A Better Path : There Are 12.2 Miles of Abandoned Rail Beds That Could Be Turned Into a Trail for Bikers, Joggers and Walkers From USC to Santa Monica, but There Is Resistance

Ideas sometimes die because they are too simple or too useful. Some people have more faith in projects that require elaborate planning and generate stacks of reports.

How, then, to assess Janice Adams’ simple idea?

Why not take the 12.2 miles of abandoned railway line, stretching from Santa Monica to USC, and convert the right of way to an urban trail, suitable for bikers, joggers or walkers?

More than a year has passed--untold hours of time and a frustrating bout with bureaucracy--but Adams’ little idea is still alive. In fact, her plan gained momentum when it became a part of the national Rails-to-Trails Conservancy celebration last Saturday, marking the dedication of the 500th trail reclaimed from abandoned railway lines. The conservancy has converted more than 6,300 miles of trails, all using old railroad rights of way, precisely Adams’ plan.

Why can’t it happen here?

* Abandoned rail beds are the legacy of the railroad-building boom of the late 19th Century. By 1916, the United States had the most extensive railway system in the world with more than 250,000 miles of tracks.

But the network that once linked small towns across the country is vanishing. Today, railroads are abandoning more than 3,000 miles of track a year. These rights of way often become corridors of crime, graffiti and garbage. Once-useful transportation lines have given way to urban blight.

Then, too, there is the issue of land gone to waste. Under federal law enacted in 1988, the Interstate Commerce Commission, the U.S. Department of Transportation and the Department of the Interior must encourage the conversion of unused rail beds to trails. But, as has been discovered, it’s one thing to encourage and quite another to implement.

The first rail-to-trail conversion took place in the mid-’60s, but most of the changes have occurred in the last 10 years. The Washington-based nonprofit Rails-to-Trails organization has been a valuable resource to Adams and her group, especially in offering strategies to cut bureaucracy.

“I would have to say that, yes, it has been a learning experience,” Adams said.

It has led Adams through a blur of committee meetings and public hearings. The railroad corridor belonged to the Southern Pacific and parallels Exposition Boulevard from Memorial Park in Santa Monica to Exposition Park near USC. The line fell out of use in 1953 and was bought by the Los Angeles County Transportation Commission in 1991 for mass transit development.

At the beginning of this year the LACTC launched a preliminary study of the Exposition corridor. According to Carol Inge, project manager for the LACTC, five to eight proposals are being studied for an Environmental Impact Report. Among them is one that would allow interim use of the right of way for a bike path. Inge said that the “interim” could last as long as 15-20 years, since debates are still raging about whether to install light-rail transportation, electric trolleys or both, along the 12-mile route.

In the meantime, though, the idea of a bike path or recreational trail is not universally cheered.

* Ruth Barnes is the immediate past president of the California Assn. of Bicycling Organizations and a member of the bicycling advisory committee to the City of Los Angeles. She said that if she were to vote today for or against the proposed trail, she would vote against it.

Barnes says she is not against recreational trails, but sees a greater need for commuter trails. The Exposition Corridor, Barnes said, is being billed as a commuter trail, but is really intended for recreational purposes.

“If you are going to call it a commuter route and design it accordingly, I’m in favor of that,” she said. “But if you are going to call it a recreational route, fine, plant trees and flowers and let the skaters and everyone else on it. Bottom line: multiple-use paths are no good for commuter bicyclists.”

Barnes said that commuter cyclists will want to travel at high speeds, which could create safety hazards if the bikeway is clogged with in-line skaters, joggers and pet owners walking their animals. Another problem with the Exposition route, Barnes said, is that it crosses too many busy city streets, slowing the progress of commuters who, hoping to maximize the efficiency of cycling, want as few stops as possible.

Barnes cited a national survey showing that 20% of those polled would ride their bikes to work if it was safe. Riding a bike alongside a light rail train, or even an electric trolley, may not be safe and it certainly wouldn’t be a pleasant experience, Barnes said.

Rails-to-Trails doesn’t understand her objections.

“It really pains me to hear bicyclists speaking out against bike trails,” said Peter Harnik, conservancy vice president. “I can’t imagine that the existence of a multipurpose trail would inhibit the development of appropriate bike lanes for commuters. These trails are for everyone and shouldn’t be limited. Skaters want to get away from traffic. Walkers want to get away from traffic. Parents pushing strollers want to get away from traffic. People learning to ride a bike want to get away from traffic.”

Homeowner groups are also opposed to the development of bike paths. Nationally, these people who live adjacent or near paths have offered the toughest opposition to the Rails-to-Trails movement. Initially, at least.

Homeowners tend to make the same arguments: They don’t want the increased traffic in the neighborhood, crime will increase and property values will go down.

Rails-to-Trails counters with a study that shows the worst fears of homeowners do not materialize. The conservancy says that with the addition of bike trails to a community, crime drops and property values rise.

“I’ve heard people say this will become a corridor for crime,” Adams said, gesturing to a portion of the proposed trail. Ahead of her was a tunnel defaced with graffiti and teeming with rats. Strewn along the rail bed were broken bottles and trash.

“Why would anyone object if this was cleaned up and made more safe?” she asked. “We know that this is a matter of building relationships with the homeowners and educating them. In the end, if we have a bike trail in here, it will depend on the homeowners.”

The 26-mile Heritage Trail, running from Dubuque to Dyersville, Iowa, encountered similar problems. In 1981, the Chicago Great Western Railroad abandoned its right of way along the scenic Little Maquoketa River. Local businesses, public and private agencies and ordinary citizens bought the rights to the corridor.

Nearby landowners strenuously objected to the trail, saying they were concerned about the prospect of thousands of strangers flocking to their property.

The “strangers,” however, have translated into profit for landowners and the communities. More than 75,000 cyclists use the Heritage Trail every year and they provide an estimated $500,000 for the local economy.

The 12-mile Burke-Gilman trail in Seattle is another example. It is one of the most heavily used, serving a million riders a year. A comprehensive study found no increase in crime along the trail and housing values within a two-block radius of the trail increased by 6%.

These lessons are not lost on local organizers. Since 90% of the Exposition right of way travels through residential areas, homeowners’ sentiments will be heard.

In other parts of the country, homeowners near trails have generally withdrawn their objections after seeing the benefit the trails offer. One entrepreneur-homeowner even installed a soft-drink machine in his back yard to serve thirsty riders.

Adams theorizes that some homeowners object to the idea of a bike path because it appears to be connected to the controversial light-rail proposal.

But she admits to being perplexed about the opposition.

“It’s such a simple, easy idea,” she said, shaking her head. “The land is paid for. The LACTC appears to be willing. Even if they decide to put a light-rail train in there, why can’t we use it in the meantime? It makes sense to me.”

Additional information on this subject may be obtained from Janice Adams at (310) 459-5660, or the Rails-to-Trails Conservancy, 1400 16th Street NW, Suite 300, Washington, D.C., 20036; (202) 797-5400.