Resident attitudes toward rail-trail development.

Three of today's most popular recreation activities can be enjoyed on hike/bike trails: walking for exercise, jogging or running, and bicycling. In 1994, more than 70 million Americans walked for exercise, 54 million biked, and 22 million jogged (NSG, 1995). Many communities, such as Herndon, Virginia; Kenosha, Wisconsin; and Albuquerque, New Mexico, have developed trail systems using abandoned railways to accommodate the leisure requirements of residents and visitors. The Rails-to-Trails Conservancy (RTC) reported that as of 1996, nearly 8,000 miles of abandoned rails had been converted to 800 recreational trails (Shulman, 1996).

Despite high public demand for trail systems, recreation and park planners have faced opposition to trail development from homeowners who own property adjacent to the sites of future trails. In 1991, a coalition of homeowners in Bloomington, Illinois, signed petitions and voiced opposition to a proposed hike/bike-trail expansion that would have run past its subdivision. Some homeowners claimed that the trail would decrease the value of their homes and increase crime and litter in the area. The Bloomington City Council concurred with the homeowners and recommended that the previously approved trail extension be modified, even though federal and state grant dollars had already been secured to pay for the trail construction. The new trail is now void of a half-mile link past this subdivision. Opponents of the trail extension were termed NIMBYs (Not In My Back Yard) by local media and trail proponents.

Given the relatively high incidence rates of resident opposition toward development, further investigation is warranted into rail-trail systems and the intensity of the NIMBY Syndrome toward such systems. This article will hopefully help readers understand the history, resident attitudes toward, and future directions of rail-trails development.

Rail-Trails: A Historical Perspective

Railroad abandonment in the United States began at the turn of the twentieth century. Railroads that were not realigned or that had grade improvements were eventually abandoned. By the end of World War I, however, because of manufacturing-sector requirements for raw material deliveries, the railroads were at their peak. After World War I, rail routes that proved less profitable were left unused. As the automobile gained popularity, fewer inter-urban trains were needed that used routes from the center of town, running parallel to the major roads. Mergers and corporate takeovers in the 1960s, also contributed to railroad abandonment. Unprofitable routes, such as grange lines made to accommodate farmers, were abandoned. In the late 1800s and early 1900s, railroads were overproduced. In 1916, 254,251 miles of railroad existed, compared to 168,000 in 1981.

Many agencies are notified when an application for abandonment is put on file, including state transportation departments, recreation and planning departments, and regional transportation and planning councils (Nielson, 1992).

Advantages of Trail Development

One appealing aspect of rail-to-trail development is that many features of the trail already exist. Neilson states, "The trail has been blazed, the land cleared, the creeks bridged, hills cut through, swamps filled and embankments built. An abandoned railroad right of way possesses other unique features. It is level, open, clear, well drained, and self-contained or screened," (1992, p.20). Rail systems extend for miles and miles, a necessary trail attribute, and tend to be located near urban areas where there is a need for open space and an avenue for recreation.

The conservation and ecology movement in this country in the 1960s was the motivating force to use these abandoned railroads for recreational trails. Many recreational activities, such as walking, jogging, bicycling, snowmobile riding, and cross-country skiing, had an impact on increased interest for this type of trail. The Illinois Prairie Path and the Wisconsin Elroy-Sparta Trail were the only rail corridors converted into trails before the 1970s. The RTC, a national nonprofit organization founded in 1985, has facilitated the development of other trail systems from abandoned railroad rights of way. RTC notifies local groups of upcoming rail abandonment, assists public and private agencies in legal procedures, and publicizes rails-to-trails issues through the country. The organization acts as the legal representative of the rails-to-trails movement and has brought suit against the ICC to enforce the railbanking provision of the National Trails System Act.

It is perceived that some trail systems can create a positive economic impact for adjacent communities. The National Park Service and the President's Council on Sustainable Development stated that the cost of conversion and maintenance of rail-trails nationwide is often covered by increased sales volume in one year. The success enjoyed in downtown Lexington, Kentucky, is an excellent example of the possibilities of trail conversion. Some restaurants and stores in this area have experienced a 30 percent increase in business, directly attributable to the Minuteman Rail-Trail. Stores once boarded up in downtown Dunedin, Florida, were reopened after the Pinellas Trail opened in the early 1990s (Shulman, 1996).

Community members can thank trail development for many of the advantages they enjoy. A community trail is easily accessible to many residents for recreation opportunities such as walking, jogging, cycling, skating, horseback riding, and cross-country skiing. Trails lead to better accessibility to local parks, open-space areas, schools, and businesses. Trails provide an educational opportunity for contemplative nature study. Conversion of rails to trails can beautify a community, potentially attracting new residents. The use of trails for commuting also decreases automobile and bicycle traffic on roads.

NIMBY Syndrome

Land owners with NIMBY or "Locally Unwanted Land Use" (LULU) syndromes have also prevented the development of numerous other public-sector services including airports, prisons, landfills, and power plants, forcing developers to drastically alter their plans or locate elsewhere (Brion, 1991). Definitions of NIMBYs and LULUs are provided by O'Looney (1995):

The term NIMBY is used to describe land-use issues that are experienced at the level of individual citizens and landowners. LULUs refer to those land uses that are generally needed by the more encompassing political or social unit, but that have specific and substantial negative spillover effects in the community where the development is sited. (p.16)

Rail-Trail Development

Previous leisure research on the NIMBY Syndrome has examined the effects of trails on property value as perceived by residents (Mazour, 1988); the economic impacts of trail users (Schwecke, Sprehn & Hamilton, 1989); and neighbors' experiences with trail-related problems (Gobster, 1990). Some studies have been commissioned by trail developers in an effort to refute the negative claims made by resistant homeowners regarding trail costs. Moore, Graefe, Gitelson, and Porter (1992, p.11) compared the perceptions of residents adjacent to three rail-trails. The majority of owners reported: (1) no increase in problems since the trails had been established; (2) living near the trails was better than they had expected; and (3) living near the trails was better than living near the unused railroad lines before the trails were constructed. Eighty-seven percent of homeowners believed that the trails either increased the value of their properties or had no effect. The authors stated that additional rails-trails research involving residents' altitudes is warranted.

Unfortunately, little reliable data exists regarding the benefits and problems associated with rails-trails, making it difficult to resolve these already emotional issues. Reliable, credible and defensible information is essential in these areas so that proposals for new rail-trails can be evaluated fairly and legitimate concerns can be effectively addressed. (Moore et al.)

Literature within other disciplines provides scarce information pertaining to the effects of park property or recreational trails on property values of adjacent homes. Review of economic, urban-affairs, land-appraisal and assessment sources has produced little research on this topic. It is perceived by other disciplines that parks and trails have a positive influence on property value; however, there are no empirical studies to defend this conclusion.

City and county assessors perceive that, initially, rail-trails have a positive influence on housing values, contributing to a five percent adjustment on homes adjacent to trails. However, residents' perceived safety concerns may curtail positive adjustments in market value. Assessors now see no significant influence in market value for homes that abut recreational trails. It has been suggested that trails do contribute to increased property values for homes removed from but with easy access to trail systems.

Resident Perceptions

Turco and Lee (1996) surveyed homes adjacent to an urban rail-trail system in central Illinois to determine whether or not residents' attitudes had changed since its construction and, if so, the nature and direction of the attitude change. Their study further sought to identify the social costs and benefits experienced by those with homes adjacent to the trail. Findings revealed that most homeowners received numerous social benefits from living near the trail, including convenience for exercise, socialization, and gardening. In terms of social costs, less than 15 percent of the residents reported litter, i invasion of privacy, theft, or noise pollution.

Favorable reactions by residents toward the trail were consistent with the social exchange theory, which suggests that those who receive benefits from rail-trails are likely to perceive the system positively and be supportive. However, those who do not receive benefits, or who believe that the costs associated with trails outweigh the benefits, are likely to consider the system negatively. Similarly, those who frequently used the trail were more likely to perceive it positively than those who did not.

Turco and Lee (1996) further revealed that most homeowners change their opinions about living next to recreational trail systems. A majority of those who were not looking forward to the Constitutional Trail being developed had changed their minds and had positive attitudes toward the trail five years later. Further, among those who purchased homes after the trail was built, 10 percent actively sought a home adjacent to the trail.

Research on resident attitudes toward rail-trail development suggests that NIMBY Syndrome can be "remedied" over time. This finding is particularly interesting to park developers and planners who must refute the negative claims presented by residents seeking to block trail expansion. Planners seeking to develop or expand existing trails should include these research findings as part of state/federal grant applications to demonstrate the demand, interest, and support for rail-trails.

Research suggests that homeowners experience numerous social benefits as a result of their proximity to rail-trails systems (Turko & Lee, 1996). However, it is difficult to determine if social costs are directly attributable to the trail or if they would have occurred regardless of the home's location in the community. Local police records indicated that crime rates near trails are similar to those community-wide. A study of a 12.1-mile bicycle and pedestrian trail in Seattle showed that homes immediately adjacent to the trail had lower rates of burglary and vandalism than the neighborhood average (City of Seattle, 1987).

Positive attitudes toward hike/bike trails should be communicated by outdoor recreation planners and managers to elected officials and those who own homes on proposed trail extensions to gain public support for trail maintenance and expansion. NIMBYs' issues have often raised considerable political and media attention, and recreation and park planners can learn from media-savvy NIMBYs and "play the public relations game" with them, using supportive research findings from similar studies.

Some recreation and park planners have encouraged support coalitions to be formed within a community to counterbalance the public relations efforts of NIMBYs. Within one year of construction, a nonprofit organization comprised of public-spirited individuals, Friends of the Constitution Trail, was established in Bloomington to advocate and maintain the trail. A foundation for the trail has been established, and several fundraisers have been conducted by the Friends. The architectural plans for the trail's expansion were paid, in part, from this foundation.

From a methodological perspective, several recommendations are offered for subsequent studies on the NIMBY Syndrome associated with rail-trails. Future research should compare the attitudes of residents with homes adjacent to the trail to those of residents near the trail to determine whether significant differences exist. It is inferred that those living near but not adjacent to rail-trails will have more positive attitudes toward the site. These residents are not on the front lines and, thus, are not receiving the social costs, yet are benefiting from convenient access. Attempts should be made to further understand the causes of the NIMBY Syndrome among rail-trail opponents. Qualitative research should be conducted and focused upon opponents of trail development to identify their underlying reasoning.

In closing, several strategies are offered to urban planners, city officials, and park administrators to develop solutions to NIMBY and LULU syndromes, including:

1. Begin a public dialogue. Inform and educate the public of the advantages and risk management associated with the site proposal.

2. Use only voluntary siting. Instead of government choosing where the facility should be, use communities that volunteer to site the facility.

3. Require burden sharing. The responsibility of handling facilities needs to be equalized so more than a few communities/states are sharing the burden.

4. Raise institutional credibility. Companies, organizations, and government need to increase positive promotion of existing facilities in order to increase societal trust for future facilities. When developers begin to cooperate with society, both sides tend to benefit more from the outcome.

References

Brion, D.J. (1991). Essential industry and the NIMBY phenomenon. New York: Quorum Books.

City of Seattle. (1987). Evaluation of the Burke-Gilman trail's effect on property values and crime. Seattle, Washington: Seattle Engineering Department, Office of Planning.

Gobster, P. (1990). The Illinois statewide trail user study. USDA Forest Service, North Central Forest Experiment Station: Chicago.

Mazour, L. (1988). Converted railroad trails: The impact on adjacent property. Unpublished Master's Thesis. Kansas State University, Manhattan.

Moore, R.L., Graefe, A.R., Gitelson, R.J. & Porter, E. (1992). The impacts of rail-trails: A study of the users and property owners from three trails. Washington, D.C.: National Park Service.

National Sporting Goods Association. (1995). Sports participation in 1994, Series I. Mt. Prospect, IL: NSGA.

Nielson, W. (1992). Rite-of-Way: A guide to abandoned railroads in the United States. Bend, OR: Maverick Publications, Inc.

O'Looney, J. (1995). Economic development and environmental control: Balancing business and community in an age of NIMBYs and LULUs. Westport, Connecticut: Quorum Books.

Schwecke, T., Sprehn, D., & Hamilton, S. (1989). A look at visitors on Wisconsin's Elroy-Sparta bike trail. University of Wisconsin Cooperative Extension Service, Madison, Wisconsin.

Shulman, S. (1996, October). Rails to trails. Technology Review, 99, 16-18.

Turco, D.M. & Lee, K.L. (1996). NIMBY syndrome associated with rail-trail development. Abstracts of the 1996 NRPA Leisure Research Symposium. Alexandria: NRPA.

Douglas Turco, Ph.D. is an associate professor of Recreation and Park Administration at Illinois State University; Laura Gallagher, M.S. is a research assistant at ISU's Bureau of Tourism & Recreation Research and Kerri Lee, M.S. is a recreation specialist at Lackland Air Force Base in San Antonio, Texas.

Research Update is edited by Dr. Irma O'Dell of Soothern Illinois University at Carbondale.