Gettysburg Super Walmart

[WJC]

Wasn't the area of Pickett's Charge a tank training ground in WW1? Shows how much the US Army thought about Hallowed Ground in 1917.

Much has changed since 1917....

 

[ami]

My mother in law lives in Gettysburg so we visit frequently, the proposed area (I'm pretty sure) is no where near the battlefield.

The town also builds huge sparking high schools that are no where near capacity and the unused portion of the school falls into disrepair then they build new.

Not really sure what my point is, other than the people elected the officials that make these decisions. The land owners want to sell and retire. Can't stop people from selling their land to the highest bidder. *shrug*

 

[Patrick H]

The odd thing about these stores is that I always found the older, smaller stores to be a lot more user friendly. Some people like the super centers, but lots of people I know feel as I do that they are just too darned big, with too much walking, too many unmanned check out lanes (mine has 19 plus the self check lanes) etc.

 

[Irishtom29]

The odd thing about these stores is that I always found the older, smaller stores to be a lot more user friendly. Some people like the super centers, but lots of people I know feel as I do that they are just too darned big, with too much walking, too many unmanned check out lanes (mine has 19 plus the self check lanes) etc.

I thought the old stores were dark, dingy and made me feel... dirty. Being as I'm too good to shop at Walmart I'm much more comfortable in the newer, larger and brightly lit stores.

 

[RobertP]

Much has changed since 1917....

Yeah, the Civil War is another 100 years in the past.

 

[Northern Light]

I think that sometimes we forget that there are people who live in Gettysburg and its catchment area who have bigger concerns than the Battlefield. While some of you may disagree with me, I think that their needs are as important, if not more so, than those who visit for a day or two and never return or even those who the those who are regular visitors to the area. How would you feel if you lived there and were unable to access things that other communities have, because there was an historic element to your town? I think I might be a tad annoyed. Just saying.

 

[EJ Zander]

We enjoy going to a small family owned hardware store for many items. We know them on a first name basis. They have exceptional customer service and have tailored their inventory to fit their niche. Same with feed/ seed I go to the local mill. Lumber/ building supplies I go to small local up in Newville. Appliance parts/repairs, there a great small business for that in New Oxford. By local when and where we can but for some big stuff like appliances its off to Hanover and the box stores.
Given the local job market my two daughters will most likely not be staying in this area when they fully leave the nest.

 

[RobertP]

I think that sometimes we forget that there are people who live in Gettysburg and its catchment area who have bigger concerns than the Battlefield. While some of you may disagree with me, I think that their needs are as important, if not more so, than those who visit for a day or two and never return or even those who the those who are regular visitors to the area. How would you feel if you lived there and were unable to access things that other communities have, because there was an historic element to your town? I think I might be a tad annoyed. Just saying.

Agree.

 

[Package4]

Is this the same proposal that's been put forward for years?

http://www.gettysburgtimes.com/news/article_c0827bc2-90a2-11e0-907f-001cc4c03286.html

https://www.eveningsun.com/story/ne...-development-near-gettysburg-threat/84854562/

No, in another area across the road, Rte 30, essentially next to the Giant, along Camp Letterman Drive, the previous plan was on the same side as the current Walmart. I believe this is property that was once a trailer park, but it is where Camp Letterman was. The current Walmart can not really be expanded due to the railroad tracks on one side and the Hampton Inn on the other.

I am in full support of battlefield preservation, in fact am a member of the CWPT, but this area is already heavily built up, just Google where the current Giant Foods resides. The previous proposal would have it closer to the main battlefield visible from Barlow's Knoll, I think.

I visit the battlefield approximately 10-15 times a year and believe that it needs protection, but the residents also need to make a living. The current Walmart in terms of Wallys is pretty bad and could use a facelift.

I'll actually be in Gburg on Friday and ask some of the folks I know there what their thoughts are. The current proposal puts the center between Rtes 30 and 15, not really that close to the actual battlefield, but as Brendon said in the piece, it was a staging area, of greater significance is the humongous hospital, Camp Letterman, on the site.

 

[MattL]

It should be up to the locals. If they want change and are ready to move on then who are we to criticize? Right?

Laugh all you want, though this is an objectively different scenario. Locals don't choose what battles happened on specific set of land. A monument can often be moved, the land of a battlefield cannot. If one cannot understand that distinction they have no right (attempting) to mock a certain viewpoint (even if failing horribly and producing the opposite result). Don't practice unsafe ridicule.

I know I am in the minority, but life has to move on. This land isn't part of the battlefield. We go back to 'we can't save everything' and is a staging ground really the important part here?

If someone else wants to buy the land to preserve it...fine. But if the people who live in that area wants the additional jobs and economic development, then that's their call.

I'm glad someone said this. I'm all for preserving battlefields if the means can be found to get it done. With that said I don't think we should shame someone for pursuing a personal gain on land they own that just happened to have a battle happen on it. They didn't choose that battle to happen, neither did the person who owned the land originally before it passed down some sort of chain to them. Why should they be scorned for doing what anyone else might pursue with their own land.

The reality is every acre of land has some sort of history buried in it. I'm all for preserving what we can, but that doesn't mean we have to get it all, or that it's even a bad thing if we don't. One of the best ways to honor the past is to live in the now.

I also agree if someone buys it up and preserves it, fine.

Someone mentioned examples of European history preserved. Though for every example of that there are many more of it being replaced. Whose to say that is a bad thing, for people to live their lives, change according to the times, and profit from their own resources.

 

[huskerblitz]

Depends on your definition of "battlefield". On day 1, the whole town, for example, was part of the battlefield. This land in discussion was part of Camp Letterman, the primary medical facility that treated soldiers from both sides right after the battle as well as burial ground for the ones who perished at Camp Letterman.

True, I should have said part of the battlefield park, which is what I meant.

@huskerblitz
Change their address or history? Most people choose a neighborhood for a reason. Slippery slope especially when there's freeways to go anywhere you want in 2018, don't forget realtors too.

Joni Mitchell sang it best...:edited by yours truly

They took all the battlefield trees
And put them in a Gettysburg tree museum
And they charged all the people
A dollar and a half to see 'em
Don't it always seem to go
That you don't know what you've got
'Till it's gone
They paved a history lover's paradise
And they put up a Walmart parking lot

I don't see it as that severe. The park will remain and that's the main attraction. Does anyone have plans to preserve and mark the area with placards? If they do great. Pay up and get to work. But the battlefield will still be there for people to come and visit.

 

[Southern Volunteer]

It should be up to the locals. If they want change and are ready to move on then who are we to criticize? Right?

To an extent I agree with you as it is the free market liberty minded thing to say. But something about a place like Gettysburg strikes me as something of a collective right that all Americans have as part of our heritage. I think we do have a right to criticize even if it is their private property. Stop it no, but criticize yes. Having control over something like that does put you as a steward of a valuable historical resource and I think confers more responsibility than say having a field in the middle of nowhere, USA where nothing of true note happened.

The right thing to do is preserve it. Just like how if say somebody who bought a priceless work of renaissance art by say Da Vinci or Michelangelo and then took a sharpie to it or slashed it I think I'd have the right to criticize because while that art was theirs, its significance to all mankind ought to give us some right to voice an opinion. But if the town approves, I guess there's nothing to be done and even though I may disagree with it, it is their right.

 

[Belle Montgomery]

True, I should have said part of the battlefield park, which is what I meant.


I don't see it as that severe. The park will remain and that's the main attraction. Does anyone have plans to preserve and mark the area with placards? If they do great. Pay up and get to work. But the battlefield will still be there for people to come and visit.

The surrounding concrete mess will ruin the "ambiance" of what people are trying to experience. Be like camping out in a tent stargazing next to a mega mall.

 

[Belle Montgomery]

To an extent I agree with you as it is the free market liberty minded thing to say. But something about a place like Gettysburg strikes me as something of a collective right that all Americans have as part of our heritage. I think we do have a right to criticize even if it is their private property. Stop it no, but criticize yes. Having control over something like that does put you as a steward of a valuable historical resource and I think confers more responsibility than say having a field in the middle of nowhere, USA where nothing of true note happened.

The right thing to do is preserve it. Just like how if say somebody who bought a priceless work of renaissance art by say Da Vinci or Michelangelo and then took a sharpie to it or slashed it I think I'd have the right to criticize because while that art was theirs, its significance to all mankind ought to give us some right to voice an opinion. But if the town approves, I guess there's nothing to be done and even though I may disagree with it, it is their right.

The "people" of the town may NOW (I'm sure the originals who moved there back in the day did) have no reverence to American history ..doesn't make them correct in voting for it. They have the "right" to move elsewhere since the battlefield was there many generations before they were! Ignoring historical sites is not "progress" it's ignorance of the past...like the Middle East blowing up museums and sacred sites under the guise of war. We know better now as Americans. Hey...the Liberty Bell is cracked let's just throw it out.

 

[lelliott19]

This land in discussion was part of Camp Letterman, the primary medical facility that treated soldiers from both sides right after the battle as well as burial ground for the ones who perished at Camp Letterman.

I agree E. That's the part that concerns me. As I understand it, it is the only part of Camp Letterman that has yet to be developed? If it was "just a staging area," perhaps I wouldn't have that pit of the stomach reaction. I guess I had always hoped that the significance of the site would one day be interpreted. Dr. Letterman's contributions were important not only to the battle of Gettysburg, but further reaching - into the methods and tactics of military medical care of the present. In the aftermath, as the mega hospital and the burial place of all those wounded soldiers, IMHO it seems like the place holds more significance than "just a staging area" as has been mentioned.

 

[huskerblitz]

To an extent I agree with you as it is the free market liberty minded thing to say. But something about a place like Gettysburg strikes me as something of a collective right that all Americans have as part of our heritage. I think we do have a right to criticize even if it is their private property. Stop it no, but criticize yes. Having control over something like that does put you as a steward of a valuable historical resource and I think confers more responsibility than say having a field in the middle of nowhere, USA where nothing of true note happened.

The right thing to do is preserve it. Just like how if say somebody who bought a priceless work of renaissance art by say Da Vinci or Michelangelo and then took a sharpie to it or slashed it I think I'd have the right to criticize because while that art was theirs, its significance to all mankind ought to give us some right to voice an opinion. But if the town approves, I guess there's nothing to be done and even though I may disagree with it, it is their right.

I don't find your argument convincing. First, the national battlefield is a collective right for all Americans and it is preserved. Sure, you can criticize them but they can ignore you since you don't live there. And it's not like a painting. A painting takes up pretty much zero real estate that could benefit the community more. Again, this was a staging area. In the importance of Gettysburg, I think this is pretty far down the list.

The surrounding concrete mess will ruin the "ambiance" of what people are trying to experience. Be like camping out in a tent stargazing next to a mega mall.

Unless that 'ambiance' is creating jobs and expanding the economic development of the people who live there then it's not worth much. Again, the battlefield is still there and it's not going anywhere. Go into the park and enjoy it there.

The "people" of the town may NOW (I'm sure the originals who moved there back in the day did) have no reverence to American history ..doesn't make them correct in voting for it. They have the "right" to move elsewhere since the battlefield was there many generations before they were! Ignoring historical sites is not "progress" it's ignorance of the past...like the Middle East blowing up museums and sacred sites under the guise of war. We know better now as Americans. Hey...the Liberty Bell is cracked let's just throw it out.

I think this was a tad condescending towards the people who live in the area. What the heck were Union soldiers fighting for? To preserve the country as it was or what it could become? Life moves on and we save the important stuff and we build our lives to benefit the present and the future. NOT THE PAST. And keep in mind since you're keen on being able to move, Native Americans had a heck of a lot more history, I'm sure they wished we would have just moved on.

And you totally whiffed on the Middle East comparison. People there are not blowing ancient sites up just willy nilly. It's a bunch of looney tunes who think they are showing off their power. People who live there are just as outraged if not more so than we are of it.

 

[Patrick H]

I thought the old stores were dark, dingy and made me feel... dirty. Being as I'm too good to shop at Walmart I'm much more comfortable in the newer, larger and brightly lit stores.

Your experience was different than mine. But once old stores were closed, they were definitely dark. At least in many cases, the old stores were shuttered until they could be given over to some non-competitive use, such as a historical society meeting center, or whatever. WM had a good dodge in my town, too. They said: "The old store is owned by a holding company. We have no control over that." Of course, the holding company was also WM owned. All of this is why I was so surprised when they leased or sold their former store to the locally headquartered (adjacent county) farm and home store. See my post #36. Other communities might have favorable experiences if they have good negotiators in their city offices.

 

[Belle Montgomery]

I don't find your argument convincing. First, the national battlefield is a collective right for all Americans and it is preserved. Sure, you can criticize them but they can ignore you since you don't live there. And it's not like a painting. A painting takes up pretty much zero real estate that could benefit the community more. Again, this was a staging area. In the importance of Gettysburg, I think this is pretty far down the list.


Unless that 'ambiance' is creating jobs and expanding the economic development of the people who live there then it's not worth much. Again, the battlefield is still there and it's not going anywhere. Go into the park and enjoy it there.


I think this was a tad condescending towards the people who live in the area. What the heck were Union soldiers fighting for? To preserve the country as it was or what it could become? Life moves on and we save the important stuff and we build our lives to benefit the present and the future. NOT THE PAST. And keep in mind since you're keen on being able to move, Native Americans had a heck of a lot more history, I'm sure they wished we would have just moved on.

And you totally whiffed on the Middle East comparison. People there are not blowing ancient sites up just willy nilly. It's a bunch of looney tunes who think they are showing off their power. People who live there are just as outraged if not more so than we are of it.

Obviously we will have to agree to disagree. If people aren't concerned "ABOUT THE PAST" then what the heck are we doing on this site? What's "important" to one may not be important to another. If people are outraged "People who live there are just as outraged if not more so than we are of it" so why can't I be? I myself keep moving farther out … others can too.-but we will NEVER be able to preserve battlefields if "progress" is destroying" them. Like Will Rogers said "buy land, they're not making any MORE of it!" ESPECIALLY historical land is what I say.
Oh well, that said, have a nice evening.

 

[UCVRelics]

I remember years back when a wally world actually did take part of the Manassas battlefield and there a LOT of hellraising but in the end it was built.

 

[huskerblitz]

Obviously we will have to agree to disagree. If people aren't concerned "ABOUT THE PAST" then what the heck are we doing on this site? What's "important" to one may not be important to another. If people are outraged "People who live there are just as outraged if not more so than we are of it" so why can't I be? I myself keep moving farther out … others can too.-but we will NEVER be able to preserve battlefields if "progress" is destroying" them. Like Will Rogers said "buy land, they're not making any MORE of it!" ESPECIALLY historical land is what I say.
Oh well, that said, have a nice evening.

But they are not destroying the battlefield, the park remains there.

I just moved my son off to college. We went through his stuff to figure out what to keep and what not to. The important stuff that were filled with memories were kept. Things not as much, was discarded. And do you know what happened to his room...his land...his sister moved into it. Because that room was needed for the present. I don't see this as any different.