Northern Virginia is a much more crowded place than it was during the Civil War. But Civil War historians, preservationists, and buffs, as well as National Park Service officials, are still flummoxed by Wal-Mart's wish to place a super center next to one of the most poignant battlefields of the Civil War.
"I am very disappointed they didn't consider other sites and didn't listen to the feedback they got that this site is too close to the Wilderness battlefield," Russ Smith, superintendent of the Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania National Military Park, told the Fredericksburg Free Lance-Star.
Wal-Mart's plan is to develop a 53-to-55-acre tract of land just north of the Wilderness Corner intersection. Part of the proposed development would hold a super center covering nearly 140,000 square feet, with enough room left over for additional retail outlets. While that land is not part of the national battlefield, it is, historically, part of the Wilderness Battlefield.
According to the Park Service, the Battle of the Wilderness was fought on May 5-6, 1864, with troops under both Union General Ulysses S. Grant and Confederate General Robert E. Lee engaged. "It was the beginning of the Overland Campaign, the bloodiest campaign in American history and the turning point in the war in the Eastern Theatre," notes the agency.
Last summer a coalition of groups -- the Civil War Preservation Trust, Friends of the Fredericksburg Area Battlefields, Friends of Wilderness Battlefield, the National Parks Conservation Association, the National Trust for Historic Preservation and the Piedmont Environmental Council -- wrote Wal-Mart president and CEO, H. Lee Scott, Jr., asking that his corporation look elsewhere for its project.
The Wilderness Battlefield was determined to be one of the most historically significant battlegrounds in the nation by a blue ribbon panel created by Congress in 1990. In an exhaustive 1993 report, the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission (CWSAC) identified Wilderness as a Priority I, Class A site, its highest designation. The commission identified the 55-acre parcel as part of the Wilderness Battlefield.
Today more than 2,773 acres of the Wilderness Battlefield are preserved as part of Fredericksburg and
Spotsylvania National Military Park. This Super Wal-Mart would be built within one-quarter mile of
the National Park and would pave the way for desecration of the Wilderness with unnecessary
commercial growth. Such a large-scale development is inappropriate next to a National Park.
At the Civil War Preservation Trust, policy director Jim Campi told the Free Lance-Star that the location of the proposed development is "extremely inappropriate for any kind of big-box commercial, especially a Wal-Mart.
"We're not telling Wal-Mart 'No way.' We're just telling them, 'Not here,'" he said.
Support Essential Coverage of Essential Places
Comments
NO NO NO NO NO!!! Have respect for this precious land! ! ! !...............there are ENOUGH Walmart's & shopping centers!!!!
Walmart = Greed.....plain and simple.
If it isn't Walmart, will it just be some other development? Walmart is always an easy target bash. The real issue is what to do about this property if it is important to the battlefield.
I agree with the previous comment that this is not about Walmart. Would people be as concerned if it were a housing development? If the land is privately owned, does not the owner have the right to use the property as he/she pleases?
Frank and Anonymous, you both hit on a point that comes up time and again when there's talk of development beyond a park's borders, whether it's the case of the American Revolution Center near Valley Forge, this Wal-Mart proposal, or oil and gas drilling in Utah.
Does an amicable solution exist? Where do a park's borders end, its viewsheds? What's appropriate in those settings?
My concern is that as more and more growth and sprawl occur, many of these places are going to become isolated islands and slowly wither on the vine. But private property rights are private property rights. That's not a complaint; that's just the way it is.
Not too surprising, considering the "Yellow Tavern" battlefield just North of Richmond is the site of an expansive mall complex today. The site where JEB Stuart received his mortal wound can be found nearby, after a tedious search through suburbia, surrounded by homes.
To have more of these sites compromised would be a travesty. Let's hope the coalition of groups listed above can influence the final decision as to where to build yet another supercenter.
Beamis, as much as I'd like to hear your rebel yell...while Wal-Mart certainly is a favorite punching bag of many, I'd venture that folks would get similarly upset if Whole Foods or REI or Best Buy moved to develop this much acreage next to a park.
Heck, I was bummed when a nice open field on the outskirts of Park City was turned into a commercial development with two groceries, a hotel, timeshares, a bank, and more. Did you know you can see the Golden Arches from atop the Olympic ski jump?
As far as some "concerned group or individual" having moved to buy the land to preserve it, I'd hazard a guess that their pockets aren't quite as deep as Wal-Mart's.
Kurt: I agree. So I guess I will be "Preaching to the Chior".
Basicaly, I have always believed that if you wish to control what occures on any piece of land, then you need to own that land. If you do not want to SEE what is done with somebody's land, then again, you need to own that land also.
We have enough land use and zoning laws. After you see what business has to go through so that they can open their doors for business, people would have more respect for the process.
I have as yet to ever see an occasion when Walmart, or any other business, go to the time and expence to open a business just so that they could "clutter up the landscape".
We recently had a Walmart store open up in our community. I view their store as just another option when I go shopping. They have never forced me to come into their store nor made me purchase any item. It is all free choice.
If you do not like a store, DO NOT SHOP THERE! I personaly do not shop at "Smoke Shops"or "Adult" stores, but I defend their right to exist within the same scope of laws that govern all "Growth".