JR wrote on 08/12/13 at 6:57pm:
Rocky, unfortunately, now that BYT is an officialy THTB trail, there is a double edge sword involved. In order to receive the funding from THTB for supplies, BYT (in theory) needs to follow IMBA rules for trail construction.
TTFs are part of it.
I don't think anything back in BYT is out of line, but it's only not a big deal until people start whining about it.
Hence the OP's "concern" of the TTF at Beatty, which seemed to be "out of code" to him... even though he's probably not raised a tool in trail maintenance...
Yes and no. worker-rider has already done a great job of making what used to be a lot of fall line trail non fall line trail with switch backs and such. The IMBA guidelines are just that...guidelines. WR knows what works well at BYT such as drainage and grade. Each trail is different and has different soil types so what works well at BYT may not work well at Beatty or Fisher or LNSP.
As far as OTF's, we have earned a lot of trust from all of our land managers (Meck P&R, Davidson P&R, Huntersville P&R, Cornelius P&R and most of all NCDENR (NC Dept of Environmental and Natural Resources)). So because of BYT and what was there before being legitimized, we have been given a fair amount of latitude by P&R.
Concerning OTF's, I worked on a set of building standards using IBC (International Building Code) and conversations with Woody Keen from Trail Dynamics and my own experience at Fisher to use for the rest of our trails. Yes, they do seem to be over kill but they will last for a very long time and they will take not only rider abuse but hopefully tree and limb fall as well. Money is not the issue because most if not all are being funded by grants. The issue is people whining about carrying the lumber to the work site!

( that was just a friendly jab at my trail coordinators.

)
Mark
Jelly in St. Croix
Oh, yea. Forgot.
EMF kill....kill...kill....just sayin'.