To create a scenic trail in the woods, lots of trees must be cut down. Otherwise, people wanting to walk, run, bike or push strollers there wouldn’t have a path to follow.

Understanding that fact, Fairfax City placed the nearly 2-mile-long George Snyder Trail on its Comprehensive Plan in 2012. Running along the southern side of Accotink Creek, it goes east-west between Chain Bridge Road and Fairfax Boulevard. (See sidebar).

After years of public hearings and work sessions, City Council approved this project in January 2024, and City staff and consultants worked toward making it a reality. Normally, they’d have done so without a hitch. But five new Councilmembers took office in January 2025. And after hearing from some residents angry about the plan, those siding with them threw up a roadblock.

By April, these Councilmembers proposed defying the wishes of past Councils and either just building half the trail or canceling it altogether. The project was still in jeopardy last Tuesday, June 10. But after hearing arguments from residents in support of it, Council finally approved constructing the entire trail.

For the past several months, a vocal group of residents spoke against it at every Council meeting and even had a petition with 3,000 signatures. And, again last week, they reiterated their opposition. They said the trail’s paved path would cause more than 500 trees to be felled and would disrupt the birds and wildlife there.

However, they didn’t speak for all 25,000 City residents – many of whom were unaware that the previously approved trail project was in danger or that they’d have to go to City Hall to fight for its retention. After all, in Fairfax, it’s unprecedented for succeeding Councils to undo the work of their predecessors. And knowing that the entire project was funded by outside sources, it seemed unthinkable that the City would just return the money.

In fact, Fairfax has already been awarded $20.6 million for this $20 million trail – with more than $13.6 million of it from VDOT. That’s because it’ll also connect to VDOT’s shared-use path along Route 123 as part of the I-66 Outside the Beltway improvements, enabling Snyder Trail users to also reach Washington, D.C. and Haymarket along the I-66 corridor.

But if the project was canceled, the money couldn’t be shifted to a different City project. And Fairfax would also have to repay from its General Fund the $3.7 million it’s already spent on design, environmental review and right-of-way acquisition. 

So on June 10, besides the usual opponents addressing Council, those in favor of the trail also spoke up. For example, Art Hammerschlag, there on behalf of Fairfax City Citizens for Smarter Growth, said, “Building all of it honors the commitment Fairfax City has made to our local-government partners to complete this critical portion of the regional trail network. Building only half of it, with an estimated $1.7 million payback, is unacceptable.”

Stressing that the full-build plan has been “developed by a wide array of City experts, groups and professionals,” Mary McDaniel said it’s had “extensive public hearings and input over the space of over 12 years. The halfway plan was thrown together quickly in the past month by a few people with limited time to review its consequences and no public opportunity for input until that night.”

Furthermore, she said, “Not building it would result in a reputational disaster for the City. We made promises to the state and entire region. At the polls in November, the majority of the people showed support for the full build. If the voters wanted the trail cancelled or substantially changed – with all due respect – there would be a different mayor sitting at the dais tonight.”

Leslie Cullen called the trail “an investment in a safer, more connected, more vibrant Fairfax. It would provide a safe route for walkers, runners, kids on bikes, and commuters. Right now, we lack a continuous path linking our neighborhoods with schools, parks and downtown. This trail fills that gap and makes Fairfax more livable for everyone. Now, with construction prices rising, we may never get this kind of funding again. This isn’t just a trail – it’s a statement about who we are.”

Mom and cyclist Marissa Perrone asked, “Why is this trail – that’s been part of our City’s public, posted plans on every sign, for years – now being second-guessed, when it offers such lasting value to the residents? Trails create a sense of place, support local businesses and help people fall in love with where they live.”

“There have been Comp Plans, area plans, pedestrian and bike master plans, steering committees, design workshops, work sessions, public hearings [about this] over the years,” added Beth Ianetta. “We’ve been telling you repeatedly, in many different formats, what our vision is for the City – and it includes this trail. 

“Why would any resident give their time to contribute to a vision – which this body repeatedly asked us to do – if, at the end of years of implementation, your position is, ‘We don’t value your input, at all. We’ll either cancel it or cut it in half’?”

In light of all the recent budget cuts Council has made, Megan James asked how it could even consider “walking away from the Snyder Trail and handing back to the state $3.7 million with nothing to show for it. VDOT believed in our vision for a connected community. This is also about equity and long-term value. It also helps seniors stay mobile and gives families an alternative to traffic.”

Agreeing, John Russell noted that this trail was “specifically designed to be accessible to all City residents.” Referring to its opponents, he said, “Being loud doesn’t make it right to shut down a commercial and recreational opportunity to protect access for only a select few. [Nor] is it right for the City to break its word, burning its credibility with partners we may want to call upon in the future.”

People walking in that forest today, said William Pitchford, will find “a patchwork of deep, rutted trails with most of the topsoil washed away. The larger trees are gradually dying and being replaced with scrub oak and other invasive species. Without the new trail, the erosion will continue.”

Mike Fabio said the trees removed would be replanted at a 3-to-1 ratio, the trail grade would be suitable for all ages and abilities, and the route design would eliminate blind spots. He also said having many trail users would reduce crime, and he had some thoughts about the City’s financial losses.

“This Council already cancelled $9 million for the Country Club Hills trail,” said Fabio. “If you include the $9.5 million for the George Snyder Trail Extension that could be lost – plus the almost $21 million and $3.7 million for this project – added together, this Council could be responsible for the loss of $43.2 million in its first few months [in office]. That’s outrageous and a dangerous precedent.”

Lastly, former Mayor David Meyer said building the whole trail would “create a legacy for future generations and bring good to our residents, now and for decades to come.”

Then it was Council’s time to act. Councilmember Billy Bates said he favored a full build over canceling. “At the end of the day, it’s a trail,” he said. “It’s not the end of the world if we all don’t get exactly what we want.”

Councilmember Stacey Hardy-Chandler said this project has both a history and a future they should consider. “This is a multigenerational decision,” she said. “We took the baton of the commitment from the Council and mayor that came before us, so I can’t support cancellation.”

“Based on my recent emails and what I heard tonight, I don’t think the community wants half a trail,” said Councilmember Anthony Amos. “They either want all or nothing. Councilmember Stacy Hall said she, too, could no longer support half a trail. 

Still, Councilmember Tom Peterson wanted to cancel the whole thing and take money from the City’s already-approved Capital Improvement Projects to fund the $3.7 million repayment. A vote on his motion failed, 5-1. Council then considered a motion Hardy-Chandler had made to build the entire trail.

“I don’t like paying back millions of dollars during these trying budget times, knowing things will only get worse next year,” said Amos. Bates said he’d support Hardy-Chandler’s motion, and Council’s subsequent vote was 4-2 in favor, with Peterson and Hall voting no.