The Virginia Supreme Court will hear a case regarding the use of Lewinsville Park, starting with written briefs that are to be received by the court starting in early April.
“I have a verbal report that they’re hearing the case,” said Jack Hannon, president of the West Lewinsville Heights Civic Association.
The case goes back to an agreement made between McLean Youth Soccer and Marymount University for use of one of the fields at Lewinsville Park. MYS had taken a loan to pay for upgrades like artificial turf and high-intensity lighting on one of the soccer fields and made an arrangement with Marymount that allowed the collegiate men’s and women’s teams use of that field for a fee. Neighbors have since complained about the lights, which remain illuminated late into the night during soccer games; the parking problems caused by games; and the noise created by games.
“Marymount had approached Arlington County first for the use of one of their soccer fields and were flat-out turned down,” said Frank Crandall, chairman of McLean’s Environment, Parks and Recreation Committee. “The reason Arlington turned them down was because they were proposing using public parks for a private organization.”
THE CASE ORIGINALLY went to the Board of Zoning Appeals, which voted 7-0 that the deal between MYS and Marymount was invalid because it was trying to prevent public use of a field by a private organization, Crandall said. The case then went before the Board of Supervisors, who overturned the initial ruling and allowed Marymount to use the fields last year.
“There were a lot of things done that were not carefully examined,” he said, which has led to a very costly lawsuit.
“The county is paying for lawyers on both sides of this case. They did it to themselves,” he said. “This ought to be a very interesting exercise in seeing how our government process can go wrong and get itself into trouble.”
“This is a step in the right direction,” Hannon said. “First, we have to file our legal brief with the court by April 5, and the county agencies will have to file their brief by early May. We’ll have the right to a reply brief within two weeks after that.”
Following oral arguments the court will issue an opinion, he said, and Marymount will be allowed to use the soccer field i this summer until a decision is made.
Should the court find the agreement between MYS and Marymount is not valid, “Marymount would have to go through the special-use-permit process like anything else, which would bring in a traffic study and a sanitation study and all that,” he said.
“This has been going on for more than two years now, but hope springs eternal,” he said.
R. Scott Wynn, a county attorney, who will be representing the Board of Supervisors, Zoning Administration and Fairfax County Park Authority in this case, said it’s simply a question of what “public use” means.
“This part of the property is being used for public use. There isn’t anything going on that changes that fact,” he said.
THE ZONING ADMINISTRATION decided that Marymount’s use of the soccer field did not require a special-use permit “because they were using a public field for public use,” Wynn said.
Using the soccer field at Lewinsville Park for a collegiate team, located outside of Fairfax County, is still considered a public use and does not change the ordinance that the park and field be used exclusively by the public, he said.
“You can’t say that outside groups can’t use the park because the word ‘public’ includes everyone,” he said. “It’s very simple. The Park Authority makes the park available for Marymount, McLean Youth Soccer and other entities to use it.”
If the current ruling is overturned, an idea Wynn said is “preposterous,” the way schools, parks and public buildings are used may have to be reconsidered.
“Effectively, it would close down all parks in Fairfax County. This is absolutely bigger than Lewinsville alone,” he said. “Even school boards would be affected by this. If a youth group wanted to use a basketball court in a school on the weekend, potentially what would happened is that they’d have to get a special permit to do so because a school is a public place.”
“This case deals with the property of the neighbors who live near the park, who feel adversely affected by the use of the field,” said Brian McCormack, a partner at Dunn, McCormack and MacPherson in Fairfax, who is representing the Board of Zoning Appeals in this case. Although two cases, one brought by the BZA and one by the residents of West Lewinsville Heights, were initially filed, the Supreme Court has consolidated them into one case because they deal with the same issue.
“THE COURT AGREEING to hear this case is a big hurdle because approximately 80 percent of cases brought before the three-justice panel are dismissed or are thrown out by the full court,” he said. “Roughly half the cases heard are reversed. I’m encouraged by the fact that they’ll hear our case.”
McCormack, a lawyer for 30 years, said people feel most strongly about protecting their homes, their children, their pets and their cars.
“The homeowners object to the lights, the noise, people parking all over their neighborhoods for these games, players relieving themselves in their back yards,” he said. “A lot of the homeowners’ complaints are on the impact of land use.”
The issue is whether Marymount’s use of the field is considered public use, he said.
“The zoning issue here is whether the contract between MYS and Marymount changes the park being used exclusively for public purposes,” he said. “However you define it, this contract is not for exclusively public use.”