Russ: I realize my previous comment may come off as hostile, I apologize for that. What I mean to say is if you'd like to map the former rail by the river where there is the embankment, I think that would be appropriate and you should do so. But in the village where houses and other structures intersect, I do not think any marking would be appropriate, and I encourage you to remove it. I merely wish to advocate for an accurate and useful map for other users. Thank you for your collaboration.

Russ: it's not about satisfying me. Like you said, it's about not mapping something that isn't there. Yet, you continue to mark a no-longer existent railroad, dismantled or not, that crosses through buildings, fences, and other features - and yet (as you said) YOU CAN NO LONGER SEE ANY SIGN OF RAILROAD. So why mark it?

By the river where this is a (mild) impression on lidar? Sure, knock yourself out - map the impression. But mapping through the center of town is pointless if it's not there in any shape or form. It doesn't meet the definition of dismantled, which suggests that some remnant is left behind. You can't possibly tell me that the people that live in those homes want a non-existent railroad going through their house on the map.

According to railway=abandoned a grassy, overgrown swamp-like ditch that barely qualifies as a "clearing" and isn't otherwise distinguishable in any way doesn't meet the criteria for an abandoned railway. Note the description states "its still visible that there used to be a railway." After physically going out there and tracking from the Seneca Canalway Trail Head, following the previously-marked path all the way down River Road and up to the lumberyard on Kingdom Road, I assure you there are no indications of a former railway (other than the wooden bridge and the embedded tracks on Gorham Street - which I left alone). I took pictures if you'd like to see them. That being said, if you'd like to add back the parts that LIDAR says exist in the wooded areas - go for it. But I can 100% assure you there are no remnants of railway that go through town, so I'd appreciate it if you didn't add anything back there without travelling out to Waterloo yourself and finding a railway in person.

Interesting, that's for that information. I went out yesterday to take a look. Aside from the buildings, unfortunately most of the places where the rail bed probably was are completely grown over or blended in with grass. It's pretty difficult to tell even in places where there is a clearing, such as where you had indicated it ran along river road - there it seemed like any other swampy ditch. It was an interesting hunt, though! The only remnants I found were on Gorham road, that were embedded in the pavement - I left that indication on the map.

After a closer look, I see now what you mean now about the old railroad down by river road - it does appear to be obscured by trees. However I don't see on satelite where the railroad you have remarked goes through homes and other buildings... Can you elaborate on this?

After a closer look, I see now what you mean now about the old railroad down by river road - it does appear to be obscured by trees. However I don't see on satelite where the railroad you have remarked goes through homes and other buildings... Can you elaborate on this?

Are you referring to an old railroad that doesn't exist? Or a footpath? Hard to remember but I'm happy to make any corrections as needed

I updated many things in the Waterloo area, anything from adjusting roads/paths, parking lots, fixing building alignments, etc.