preserving the Olmsted Walk was one of the historic preservation benefits the project would convey. The judge commented to the District's legal team that she thought she had told them not to engage in that kind of activity.
So where are we now?
We are appealing this decision back to the D.C. Court of Appeals, where we originally wanted to present this case, to present our case alleging that the District has not abided by that Court's instructions, and we're going back with agreement from the Superior Court that that is so. So that's a good thing.
And it's about time that we got some good news like this.
If you have any questions, please contact restoremcmillan@gmail.com.
Omfg just let them build. Enough NIMBY
ReplyDeletehere here, let's get on with it!
DeleteAgreed
Delete