When you’re planning to build thousands of homes, businesses, schools, and even a hospital — all in one major project — environmental concerns are going to be front and center.
That’s exactly what happened with the Cainhoy Project in Charleston, South Carolina, a huge development that’s been years in the making.
Developers Needed Green Light for Wetlands Work
Back in 2018, the team behind the Cainhoy Project — which spans over 9,000 acres — applied for a Clean Water Act (CWA) permit.
Why? Because parts of the land included wetlands, and any plan to fill in those areas requires federal approval.
The developers aimed to turn this massive plot into a mixed-use community featuring at least 9,000 homes, along with schools, city services, commercial buildings, and even a medical center.
Recognizing the environmental sensitivity of the area, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers spent four years reviewing the proposal.
After the developers revised their plans to reduce wetland impact by 90%, the Corps decided to issue the needed permit.
Legal Challenge Puts Project on Hold
Not everyone was thrilled with that decision.
Opponents filed a lawsuit challenging the Corps’ approval, which pushed the case into the spotlight of the U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina — and eventually the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.
One of the claims made by the plaintiffs was tied to the Endangered Species Act (ESA).
They argued that the project could potentially harm protected species in the area and pushed for a preliminary injunction to halt construction.
However, the court didn’t find their concerns convincing enough — calling the potential harm “speculative” — and refused the injunction.
That ESA claim was later dropped altogether.
Corps’ Decision Gets Backed by the Courts
As the case progressed, the Justice Department’s Environment and Natural Resources Division (ENRD) stepped in to defend the Corps’ decision.
Their main point? That the Corps had done its homework.
According to the District Court, the Corps had reasonably determined that the development plan on the table was the “least damaging and practicable alternative” — a key phrase when it comes to wetland protections.
The court also ruled that the Corps had looked at the environmental impacts extensively, particularly under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).
Because of that detailed review, the court agreed with ENRD’s argument that the project would not significantly damage the waters of the United States.
Case Handled by Environmental Law Experts
This wasn’t just one team of attorneys managing a quick case.
It was a multi-division effort from within the ENRD.
Lawyers from the Environmental Defense Section, the Natural Resources Section, and the Wildlife and Marine Resources Section all played a role in defending the federal government’s position — and ultimately securing a win.