many thanxxx
& comments intertwingled
--- In
BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "Lowell G. McManus"
<mcmanus71496@m...> wrote:
> Attached (and also at www.mexlist.com/bp/bcjc.jpg ) is an aerial
photo map that
> I have made to show the Bi-state Criminal Justice Center
condominium.
>
> The placement of the boundary around the condominium is predicated
upon the
> statement in the compact that it embodies "the plant and
facilities" of the
> BCJC. My interpretation is that this includes the property on
which the
> building is situated.
good
i agree
& this means the tripoints can be made without having to even visit
the er plant
From my on-site observations, that property appears to be
> three-quarters of the city block, the remaining quarter being
occupied by a
> tall, slim, boarded-up old hotel building. The divided building
across Front
> Street south of the BCJC is the railroad station. North of the
BCJC, the
> boundary is shown correctly as it crosses the corner of the
sidewalks at the
> corner of Pine and Broad Streets.
>
> Before the BCJC was built, State Line Avenue continued through the
block on
> which it sits--even with the corner of the block to the north
jutting into it as
> it does. State Line Avenue ended into Front Street in front of the
railroad
> station by the east corner of the tall old hotel. The main
uncertainty in my
> mind is whether the right-of-way of the former State Line Avenue
might have been
> included in the BCJC property. If that is the case, then the
boundary between
> Arkansas and the condominium along the edge of Front Street would
extend all the
> way to the ARTX boundary near the corner of the tall old hotel
instead of
> jutting northwestward to an acute angle. It would probably take a
search of
> local cadastral records to answer this question and definitively
place the
> tripoint.
both tripoints might however be probed for in the street first
just to see what factors might be at issue
but before that
i would like to find out whether the federal congress has ever
ratified this agreement
because if not
& insofar as the compact alters the character & location of the state
line
then it is not yet constitutionally legal
in which case the artx state line has never really legally moved an
inch
nor opened up to admit this common territory in its midst
nor produced in fact these arartxtxn & arartxtxs condo tripoints
Therefore, my map is an approximation.
>
> Lowell G. McManus
> Leesville, Louisiana, USA
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Lowell G. McManus" <mcmanus71496@m...>
> To: <BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2003 9:35 AM
> Subject: Re: [BoundaryPoint] Re: Boundaries through urban areas
>
>
> > > & my question of course is about the actual shape & dimensions
of the
> > > condo territory
> > > & the positions of the 2 condo tripoints
> >
> > I knew that was coming! :-)
> >
> > I'll research it and get back to you.
> >
> > Lowell G. McManus
> > Leesville, Louisiana, USA
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> >
> >
> >