"Street pattern" notation on charts?

[[email protected]]

Hello all!

I'm wondering about a notation I've seen on a couple of VFR sectional
charts. A small area - no bigger than about 3 or 4 miles on a side -
will be outlined with thin black dashed lines, with a note "street
pattern". The note is in the same typeface used for other landmarks
like "golf course", "plant", "hospital", etc. Does it mean something
like "unusual street pattern that is a good visual landmark"? Or
something closer to "this might sort of look like a runway, but it's
not, so don't land on it"? I've looked through the User's Guide at
http://www.naco.faa.gov/index.asp?xml=naco/online/aero_guide but the
answer didn't jump out at me; is there a better place to look for things
like this?

One example is about 10 miles due east of MKO (Muskogee, Oklahoma). See
http://skyvector.com/perl/code?id=KMKO&scale=2 and look east of MKO and
just north of the small town of Braggs. (For those of you keeping score
at home, this is on the Dallas-Ft. Worth sectional.) Here is a Google
Maps satellite photo of the same area:
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&z=14&ll=35.674032,-95.189667&t=h

Thanks!

Matt Roberds

[Roy Smith]

In article >,
wrote:

> Hello all!
>
> I'm wondering about a notation I've seen on a couple of VFR sectional
> charts. A small area - no bigger than about 3 or 4 miles on a side -
> will be outlined with thin black dashed lines, with a note "street
> pattern". The note is in the same typeface used for other landmarks
> like "golf course", "plant", "hospital", etc. Does it mean something
> like "unusual street pattern that is a good visual landmark"?

That's how I would interpret it. The primary design goal of the sectional
is to serve as an aide to visual navigation. Things get put on the chart
if they're easy to spot from the air and thus serve as good visual
landmarks.

[Peter Dohm]

> wrote in message
...
> Hello all!
>
> I'm wondering about a notation I've seen on a couple of VFR sectional
> charts. A small area - no bigger than about 3 or 4 miles on a side -
> will be outlined with thin black dashed lines, with a note "street
> pattern". The note is in the same typeface used for other landmarks
> like "golf course", "plant", "hospital", etc. Does it mean something
> like "unusual street pattern that is a good visual landmark"? Or
> something closer to "this might sort of look like a runway, but it's
> not, so don't land on it"? I've looked through the User's Guide at
> http://www.naco.faa.gov/index.asp?xml=naco/online/aero_guide but the
> answer didn't jump out at me; is there a better place to look for things
> like this?
>
> One example is about 10 miles due east of MKO (Muskogee, Oklahoma). See
> http://skyvector.com/perl/code?id=KMKO&scale=2 and look east of MKO and
> just north of the small town of Braggs. (For those of you keeping score
> at home, this is on the Dallas-Ft. Worth sectional.) Here is a Google
> Maps satellite photo of the same area:
> http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&z=14&ll=35.674032,-95.189667&t=h
>
> Thanks!
>
> Matt Roberds
>
The one that I was familiar with was a case of a a good sized development
that had, for want of a better word, fizzled. Basically, it was a
development started in the sixties with all of the infrastructure, streets
and utilities, in place; but only a small percentage of the homes were
built. The visual effect was that of a small city without the homes.
Effectively, it is a daytime landmark, but won't appear as a lighted area at
night. Therefore, it was charted in the manner you described--rather than
the filled in yellow of a typical town or city.

For any who are curious, the area of that type that I most clearly recall is
called Lehigh Acres and is located in southwest Florida--however, I have
been told that it was finally built out in our recent "land boom." I have
not seem it recently, either from the air or by chart, so I really don't
know the current status(s).

Peter

[Gene Seibel]

On Apr 9, 7:40 am, wrote:
> Hello all!
>
> I'm wondering about a notation I've seen on a couple of VFR sectional
> charts. A small area - no bigger than about 3 or 4 miles on a side -
> will be outlined with thin black dashed lines, with a note "street
> pattern". The note is in the same typeface used for other landmarks
> like "golf course", "plant", "hospital", etc. Does it mean something
> like "unusual street pattern that is a good visual landmark"? Or
> something closer to "this might sort of look like a runway, but it's
> not, so don't land on it"? I've looked through the User's Guide athttp://www.naco.faa.gov/index.asp?xml=naco/online/aero_guidebut the
> answer didn't jump out at me; is there a better place to look for things
> like this?
>
> One example is about 10 miles due east of MKO (Muskogee, Oklahoma). Seehttp://skyvector.com/perl/code?id=KMKO&scale=2and look east of MKO and
> just north of the small town of Braggs. (For those of you keeping score
> at home, this is on the Dallas-Ft. Worth sectional.) Here is a Google
> Maps satellite photo of the same area:http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&z=14&ll=35.674032,-95.189667&t=h
>
> Thanks!
>
> Matt Roberds

I believe the street patterns are there as land marks, however I have
seen a dragstrip or two on a chart, and I suspect those are there so
as to not be confused with a landing strip.
--
Gene Seibel
Gene & Sue's Flying Machine - http://pad39a.com/gene/
Because we fly, we envy no one.

[Matt Barrow[_4_]]

> wrote in message
...
> Hello all!
>
> I'm wondering about a notation I've seen on a couple of VFR sectional
> charts. A small area - no bigger than about 3 or 4 miles on a side -
> will be outlined with thin black dashed lines, with a note "street
> pattern". The note is in the same typeface used for other landmarks
> like "golf course", "plant", "hospital", etc. Does it mean something
> like "unusual street pattern that is a good visual landmark"? Or
> something closer to "this might sort of look like a runway, but it's
> not, so don't land on it"? I've looked through the User's Guide at
> http://www.naco.faa.gov/index.asp?xml=naco/online/aero_guide but the
> answer didn't jump out at me; is there a better place to look for things
> like this?
>
> One example is about 10 miles due east of MKO (Muskogee, Oklahoma). See
> http://skyvector.com/perl/code?id=KMKO&scale=2 and look east of MKO and
> just north of the small town of Braggs. (For those of you keeping score
> at home, this is on the Dallas-Ft. Worth sectional.) Here is a Google
> Maps satellite photo of the same area:
> http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&z=14&ll=35.674032,-95.189667&t=h
>
IIUC, it's where streets were laid out, but no buildings erected (ie, RE
development gone bust).

[Ben Jackson]

On 2007-04-09, Peter Dohm > wrote:
> The one that I was familiar with was a case of a a good sized development
> that had, for want of a better word, fizzled.

I turned in to one of those when I was visiting Houston, TX. It was
a whole suburban neighborhood of roads, with mature trees all around,
but no houses at all. It was surreal. Houston also had highway ramps
going nowhere (with matching rusted out cranes). I got the impression
that the money dried up suddenly one day and everyone just walked away.

--
Ben Jackson AD7GD
>
http://www.ben.com/

[JGalban via AviationKB.com]

Matt Barrow wrote:
>
>IIUC, it's where streets were laid out, but no buildings erected (ie, RE
>development gone bust).

Yep. There are a lot of these out here in the southwest. I've even seen a
few that were designated as street patterns, then during one of the
inevitable housing booms, were resurrected into actual neighborhoods.

John Galban=====>N4BQ (PA28-180)

--
Message posted via AviationKB.com
http://www.aviationkb.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx/aviation/200704/1

[Mike Adams[_2_]]

Some Other Guy > wrote:

> JGalban via AviationKB.com wrote:
>> Matt Barrow wrote:
>>>
>>>IIUC, it's where streets were laid out, but no buildings erected (ie, RE
>>>development gone bust).
>>
>> Yep. There are a lot of these out here in the southwest. I've even
>> seen a
>> few that were designated as street patterns, then during one of the
>> inevitable housing booms, were resurrected into actual neighborhoods.
>>
>> John Galban=====>N4BQ (PA28-180)
>
> Do you have any lat/lon coordinates?
>
> It sounds like it could be an interesting Google Earth trip.
>

There's one at N32.554, W111.717. I have heard that there is one of these in this area south of Phoenix
that is an old World War II Japanese interment camp. Not sure if this is it. It doesn't look like it on Google
Earth (named streets and some houses).

Mike

[Mxsmanic]

Mike Adams writes:

> There's one at N32.554, W111.717. I have heard that there is one of these
> in this area south of Phoenix that is an old World War II Japanese interment
> camp. Not sure if this is it. It doesn't look like it on Google Earth (named
> streets and some houses).

That would be the Gila River camp, which is here:

http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&z=18&ll=33.070002,-111.830392&spn=0.004455,0.006952&t=k&om=1

It looks abandoned.

The place you're looking at seems to be just another one of those abandoned or
underdeveloped subdivisions that one sees in areas like Phoenix.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[Mike Adams[_2_]]

Mxsmanic > wrote:

> That would be the Gila River camp, which is here:
>
> http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&z=18&ll=33.070002,-111.830392
> &spn=0.004455,0.006952&t=k&om=1
>
> It looks abandoned.
>
> The place you're looking at seems to be just another one of those
> abandoned or underdeveloped subdivisions that one sees in areas like
> Phoenix.
>

Yes, that's the spot I was looking for. Interesting curving pattern of irrigated farm fields to the northwest
makes it easy to spot. However, I don't see that one on the sectional or TAC with the "street pattern"
identification. I guess it's just viewed to be not that clearly visible as a landmark. The historical aspect is
interesting, however.

Mike

[BT]

the oil bust in the late 1980s

"Ben Jackson" > wrote in message
...
> On 2007-04-09, Peter Dohm > wrote:
>> The one that I was familiar with was a case of a a good sized development
>> that had, for want of a better word, fizzled.
>
> I turned in to one of those when I was visiting Houston, TX. It was
> a whole suburban neighborhood of roads, with mature trees all around,
> but no houses at all. It was surreal. Houston also had highway ramps
> going nowhere (with matching rusted out cranes). I got the impression
> that the money dried up suddenly one day and everyone just walked away.
>
> --
> Ben Jackson AD7GD
> >
> http://www.ben.com/

[BT]

heres two

N36-17, W115-58
N35-57, W115-53

BT

"Some Other Guy" > wrote in message
...
> JGalban via AviationKB.com wrote:
>> Matt Barrow wrote:
>>>
>>>IIUC, it's where streets were laid out, but no buildings erected (ie, RE
>>>development gone bust).
>>
>> Yep. There are a lot of these out here in the southwest. I've even
>> seen a
>> few that were designated as street patterns, then during one of the
>> inevitable housing booms, were resurrected into actual neighborhoods.
>>
>> John Galban=====>N4BQ (PA28-180)
>
> Do you have any lat/lon coordinates?
>
> It sounds like it could be an interesting Google Earth trip.
>

[[email protected]]

Some Other Guy > wrote:
> JGalban via AviationKB.com wrote:
>> Matt Barrow wrote:
>>> IIUC, it's where streets were laid out, but no buildings erected (ie, RE
>>> development gone bust).
>>
>> Yep. There are a lot of these out here in the southwest. I've even
>> seen a few that were designated as street patterns, then during one
>> of the inevitable housing booms, were resurrected into actual
>> neighborhoods.
>
> Do you have any lat/lon coordinates?

There are some street layouts like this just west and just south of E60
in Eloy, AZ. They aren't listed as "street pattern" on the chart, and
they aren't completely vacant - there are a few houses - but they're
pretty bare.

N32.797, W111.601 or
http://maps.google.com/maps?z=14&ll=32.797087,-111.601267&t=k .

Matt Roberds

[[email protected]]

Ben Jackson > wrote:
> On 2007-04-09, Peter Dohm > wrote:
>> The one that I was familiar with was a case of a a good sized
>> development that had, for want of a better word, fizzled.
>
> I turned in to one of those when I was visiting Houston, TX. It was
> a whole suburban neighborhood of roads, with mature trees all around,
> but no houses at all. It was surreal.

There used to be one of these in Kansas City, Missouri, as well. In
this case, though, the area _used_ to be full of houses. The houses
were bought and razed some time in the late 1960s or early 1970s,
nominally for the purpose of building a highway, but allegedly for the
purpose of "cleaning up a bad part of town". There were trees, streets,
street signs, and even street lights, but no houses. About 25 years
later, they finally built the highway - US 71. The place I remember was
on the north side of 63rd St.

Matt Roberds

[John Galban]

On Apr 9, 7:07 pm, Mike Adams > wrote:
>
> Yes, that's the spot I was looking for. Interesting curving pattern of irrigated farm fields to the northwest
> makes it easy to spot. However, I don't see that one on the sectional or TAC with the "street pattern"
> identification. I guess it's just viewed to be not that clearly visible as a landmark. The historical aspect is
> interesting, however.
>

I often use that dirt strip that's just north of the Gila River
camp. The camp has never been listed on the charts as a street
pattern. In fact, it's pretty hard to see unless you're looking for
it. It was first pointed out to me when I was a student and my
instructor and I used to practice on the dirt strip. Last time I
drove down the I-10 in that direction, the Gila River Tribe was
advertising tours of the WWII internment camp. Having flown over the
outlines on the ground for decades, I'll bet that sightseers are
probably disappointed when they actually see it.

John Galban=====>N4BQ (PA28-180)

[John Galban]

On Apr 9, 10:03 pm, wrote:
>
> There are some street layouts like this just west and just south of E60
> in Eloy, AZ. They aren't listed as "street pattern" on the chart, and
> they aren't completely vacant - there are a few houses - but they're
> pretty bare.
>
> N32.797, W111.601 orhttp://maps.google.com/maps?z=14&ll=32.797087,-111.601267&t=k.
>

Yes, the Eloy street pattern is one of the biggest I've seen. It's
huge, but it's never been marked on the charts because of chart
clutter. Somebody must have lost a fortune on that development.

There is a street pattern that is marked on the charts, due south
of Arizona City (SW of Eloy). Here it is on google :

http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&z=15&ll=32.553903,-111.716537&spn=0.027021,0.039911&t=k&om=1


John Galban=====>N4BQ (PA28-180)

[Dylan Smith]

On 2007-04-09, Peter Dohm > wrote:
> The one that I was familiar with was a case of a a good sized development
> that had, for want of a better word, fizzled.

I've seen some of these street patterns in the desert where there's no
infrastructure like roads laid, it just looks like the dirt has been
scraped out into a street pattern (like someone drawing lines in the
sand). They are also in the middle of nowhere. I guess someone wanted to
practise using a bulldozer.

--
Yes, the Reply-To email address is valid.
Oolite-Linux: an Elite tribute: http://oolite-linux.berlios.de

[[email protected]]

wrote:
> Does it mean something like "unusual street pattern that is a good
> visual landmark"?

This is apparently what it means. I also took a closer look at the
Phoenix terminal chart (not the sectional) and found a lot more "street
patterns" marked.

Thanks for all the responses!

Matt Roberds