Subject: Re: [BoundaryPoint] Quadripoints in Baarle
Date: Mar 12, 2001 @ 03:06
Author: Brendan Whyte ("Brendan Whyte" <brwhyte@...>)
Prev    Post in Topic    Next [All Posts]
Prev    Post in Time    Next


As stated previously, there is only ONE quadripoint in Baarle, as evidenced
by the Treaty of 1995 which finally determined the boundaries of the
enclaves, and the associated cadastral maps of both countries.
There are 959 separate turning points listed for the enclaves in the
numerical listing of these TPs together with their coordinates in each
country's national grid. Yet counting up the turning points enclave by
enclave in the enclave-wise listing, there are 960. Why? Because one point
is used twice, as a turning point for each enclave, and is thus the ONLY
point common to 2 enclaves.
The Plattegrund map, of which i also have a copy is a tourist map. It
suffers from being designed as such.
The roads USED to be considered Dutch (and the belgians had free use of them
as per 1843 treaty and ancient privilege). The Ferraris map of the late
1700s makes this clear. This is available fomr the Belgian survey dept, the
IGN in Brussels. Their web site is www.ign.be

For much of this century, if the two nations stood opposite each other
across a road, the dividingl ine was considered the middle of theroad for
the extent of the opposition. since 1995, the roads only form the boundary
if the turning points in the treaty fall down the middle of the road, though
for practical purposes like street lighting and road maintence costs, the
middle of the road is still used to aportion costs based on pro rata areas.
But legally, the boundary is a series of straight lines joining up the
various turning points, and so cuts across many roads, makeing sharp and
obtuse angles in the roads, not necessarily in the middle.
There is no questiuon of any other multipoints apart from the one that
exists between enclaves H1 and H2. there are no multipoints along the main
boundary between pillars 214 and 215 either.
De Blokken in the south of Baarle Nassau commune is connected to the main
commune by a 20m wide strip along which runs a farm lane.
The Castelre salient in the SW of Baarle Nassau commune is connected by a
300m wide neck, and the fragment of baarle Hertog at the north side of this
neck is itself connected to the rest of Belgium by a neck only 50m wide.
Some of the enclaves in the village are only 10m apart. Some enclaves
themselves have narrow necks down to 2.9m wide (eg H16).
These can appear on the topographic maps of botrh countries at 1:10k and
1:25k, and even on the larger scale tourist maps as joined or multipointed
or separate, due to the problems of mapping such small distances at even
such a large scale s 1:8000.
That is why the cadastral maps showing the boundary were compiled at 1:2500
for the rural communal areas, and 1:1000 by Baarle-Nassau and 1:500 by
Baarle Hertog.
Only on these, with the points numbered and distances labelled, can one
determine the exact geometries.
Tourist maps are indicative only. Plattegrund is one of these, as are the
maps appearing in the Gemeentegids, or Communal guide the 2 municipalities
jointly issue.
Plattegrund is a streetmap and designed to show streets and buildings. The
enclave information is secondary, and slightly inaccurate.

Brendan


>wowwoooo
>i would like more light in this area too
>especially the quadripointing implications
>because i believe i recall brendan mentioning a rather recent new accord &
>map
>possibly affecting at least one such point
>
>m
> >
> >I bet that no international boundaries in an around the Baarles have
> >changed in the last few hundred years. Differences between maps will be
> >due to error in one or both.
> >
> >David
> >> Mats,
> >>
> >> I agree your map looks good, mine has the road belonging to BE.
> >>
> >> I don't if they are just unaccurate or things have changed.
> >>

> >> > Jesper,
> >> >
> >> > The print date of my map is 1995. Since your map is newer,
> >> > I suppose it should contain the best information. Too bad...
> >> >
> >> > Here is a (bad-quality hand-scanned) image:
> >> > <http://www.geocities.com/exclaves/BiQuad_Candidate.gif>
> >>http://www.geocities.com/exclaves/BiQuad_Candidate.gif
> >> >
> >> > By the way, did y'all see:
> >> >
> >><http://www.icj-cij.org/icjwww/idecisions/isummaries/ibnlsummary590620.htm>
>http
> >>://www.icj-cij.org/icjwww/idecisions/isummaries/ibnlsummary590620.htm
> >> > (Perhaps it's old news to most of you...)
> >> >
> >> > Mats
> >> >
> >> > >
> >> > > Mats
> >> > >
> >> > > according to my (Peters) 1:8300 Baarle map all of the pink
> >> > > main road is hatched. Donkerstraat looks also to be all
> >> > > Belgium apart from a tiny part of the last road connection to
> >> > > Molenstraat.
> >> > >
> >> > > If we have the same map - notice that the red (hatch) line
> >> > > that goes through the world Donkerstraat continues through
> >> > > all the way through. I also see two red (hatch) lines in
> >> > > between the enclaves.
> >> > >
> >> > > However I don't trust the tourist map's 100% accuracy.
> >> > >
> >> > > Checking a third Baarle map 1:25000 don't answer the
> >> > > question. This one do show the triangle as Dutch, but the
> >> > > road is not marked to any country.
> >> > >
> >> > > Jesper
> >> > >
> >> > > > > I have a tourist Baarle Map 1:8300. It's named "plattegrond"
> >> > > > > from 1999. The Belgium part is hatched. I see the triangle
> >> > > > > and inverted U-shape. As I see the map the road
> >> > > > > Molenstraat/Turnhoutsweg is all Belgium and therefore not a
> >> > > > > bi-quadro.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Are you quite sure? I think I am looking at the same map.
> >> > > > Mine is 1:8300 and the Belgian fragments are hatched in a
> >> > > > red (hard-to-read) color.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > On my map the Molenstraat seems to be part of the triangular
> >> > > > Dutch shape, i. e. the part of Molenstraat that runs through the
> >> > > > triangle is not hatched, thus Dutch, on my map.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > My triangle is actually a polygon with four corners, looking
> >> > > > a lot but not quite, like a triangle, the fourth corner
> >> > > > apparently connecting to the inverted U-shape.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > I'd say there is definately a bi-quadro candidate to be
> >> > > > investigated in situ, if anyone should happen to pass by.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Let's hear what our new brother Wolfgang has to say about it.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Thank you for the description of your other candidates!
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Mats

_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com