Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Data Management topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Tree-inventory debate: Charles Town board weighs Bartlett data, GIS access and ownership
Summary
Board members said Bartlett Tree has loaded inventory data but the town lacks easy editing access; members discussed costs to verify a 5‑year‑old dataset, options for Bartlett hosting, and the need to require usable digital planting plans from developers.
Members of the Charles Town Tree Board spent a substantial portion of their Oct. 10 meeting discussing where and how the town’s tree‑inventory data should be stored and maintained.
A committee member described prior efforts to have the GIS department host the dataset but said maintenance access was limited; he reported Bartlett has now loaded recent inventory data and that Bartlett indicated the town could run ad‑hoc queries if they host the data. "He's loaded it," the committee member said of Colton at Bartlett, but he raised concerns about whether Charlestown can access and maintain the dataset on its own systems.
The chair underscored two cost considerations: the upfront cost to verify and refresh a roughly five‑year‑old inventory (trees lost or species misidentified), and annual licensing or hosting fees. He said the Shepherdstown model — tagging trees so citizens can report problems by tag number — is a useful example but may not scale directly to Charles Town.
Members asked Bartlett for estimates, maps and clarity on data‑ownership terms before making a decision. The chair also asked city planning staff to request that developers provide planting plans in a machine‑readable format rather than only PDFs, to streamline incorporation into the inventory.
Next steps: the chair will supply maps and the board will obtain Bartlett’s cost estimate for verification and hosting; members agreed to continue discussions about ownership and maintenance options at future meetings.
