Standards Committee September 3, 2015

Thursday, September 3, 2015 - 4:40pm - 6:00pm
  1. How to make the user group online work for all committee members
    1. Full, detailed instructions; what is to be found where, how to post
    2. Must we all need to regularly check the Group entries, and what all else?
    3. Would communications primarily by email be more helpful to all?
      1. Emails could include when and what is newly posted and how to find it
      2. Notification and reminder of meeting dates
  2. Discuss method and details to incorporate trail user density into the standard
  3. Review of latest version of the Trail Level chart (Ama's)
  4. Identify list of further needed definitions
  5. The proposed Standards Policy: [Do we need to devote our time and efforts to this quite yet?]
    Ref: I provided many comments to the existing draft immediately prior to the last (aborted) meeting: The intent was to have it available for discussion. If all have not seen it, reviewed it, and penciled or provided their comments, it would be good to do so in preparation for the meeting. Or answer the question above- do we need to devote time to it?.
  6. Goals for next meeting
  7. Date and time of next meeting Thursdays are Sept 10, 17, 24; Oct 1, 8


Trail Development Levels -DRAFT- provided by Ama and I believe posted somewhere within Groups or Google Docs. Perhaps everyone has seen this.  Other than the addition of one row for "Volume for use considerations" I shall not try to relate other updates within it.

Trail user density considerations: This contains my comments on trail user density for consideration, how it does not really fit in a table of physical trail attributes while also recognizing that it is a valid concern appropriate to consider, but to include in a different manner. This may have been circulated online, I produced it just prior to the last aborted for low attendance meeting (and had copies with me). The version attached, dated today, is somewhat modified from the original.

Trail Standard Policy annotated.  I had sent this previously by email but may have missed some of you (today working from the "official listing" of 9 members. I do not know what else may have come of it. It is comments to Walt's draft policy, including questioning of whether we need to digress to define this document at this time, though partially addressing to it would serve the purpose of focusing on what we consider to be the entire trail standards bundle, whether or not that will be our position to tackle, but might guide us on what we should be including in the current endeavor. This document is a bit of a mess. I think that I did it as a Google doc then copied it.  As it was copied, the comments could not be recognized from the original and making sense of it was much more difficult. I have attempted in the attached version to highlight my comments, I am sure not totally successfully.

To aid progress at the meeting it would be helpful for all to examine these documents for familiarization and to have your comments and thoughts ready for discussion.

All presented with the intent to aid us in getting to where we want to go.

Ama, Kevin, Erik, John Magerlein, John Mack, Chris Reyling, Chris Connolly, Walt Daniels
Status of Minutes: 
  1. Agreed to pass the Standards Policy on to the Policy Committee as our suggested wording.
  2. Long discussion on how best to collaborate on producing the required documents. No general agreement so we settled on one person taking control of any particular document and doing all the editing. Others will copy snippets of the current version and paste it into email followed by the replacement text and send to document editor. For complicated changes, talk with editor and agree on some mechanism.
  3. General agreement on most of the content in the current categories document. Walt will be document editor for the next pass at it and will clean up the current document replacing the header stuff with a preamble explaining what the document is about, followed by a definitions section, followed by the two tables. It is expected that the definitions will need further work to make them not too technical. 
  4. There was a lot of discussion of what a segment means. A segment all has the same class, but not clear if we change segments every time the character of the trail changes, or we average the class of a longer stretch, such as between trail intersections.
  5. Next meeting Oct. 15, 2015
Trail Development Levels-DRAFT_Ama.docx60.84 KB
TrailStandardsPolicy annotated 26Aug15.docx15.45 KB
Trail user density considerations JM 5 Aug 2015.docx14.64 KB