As the dust settles after the January 13 City Council vote that brought the long running George Snyder Trail controversy to a swift conclusion, it is hitting me what a long journey this has been. For those who are interested I thought I’d share a brief summary of its history.
I’d say the most accurate description of the George Snyder Trail as it existed in 2015 was a hodge podge of small trail and sidewalk segments collectively named for the former mayor.
The idea to connect them and extend it to Chain Bridge was formalized in a 2015 Parks and Rec strategic plan but with no means to pay for it. City staff determined that if they designed it so that it met VDOT bicycle path design specs and strengthened the connection to I-66 it might qualify for a transportation grant through a new program called Smart Scale.The hitch was that the VDOT requirements meant the trail could no longer be the on-grade natural surface trail envisioned by the original proponents. Several of those early advocates were bicyclists but notably they were not advocating for a VDOT level bike trail.
It was turned down for Smart Scale funding but in 2017 the concession fund, private money provided from the company that widened I-66 as part of its contract with the Commonwealth, was made available to local jurisdictions affected by the construction project and all of a sudden the GST had its funding.
Only after it was engineered to meet VDOT specs and awarded $13.6 million from the concession fund did regional bicycle enthusiasts get wind of the project. They threw their support behind it as part of their larger lobbying effort for off road trails, not so much out of a particular interest in this location.
The idea that it would be a part of the Cross County Trail (CCT) may have been discussed but I’ve never seen anything formal from the county that they requested this be a segment of their recreational trail (after all, even John Mason didn’t propose renaming it the Gerry Connolly CCT!). That goal/role was also not included in the grant submission. It seems the idea was embellishment after the fact as far as the records show.
The advocacy for an alternative started in 2018 thanks to the Friends of Accotink Creek, the Audubon Naturalist Society and the city’s own Environmental Sustainability Committee, who first rang the alarm bells after seeing the proposal.
However, it took the combined efforts of many groups and individuals over the next 8 years to fight these plans to pave over forested land in the city, and while this one was obviously the most formidable, each success was a result of advocacy, persistence, and ultimately, electing council members who made good on their campaign commitments to protect the city’s environment and who listened to their constituents.
Two takeaways: Your vote matters so choose wisely.
The participants on both sides of this controversy were united on one thing- all supported safer bicycling options. Let’s find ways to utilize already paved roads to make cycling safer and more convenient in the City.
Sincerely, Judy Fraser
City of Fairfax Resident
