[form49b]

There's a new Midpen survey that's a few levels deep in their November newsletter. They're collecting feedback on what users want from online trail data visualization as well as on-trail info, but there are some opportunities to comment on trails as well. It may help to have cyclists giving feedback just for numbers as well. The page below describes their project; scroll down for the survey.

https://www.openspace.org/stories/trail-tales-november-2021

For my part, the sign format they proposed is not particularly clear or interesting. It uses terms that are familiar to trail workers but probably not to most trail users, and some of the info is not useful. Why would we need to know the cross slope? I feel like the side slope would be much more useful to many users as it speaks to the amount of exposure and difficulty of moving to the side of the trail.

 

[Ogre]

It's better than the classic/ worthless green circle/ blue square/ black diamond designations.

Around here seems like the more effort people put into signage, the quicker the vandals destroy them.

 

[Doesn't Matter]

View attachment 1955106

Possibly useful data as you're browsing their site to determine which preserve to visit with your 5-year-old and 92-year-old grandmother.

At the trailhead, seems like a waste of money, as I'm unlikely to change my plans based on, "Oh no, my Specialized Renegade 2.35 S-Works tires can't handle a 1.5% cross slope!"

 

[HansNiemand]

The survey was a good opportunity for me to write in: Stop naming fire roads as 'trails'.

 

[form49b]

The survey was a good opportunity for me to write in: Stop naming fire roads as 'trails'.

Thanks for that. I've spoken to Midpen a lot about this. I showed them how State Parks trail maps make it clear which are roads and which are trails. There was an even better example from the San Vicente Redwoods plan where they just use different line styles to show segments that are on road grades. So far they've pushed back, saying there are too many things they want to show on the trail map to make this clarification (regional trails, who can use the trail, etc.). I'm not convinced about that, but the online info that they are exploring with this survey could show it, and I think they were open to doing that (since it could show different info on different layers). They explicitly mentioned this project in their response, so it's important for people to provide this roads vs. trails feedback.

The other thing I argued for was for the planning documents to be clear about road and trail, and they seemed to take that suggestion seriously, since they may already have multiple maps showing different types of things, it's easier to add this info on one of them without it becoming too complex.