I defer to the moderators as to whether this is off-topic or not, but I believe there is a common element of historical areas/fabric-or nearby areas (however one defines that)-being lost to commercial development. From a historical context perspective, some of Gettysburg has already had development near the battlefield, as commented on by Bill Bryson in his book "The Lost Continent", as he described envisioning Union soldiers sweeping across the battlefield and across the parking lot of the Tasty-Rama Ice Cream Emporium or something similar....

And the CEO of the development group is one David LeVan....possibly the last CEO of Conrail?
http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/02/28/historic.battlefields.ap/index.html

That would be the same David LeVan of Conrail. His golden parachute floated him to a Harley Davidson dealership in the Gettysburg area.

Tom Cornillie

I believe this is very much on topic, even without the involvement of the former head of Conrail.

Many of our preserved railroads are having their view sheds negatively impacted by development. Several years ago it the there was a high tension power line proposed to parallel the EBT. A few additional motels near Strasburg could make the photo freights much less attractive.

The Civil War preservation groups are much more active in trying to preserve the landscape. We may be able to learn something from their efforts.

I think preservation is preservation, regardless. But that’s just me. I was stationed at Aberdeen, Maryland and spent a lot of time at Gettysburg for various reasons (went to two re-enactments there as well). I know that place like the back of my hand.
While I’m not big on development of battlefields (go to Waterloo and see what the Belgians did to that place. It’s hardly changed at all since 1815!), I am torn with the opinion that people shouldn’t be told what they can’t do with their own land within the law. If someone has the coin to buy land and build a min-mall where it’s zoned and it’s not illegal to do so, I feel they should have the right. But anyone who feels Gettysburg shouldn’t be commercialized has clearly never actually been there. The place has been fully commercialized for the duration of the 20th century. It’s already like, “History channel” meets Las Vegas!

Randy, thanks for your comments. Another thought that comes to mind (related to this) is that we've seen some excellent, intelligent posts here on Interchange that find silver linings or hidden opportunities for preservation and operations in similar, seemingly negative situations. Were I in charge of marketing at a museum, tourist railroad, etc I'd print out those posts and tack them over my desk. Similar ideas may emerge from continued study of this proposed development.

If nothing else, the more we learn how to co-exist with realities we may not like (Wal-Marts built on the site of Eddystone; gambling casinos impacting passenger counts at tourist railroads; etc), we will hopefully be better poised to adapt to change.

It all comes back around to getting our kids enthused about history. Hopefully, preservation will be the obvious 'next stop' in the thought process.

Didn't they knock down the tower on the battlefield in an effort to recover the land as it once was? I read somewhere many years ago that the state or feds were going to make it a historic site. Sounds like the buck talks loud and clear. When history and rateables run head to head, rateables will win evry time. Rateables rule! Sad but true.

Later!
Mr. Ed

Touchy subject for me fellas -----

Given that my great-great-grandfather, Patrick Gaffney, Private, Company K, Michigan 24th Infantry (better known as the Iron Brigade or the "Black Hats" to some) took a mini-ball in the leg in McPherson's Woods on the first day of battle there, I consider it BEYOND hollowed ground --- if the Southerner who shot him had aimed a couple of inches to the right, I wouldn't be here.

You don't get much more history than that. Gettysburg is one of the few places left you can sense as if you were there those days in July of 1863. Getting personal here ---this may sound downright stupid/ insane to some, but I've stood next to that monument to the 24th countless times with my dad, and as I grew older, the significance of it really hit home. Last year, I went back to the site for the first time since he died in 2003; and standing next to it with my son for the first time, I did my best to explain to him as best I could why that stretch of ground was so important --- and its like I could hear my dad's voice in my own.

You can't BUY that kind of experience, real or imagined.

Sorry, but any development that get even MILDLY close to the battlefield is a no for me. It means something to me that MY great great grandson can have as unobstructed a sense of what that space and setting was like as I can now --- and no, its not perfect, but I wouldn't want it to get worse.

TJ Gaffney

Check out the Civil War Preservation Trust at www.civilwar.org . I was privileged to work on a photo project with one of the officers of this group ("Civil War Battlefields Then and Now", available at Amazon and elsewhere). The group is, in my opinion, one of THE most effective at their stated missions about, not only lobbying for battlefield preservation but actively raising funds to buy endangered property and "buffer zones" around such lands, or arranging for the donation of such land to trusts for long-term preservation. Not only have they been proactive, but they are a great example of people putting their monies where their mouths are.

The Gettysburg tower mentioned by Mr. Ed is a classic case in point. The tower, a for-profit observation tower, stood since 1974 atop a plot of private land, and for years activists tried to simply make the National Park Service make the tower illegal through legislative and bureaucratic channels--it rose up into any and every battlefield view for miles. A judge ruled in favor of Federal takeover through eminent domain, and a month later the tower was dynamited, with the former owners receiving $3 million in compensation.

It occurs to me that, although in this case the Federal takeover might have had a point, it would have been much better for private individuals to just raise the money to buy the tower and then knock it down.

I will second the sentiment that preservation is preservation. By building tight boxes around what is railroad preservation and what is historic preservation (broadly), landscape preservation, etc - we fail to recongnize opporunites for partnerships for action.

Landscape preservation and farmland preservation is a high-profile issue, and it is one where rail presrvationists can find many allies.

Tom Cornillie

I have personally been encouraging several rail museum groups with which I am affiliated to try to acquire property adjacent to their rights of way to form buffers between the railways and development. There are too many cases of rail museums, once out in the burbs or in the country, now becoming surrounded by structures that don't fit the viewscape.

At once such railway, a decrepit mobile home looms into sight as the train rounds a curve while working upgrade through a scene that could be 1906. It hurts my eyes every time I see it. And don't suggest I sit on the other side of the coach, because my eyes are drawn to it every single time, regardless!

Well, first his delership is east of US 15 on Lincoln hwy, so it is not next to the battlefields; and second; after some miscreants vandalized several of the monuments a few weeks ago he not only put up $25,000 to get them restored; but he also put up a $5,000 reward leading to the arrest and conviction of the cretins.

My employer is about to move me to a new branch office in Gettysburg, three blocks east of the square on Lincoln Hwy. We are redeveloping the Biglerville station as a home for the FRA Track Geometry vehicles.

http://www.atipsafety.com/


Steve Zuiderveen