----------------------------Original message----------------------------
Paige had some creative ideas on this question.  My own line of
thought on this type of place is to think of them as a kind of "ghost
town"--which is a valid subject heading.  While not the same as a
town that once existed and has lost its population or shrunken to a
"ghost" of its former self, a lot of towns and mining camps in the
California gold rush days existed for such a short time that they
weren't much better than these platted towns in Oregon.  California
had numerous such schemes, as documented in the classic "Historic
Spots in California" by Hoover et al.  In a real sense, they are
"ghosts" esp. if they have appeared on state maps, even when there's
nothing there for the traveler to find.
    Another thought is that these were early versions of today's
PLANNED COMMUNITIES or NEW TOWNS (two more valid subject headings).
They simply didn't get beyond the planning stages.  There are those
that popped up in recent decades in California and elsewhere but
never got very far, and struggle along with a few houses scattered
thinly across the site, restricted perhaps by lack of water and
services.
    Let us all know what you decide on, Peter, it's an interesting
case.    -- Ken R
 
> ----------------------------Original message----------------------------
> Dear Maps-l catalogers,
>
>    We are about to catalog our collection of historic Oregon city plans
> and now need some advice from experienced catalogers on a particular kind
> of city plan -- cities proposed and platted but never built.
>
>    The question:  Is there an LC subject heading that correctly describes
> this kind of town other than the town name itself followed by |x Maps.
>
> There are many such towns in Oregon.  The subject heading "Extinct cities"
> does not really serve here.  These towns never "lived" so could not become
> "extinct."  They did not become part of other towns nearby, and they were
> not wiped off the face of the earth by some natural disaster. Plat maps
> exist for them and these plats were duly filed with the county clerk.
> Perhaps lots were sold, but they were never built upon -- nothing ever
> existed to waste away into a ghost town.
>
>    LC's cataloging manual addresses these towns on Page 1.7, but only in
> regards to classification number assignments, not subject headings.
>
>    Perhaps their is no adequate subject access -- if so, should "Extinct
> cities" be used anyway?  Thank you all.
>                ---------------------------------------------------------
>                Peter L. Stark
>                Head, Map and Aerial Photography (MAP) Library
>                165 Condon Hall, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR  97403
>                (541) 346-3051
>