|
|
|
| Sat, Nov. 07 - - Mobile - RSS | |
|
|
State backs Park Service
State agency urges Orange County to 'squarely address' National Park Service concerns about Wilderness Wal-Mart, says store could be seen from park, Route 3
RELATED:
Date published: 6/11/2009
BY CLINT SCHEMMER Orange County should resolve the National Park Service's concerns about the Wal-Mart retail center proposed in the Wilderness battlefield area, a state agency says. As the Planning Commission prepares tonight to discuss the project with Wal-Mart, its members will also have an opportunity to question an official of the Virginia Department of Historic Resources about issues that VDHR has raised. At the county's request, VDHR advised Orange planners and the Board of Supervisors on the proposal in a seven-page letter sent Monday to County Attorney Sharon Pandak by Kathleen Kilpatrick, the department's director. "In our considered judgment, the National Park Service's concerns about the impact of the proposed development and the park should not be dismissed, but squarely addressed by the county, ideally in the context of a comprehensive planning approach," Kilpatrick wrote. The 51.5-acre site, owned by JDC Ventures of Vienna, is a quarter mile north of the intersection of State Routes 3 and 20 and Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania National Military Park. Park Service officials have said the retail center, along with the adjoining Wilderness Crossing development proposed by the King family, would create an urban center beside the park, increase traffic on Routes 3 and 20, and foster demand to widen those roads through the park. Although the proposed Wal-Mart site lies outside the congressionally mandated boundaries of the park, Kilpatrick wrote that the Wal-Mart site is part of both the May 1864 Wilderness and the May 1863 Chancellorsville battlefields and retains its landscape features from the Civil War period, including what may be a wartime road trace. The property probably figured in military operations during each battle, and may have included the Union Army's 6th Corps hospital on the Germanna Plank Road during the Battle of the Wilderness, she said. It is eligible for the National Register of Historic Places, she said. "A commercial development of this magnitude is by definition incompatible" with these "nationally significant" historic sites, she wrote. "The direct impact on the historic landscape cannot be mitigated through design and new landscape elements. The proposed development's impact on the battlefields would also be irreversible."
Date published: 6/11/2009
I agree that VDHR did not cover itself in glory
(posted by
larryg
, June 12, 2009 7:17 pm)
but the maps are clear about the historic land.
the question is when was this map made available to
Orange County?
It would seem to me that AFTER they received the map,
they KNEW where the historic land was when making land-
use decisions.
If that map showed up two weeks ago.. that's way different
than 2 year or 10 years ago.
Also - WHO is JDR Ventures up in Vienna? That does not
sound like a local landowner to me... or did JDR buy the
land recently?
Who paid the prior commercial taxes on that property?
Oh now it's important land
(posted by
wideopenspace
, June 12, 2009 4:40 pm)
Back in February it wasn't important when the OC BOS met with the VDHR in a meeting that VDHR originally claimed never happened. In that meeting they looked at maps and studies and nothing was found to make the VDHR recommend to the BOS that they should turn Wal-Mart away. 2 months later they suddenly change their tune. How far can you believe the VDHR when they flat out lied and attempted to smear the OC BOS? Where are the enviro nuts complaining about the Park and VDHR wanting to remove a bunch of trees?
this are the first maps
(posted by
larryg
, June 12, 2009 7:14 am)
that I have seen that show BOTH the proposed WalMart
and the areas designated as historic.
Were these maps available when the Sheetz and adjacent
were proposed as well as when the land that WalMart wants
was zoned commercial?
In other words... when were these maps first available and
did decision-makers see them when they made decisions?
"It is eligible for the National Register of Historic Places,"
(posted by
larryg
, June 11, 2009 5:21 pm)
this could be a significant statement because this
determination is made by an independent 3rd party - the
Keeper of the Register.
The question is .. WHEN was this done - from that point on -
all decisions of the PC should have taken this into
consideration.
No, they need to only listen to facts...
(posted by
blitzburgh
, June 11, 2009 11:56 am)
Just about everything Ms Kilpatrick said in her letter was her personal opinion, not fact.
|
 |
|||
|
|||
