Is there a reason that this is signed U.S. 26, such as a local map or street sign, as that seems a bit odd to sign on this stretch.

Just a heads up, it might be easier to use LIDAR for some of the abandoned features, as there is a wye outside of Breton Woods that was in the wrong spot.

Hi there, I mapped this about a year ago and revisited it recently. I still need to go into this further, as I have yet to do on-the-ground research for this. That said, I have cut up some of the segments to reflect this, so I thought that I had done that with buildings. Let me work on this further in the coming days, and thanks for the heads up.

Thank you for pointing this out, as I meant to tag the entire path under the reservoir as historic, but only remembered to do a small part near the Windsor Dam before saving. I will go ahead and tackle this in the coming days, as I meant to do so before falling asleep the other day!

Check the next changeset for this, as I was able to map out most of the original routing for the route into North Andover, via LIDAR. The only hazy part is in downtown Andover, but thanks for starting this, as I was able to complete it for you!

Hello there,

I just wanted to note that you accidentally dragged Neponset Avenue to Morrissey Boulevard with this edit. Fortunately, it is easily fixable, as I have also done the same in the past, but I just wanted to give you a heads up in case you are alerted by my edit.

Happy editing!

Kevin

I have received your message and will look into this later in the week, but I just wanted to let you know since it may be a few days until I get to it.

So going off of this, how would we categorize the crane route, seeing as I have seen this copied at major shipping ports (albeit, with an actual crane). I am not sure if MxxCon asked for your opinion on this, so that is why I am asking again (I do not want to usurp anyone's recommendation), because I would be curious how you would recommend mapping the proving ground. Yes, I agree that a marking lot is not a historic site, however it does also exist in the area that used to be the ground.

Also, for the railroad, I can certainly cut up what is there and can mark embankments and whatnot, but I want to ensure some consistency, especially because there are many other cuts that I did not map, because I did not want to spend all night on it.

Then what do you think the long embankments and cuts into the sand are, as they are located right where maps and aerial imagery has shown the railroad to have been.

It would be nice if there was a crane railroad criteria, but such is life. As for the ruins bit, mapping it as a former military area makes it show up on the map, so I was trying to go with the best option that I could think of. If you can suggest a better option, please do.

So what do you want to keep here, in light of the LIDAR argument?

That may be so, but there is extensive LIDAR imagery of the area that shows where the railway used to be. A more intensive approach would be to split up everything based on what is a cut and embankment, while excluding potential flat areas, but that would involve more work on the ground because there could be a slight embankment. That said, I am standing by the fact that much of the route is visible on the mainline route, including the road which was developed as a railroad bed, which is what has been commonly mapped on other routes around the nation.

Much of this is visible on LIDAR. It may have been mapped a bit too much, but the rock cuts are still there to the North of the highway.

In that case, I would suggest seeing if there is an area that would cause colors to default to lower case, as the website accepts any style of input.

Seeing as the Interstate 93 section was removed since I was last here, what are you referring to here?

I would advocate for keeping the railroad, as it was there at one point and is the reason that the grading exists, if that makes sense. In terms of the name, I only did that for a lack of a better option (usually, these are folded into whatever railroad first opened this, and then a few name evolutions later along that line). If I recall correctly, I moved the node to straighten the line, assuming that there was not some right turn hidden under the tree. If that is the case, feel free to map out the correct path, and leave the node, so that I can revert it to being an abandoned railroad. If you feel comfortable doing so, please go ahead and correct it all, as I know that sometimes rail segments can be so rough that turning on a LIDAR map shows everything very far from where the actual bed is.

That explains the fish ladder, as I meant to do more research into what exactly that was and forgot to follow up. As for the lock, I have no idea how that occurred, but I have gone ahead and corrected that, noting the correct width as well.

Is there a reason that the Charles River has bridge relations tied to them?

I was trying to find a way for this to be searchable, without the dams showing up online, for historical purposes. It would not hurt if people wanted to see where these were, especially since there still may be a smidgen of infrastructure present once the dams are fully remediated. Do you have any suggestions as to what might be the best way to solve this?

You are right, as I somehow missed that the sidewalk was the old layout, even having biked it last month. Thanks for the correction!

Thank you for catching that one, as I was experimenting with trying to make the map more clear when editing, however that very much went awry.