0 comments

---

Even wanted to know what it is like to live near a new Walmart store as it’s being developed? Well today is your lucky day! This blog, ENDURING THE NEW HURRICANE WALMART: A Daily Diary Of What It’s Like To Have A Massive Supercenter Built In A Formerly Quiet Neighborhood, from a local West Virginia news site is an ongoing first hand account of just that.

Here’s just a sample of what you would be in for if Walmart decided to move in to your backyard:

A beautiful tree-covered hill and a quiet Hurricane neighborhood have been destroyed in order to build the new Walmart and Hurricane Marketplace.

Neighbors, including me,
are being subjected to
loud noise that I can hear inside my home with the windows closed, bright lights shining in my bedroom window before sunrise, and several cases of our water being cut off.

Greedy city and county officials looking to grab more property and Business and Occupancy taxes are refusing to enforce city and state noise ordinances, and are also refusing to buy out the homeowners that are living next to the construction site.

Hurricane City Manager Benjamin Newhouse, and Cleveland Construction Supervisor David Koon have both demanded that homeowners move if we don’t like the noise. However neither is willing to cut a check for our homes.

The Putnam County Development Authority, which created this mess, refuses to buy us out and develop our land.

Has anyone else had an experience like this? Did Walmart bring excessive noise, traffic, crime, or pollution to your neighborhood, as they so often do?

0 comments

---

Back in September the National Trust for Historic Preservation, Friends of Wilderness Battlefield, and six nearby residents filed a lawsuit in the Circuit Court of Orange County. They alleged that the country “supervisors failed to comply with the county’s comprehensive plan. The suit also claims the county’s zoning ordinance is invalid because it fails to comply with state laws requiring such ordinances to protect historic sites, and there were procedural defects in the approval process.”

Today, the court heard the first arguments of the case.

Here’s a quick excerpt from the National Trust for Historic Preservation’s press release outlining their central arguments (it was emailed to me, so I don’t have a link):

“The County has an affirmative responsibility to protect those historic resources under Virginia law and under the County’s own Comprehensive Plan for development. Yet, the Board ignored the concerns, objections and offers of assistance from the Governor and the Speaker of the House of Delegates of the Commonwealth of Virginia, the National Park Service, the Virginia Department of Historic Resources, 250 Civil War experts, and others.

The Battle of the Wilderness, where 26,000 men were killed or wounded in May of 1864, may not be as well known as Gettysburg or Antietam, but it marked a milestone in the Civil War. It was the first time generals Robert E. Lee and Ulysses S. Grant met in battle. The site of the proposed 140,000-square-foot Wal-Mart superstore, along with 100,000 square feet of additional big box commercial development, stands on unprotected land within the historic boundaries of this battlefield.  It is also immediately adjacent to the Fredericksburg & Spotsylvania National Military Park, which was established by Congress in 1927. In a split vote, the Orange County Board of Supervisors voted to approve a special use permit allowing the 240,000-square-foot project to proceed on August 25, 2009. This project poses a considerable risk of destruction and increased commercialization of a nationally significant and highly vulnerable historic site.”

We’ll certainly keep our eyes on the case. In the mean time, you can check out the National Trust for Historic Preservation’s website here and read more about the case here.

0 comments

---

On January 29, 2009--just about a year ago--Sprawl-Busters reported that Haywood, North Carolina officials had a big hole to fill that once was a Wal-Mart discount store on Route 74 in the Clyde area.

The vacant Wal-Mart has been there since a Wal-Mart supercenter, with 188,494 s.f., opened in Waynesville on October 1, 2008---just eight miles down the road from the original location in Clyde. The Wal-Mart discount store in Clyde that was closed was built in 1990, and is 116,061 s.f. The Smoky Mountain News reported that what was once a bustling retail market and taxpaying property was now slated to go off the tax rolls entirely and become the new home of the Haywood County Department of Health and Social Services. 

One year later, the deal has still not jelled. According to the News, Commissioners are still considering the old Wal-Mart site. The county wants to buy the 20 year old Wal-Mart because its the cheapest option they have, making it a ‘bargain’ for the taxpayers, Commissioner Mark Swanger told the News. The current DSS building was constructed in the 1920s. “It would require millions in renovations, heating, air, roof windows and you still have an inadequate space for doing business,” Swanger explained. The DSS building needs a new roof, windows, and electrical wiring. “We could go on and on about what it would cost us, we would still have an old building,” another Commissioner noted. A new building is also out of the question, the Commissioners say, costing as much as $30 million. So taking over the dead Wal-Mart makes financial sense.

The Wal-Mart property itself will need a lot of work. It was described by the News as a “gaping retail shell.” But at least it has a roof and a parking lot. The County says if they put a DSS office into the building, it will act as an anchor for the shopping center and stimulate adjacent businesses. Over the past ten years, the county has been building a new Justice Center, a new jail, and a remodeled courthouse. So officials don’t have much capital left to spend on the new DSS space. “I suppose it has been just a matter of priorities,” Swanger explained.

Negotiations with Wal-Mart Realty have been going on for at least a year. “If we don’t do something now, it’s going to cost us much more in the future to buy property and start building,” one Commissioner pointed out. If the county does move into the building, the dead Wal-Mart would be subdivided between the DSS offices and the Tractor Supply Company, which is also in negotiations for part of the Wal-Mart building. When Wal-Mart left a gaping hole in the strip mall where it was located to move to the other side of town in 2008, Commissioners began thinking about using the vacant store. They decided not to pursue it at the time given the county’s economic situation with the recession.

At that time Commissioners were seeking a federal loan of up to $11 million to purchase and renovate the Wal-Mart. The area had lost a Goody’s clothing store, which was one of many casualties of the big box retailers. Goody’s left behind a storefront in a strip mall in Waynesville. Home Depot canceled plans at the last minute to open a new store in Waynesville, leaving a hole next to the new big box retail complex where Super Wal-Mart moved to. Last year at this time, the Commissioners’ economic development staff said, “Right now, there’s not a whole lot of retailers that are looking to expand. Everybody’s pretty cautious right now. The county’s interest (in the Wal-Mart property) is very encouraging.” Commissioners said in January of 2009 that money from the federal stimulus package could help finance the purchase of the Wal-Mart building, but it was unclear how long it would take for the money to trickle down to local governments.

What you can do: There are currently 9 Wal-Mart “dark stores” in North Carolina. Wal-Mart has several private real estate brokers trying to sell these properties. The official Wal-Mart line is that its Realty division has no problem disposing of these properties, but in many situations, these large “ghost boxes” are hard to remarket because there are very few businesses looking for such large buildings. Wal-Mart has left hundreds of ‘dark stores’ in its wake as it moves through small town America, causing local officials to worry about being stuck with huge, empty stores that cannot easily be recycled.

One has to wonder what officials in Clyde would have said in 1990 if Wal-Mart had told them that in less than 20 years their proposed discount store would be closed and left for the county to buy. For the town of Clyde, this represents a major loss of revenue. The County will not pay property taxes on the building, and there will be little sales tax from the Tractor Supply Company compared to a Wal-Mart store. The big winner is Wal-Mart, which will sell off its dead store, and make more money at its superstore 8 miles away. This leapfrog development is a perfect example of the sprawl that happens when there is no regional planning. In this case, Waynesville took away Clyde’s store, when the Clyde store could have been reformatted to become a superstore. Wal-Mart today is building superstores that are 99,000 s.f. The Clyde Wal-Mart was 116,061 s.f. No relocation was necessary in the first place, and Clyde’s store was clearly meant for Waynesville and surrounding towns, because Clyde’s tiny population could never support a discount store on its own.

Readers are urged to email Haywood County Commission Chairman Kirk Kirkpatrick at with the following message: “Dear Chairman Kirkpatrick, Please don’t use federal or county tax dollars to buy an empty Wal-Mart that bad planning created. Clyde and Waynesville should never have allowed Wal-Mart to abandon its ‘old’ store in the first place, just to move to bigger quarters 8 miles away. They could have reformatted their existing store in Clyde into a superstore, and today you’d have no dead store to worry about. But the idea of using federal stimulus money to write a check to Wal-Mart—which doesn’t need any more federal subsidies---is irresponsible. Instead, call over to the new Wal-Mart superstore manager, Jerry Presley at (828) 452-5090 and ask him to write to the corporate central office in Bentonville, Arkansas, asking Wal-Mart to donate the land and building to the county. It’s the least they can do to repay the county and the town of Clyde for leaving you with an empty building that could have been avoided in the first place. Don’t subsidize Wal-Mart with tax dollars---ask them for a charitable donation that they can take as a tax write-off.”

0 comments

---

This is it, so don’t get scared now.

The Orange County Board of Supervisors is set to make a decision once and for all on the fate of the Wilderness Wal-Mart - a public hearing has been scheduled for July 27th, which will be the last time the public (and Robert Duvall) will be able to make their opinions known before the board takes the matter for good. Note: As a Civil War vet, Robert Duvall can actually comment all he’d like.

What will they decide? Will Wal-Mart be allowed to desecrate a piece of American history? Will they be denied, and an alternate site be recommended?

There seems to be a divide between the County Planning Commission and Orange County residents - the Commission voted 5-4 last week to approve development on the Battlefield site, yet at previous public hearings, the majority of Orange County residents were against the project (by an estimated 2-1 margin). This public outcry, combined with the history of the land at stake, would make it seem appropriate that Wal-Mart would be eager for a compromise that would still allow them to develop in the area, if one were presented...but to this point, no dice. Which is why County Administrator Bill Rolfe believes it’s now up to the supervisors to make the “win-win” a reality.

“The question that begs to be asked is, ‘Why isn’t the county trying to broker a deal that keeps Wal-Mart in the county and moves it further away from the congressionally approved boundary line of the Wilderness Battlefield?’ Both would be in our best interest,” Rolfe wrote the Board of Supervisors in a June 15 e-mail...He noted two goals--that Orange enlarge and diversify its tax base, and not do anything that would “detract from the [Wilderness] battlefield as a tourism destination for our community.”

Rolfe went on to point out that the coalition of historic preservation groups currently fighting the Wilderness plan would appear to be amenable to a development located farther from the battlefield park. And it just so happens that just such a piece of land could be made available next to a nearby 51-acre retail development. The question is, will County Supervisors go for it, or will they doom the Wilderness Battlefield to witnessing another brutal defeat?

Seeking win-win in store debate [Fredericksburg Free Lance-Star]

Read the rest of this story ...

0 comments

---

Not long ago, we reached out to our Wal-Mart Watch communities in New York, Los Angeles, and Chicago, asking them to contact their city councils and urge them to continue to oppose Wal-Mart’s moving into their cities. Combined, the populations of Chicago, NYC and LA house nearly 15 million people, or roughly 5% of the U.S. population.

For years, Wal-Mart has tried to build stores in those and other urban centers including Detroit, Washington, DC, and Boston. Building stores in these cities represents one of the last few rich avenues for domestic U.S growth open to Wal-Mart, but to this point it’s been one big, giant FAIL.

Since submitting our request, over 25,000 letters have been sent to the city councils in LA, New York and Chicago. And below is an example of the responses those letters have been generating - this one is from David Yassky, a member of the New York City Council currently running for New York City Comptroller:

Dear Neighbor:

Thank you for your concern regarding the recent proposals to open Wal-Mart stores in New York City. I agree that this is not the answer to our City’s economic problems, and I am concerned by the company’s poor track record regarding the treatment of its employees and its devastating effect on local businesses.  Small businesses are the life-blood of our City and as the Chair of the City Council’s Small Business Committee, I will fight against the development of new Wal-Mart stores that bring more harm than good to a community.

Moreover, I strongly support passing the Employee Free Choice Act. This legislation would be an important safeguard against employee abuses.  The Employee Free Choice Act would promote better working conditions and benefits for those who need it most:  New York’s working families.  I will continue to support this legislation and employee rights whenever I have the opportunity to do so. Thank you again for your interest.

Sincerely,
David Yassky
Council Member, 33rd District

We’ll keep updating you as we continue to get more responses. Until then, you can check out more on Wal-Mart’s Urban Problem here. What these cities need now are jobs that pay a living wage, good health benefits that keep people healthy and productive (and off public health care), and thriving small businesses that give back to their communities. Wal-Mart need not apply.

0 comments

---

As you may have seen, last week we rolled out a new initiative to stop Wal-Mart’s plan to use the cover of recession to sneak in to Chicago, New York City, and Los Angeles.

Since then, supporters across the country have sent thousands of letters urging their local city council members to refuse to even discuss Wal-Mart development plans until the Employee Free Choice Act is passed to safeguard their communities. The WMW team would like to thank everybody who wrote in to their local elected officials.

Particularly strong in their effort were New Yorkers. One letter that was particularly articulate, passionate, and well reasoned was sent to by Bill Millard, a resident of NYC. Thanks to Bill for giving us permission to publish the letter in its entirety:

Dear Councilmember Mendez:

Greetings from St. Mark’s Place. I’ve recently read that the Wal-Mart corporation is trying to gain a foothold in the Union Square area. As a constituent living in the East Village, and as a local architecture writer who treasures the unique culture, heritage, and built environment of our city, I would like to urge you to use all available means to prevent that corporation from opening anywhere in New York. Not in Union Square, not in Brooklyn, not in Queens: nowhere in our city, please. Not now, not ever, not here… and not even if they swear on a stack of every major culture’s holy books that they’ll pull an ideological 180-degree turn and start supporting the Employee Free Choice Act. No matter what promises they make, Wal-Mart simply doesn’t belong in New York City.

With a disgraceful record of corporate behavior and a business model premised on exurban sprawl, automobile dependence, a work force with no better options, and a bland commercial monoculture, Wal-Mart represents everything ugly and mediocre and unjust about our nation, the exact opposite of the values that progressive Americans take pride in. Part of the case against Wal-Mart is simply economic: Wal-Mart destroys local economies, puts people out of work, damages local environments with auto traffic, degrades local pay-scale standards, treats workers like cattle, and evades its responsibilities as a major employer to provide its workers with decent health care. I’m sure you’ve heard the grim stories about workers locked into stores, mandatory work hours off the clock, petty efforts to claw back legal settlements from workers with health problems, exploitation of Chinese labor under conditions that border on slavery—all the things that make the Wal-Mart name stink worldwide. The “low prices” that Wal-Mart offers on its goods are no bargain at all: they merely shift the costs of its profiteering onto the people and places that have the least power to bear them.  (The necessary statistics and narratives on all this, as you’re probably already aware, are available at walmartwatch.com.)

Read the rest of this story ...

0 comments

---

The Virginia Democratic Primary is tomorrow, and with it gubernatorial candidates on both sides of the aisle are making their views known on the controversial Battlefield Wal-Mart. This also comes just days before the Orange Planning Commission is scheduled to meet to consider the site developer’s request for a special-use permit for the 138,000-square-foot Wal-Mart store.

By now we all know that Wal-Mart wants to build a 141,000-square-foot supercenter on the edge of the Wilderness Battlefield National Park in central Virginia. The plan came under heavy opposition last year by several groups focused on everything from preserving the site’s historical significance to protecting the local environment. Collectively these groups have come to be known as the Wilderness Battlefield Coalition.

This past weekend, the Fredericksburg Free Lance-Star took a look at the positions of the Virginia gubernatorial hopefuls. Democratic candidates Creigh Deeds and Terry McAuliffe both are in favor of preserving the site, having sent letters expressing as much to current Wal-Mart CEO Mike Duke, with Deeds going so far as saying he felt an obligation to do so. Both of their letters echo the sentiments of preservation groups - that alternative sites exist that would allow Wal-Mart to build while protecting the sanctity of the Battlefield site.

Deeds:

“The opponents of the proposed project have identified [alternative] sites within two or three miles of the current site,” he wrote Duke. “With this compromise, we can continue to preserve the land and history of the Wilderness battlefield while still providing your company a location for a store.”

McAuliffe:

He asked Duke to “consider moving the Wal-Mart a little ways down the road so that we can preserve this historic site. The Wal-Mart you are building could potentially jeopardize the most popular tourist attraction in Orange County.”

Read the rest of this story ...

0 comments

---

Kilbuck...the name seems to ring a bell, right? Small town? Pennsylvania? Wal-Mart construction mishap? Highway travel through the town slightly impossible for a couple weeks? That Kilbuck?

While excavating a huge tract of land to build a new Wal-Mart, Kilbuck properties failed to properly stabilize the site, which ultimately led to a massive landslide. Following months of work to stabilize the Route 65 site, Wal-Mart ultimately abandoned development. According to the Pittsburgh Business Times:

The landslide...dumped 500,000 cubic yards of dirt and debris onto Route 65 and three Norfolk Southern railroad tracks during excavation work for a Wal-Mart Supercenter and a shopping center.

All of this happened back in September. Of 2006. And on June 8, 2009, Wal-Mart expects to have a contractor ready to go and begin repairs to the compromised stretch of I-65.

One lane of Route 65 in Kilbuck Township has been closed ever since a landslide at the proposed Wal-Mart site where the Dixmont State Hospital used to sit. That landslide happened Sept. 19, 2006, and to the average person driving the roadway, there has been little work done since. However, that’s all going to change. According to the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation, Wal-Mart is planning to hire a contractor to start repairs on June 8.

At least, according to the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation, Wal-Mart will be paying for the repairs instead of hanging it on PA taxpayers. A good thing, even if the repairs are starting just a little bit late. After the road repairs, the site itself will still need further stabilization, which could take another two years.

Road Repairs To Start Soon At Route 65 Landslide Site [WPXI.com]

33 comments

---

He’s grizzled. He’s mentored Cole Trickle and knows that on the track, rubbin’ is racin’. He’s fought Yankees in the Civil War, to the delight of Red Sox fans everywhere. He’s Robert Duvall...and he’s now Wal-Mart’s worst enemy.

Joined by two congressmen whose states suffered heavy losses in the Battle of the Wilderness, Duvall--who lives in Virginia’s horse country--pledged to do “anything we can” to support the fight against the Wal-Mart store. The proposed construction has drawn opposition from 250 historians, including David McCullough and James McPherson, and filmmaker Ken Burns.

Duvall toured the grounds with Rep. Peter Welch, D-Vt., and Rep. Ted Poe, R-Texas. Welch, for his part, comes from a state in Vermont that has already made some noise concerning the Wilderness site. Earlier this year the Vermont Legislature passed a joint resolution asking property owners and elected officials in Orange County, Virginia, to protect the historic battlefield - many Vermonters died fighting there during the Civil War.

Welch and Duvall both spoke out not only on the importance of the site, but of Wal-Mart’s ability to take the high road:

“The impact of the Wal-Mart is that it will totally change the context of that battle site,” Welch said. “With the immense increase in traffic and congestion and additional development, you’re going to get very large-scale commercial activity.”

“The Wal-Mart Corporation has it within its power to be a savior of the Wilderness Battlefield,” Duvall said in a statement released by Welch’s office. “Simply by moving to an alternate location slightly further from the battlefield, they have the ability to protect this critical piece of American history for generations to come.”

Already, hundreds of historians have signed on in opposition to the development.

Actor Duvall enters battle to save Va. battlefield [AP via the Daily Press]

Read the rest of this story ...

0 comments

---

The Battle of the Wilderness was among the most significant engagements of the Civil War. The number of voices who argue that Wal-Mart should find somewhere else to build are steadily increasing. And now a national audience is getting the story of the most recent battle to be fought there.

Both the Washington Post and prominent blog The Daily Kos posted stories on the Wilderness struggle on Sunday, and both are great reads. The Post entry was written by James McPherson, the George Henry Davis ‘86 Professor of History at Princeton University and a past president of the American Historical Association. McPherson won the 1989 Pulitzer Prize for “Battle Cry of Freedom” and is a two-time winner of the Lincoln Prize.

A snippet from the Post:

Preservationists are not opposed to Wal-Mart opening a superstore in the region. A coalition of national and local conservation groups has merely asked Wal-Mart to choose a different location...The Wilderness is an indelible part of our history, its very ground hallowed by the American blood spilled there, and it cannot be moved. Surely Wal-Mart can identify a site that would meet its needs without changing the very character of the battlefield.

And from Daily Kos:

Development has spread out in all directions from Washington DC, devouring landscape and culture.  McPherson notes that only 21% of the actual site of the Battle of the Wilderness are in the national park, that many key areas are “privately held and vulnerable to development”...We perhaps cannot preserve every place of possible historical importance, but in our shortsightedness we have already lost much.  Too many historic buildings are now gone, and sacred spaces are increasingly threatened as our cities spread out.

Again, both are really good reads, and the post on The Daily Kos has already inspired 150 comments, so head on over and join the discussion!

Wal-Mart vs. the Wilderness [Washington Post]

Wal-Mart vs. the Wilderness [Daily Kos] [And yes, they have the same title...]

3 comments

---

We’re going to take an ever-so-short break from Wal-Mart and the labor fight to return to the “roots” of the grassroots organizing against the retailer - namely objections to the company’s expansion. To the right is the view from inside a mammoth Wal-Mart Distribution Center. It is big...REAL big. In fact, just a couple months ago, Al Norman laid out exactly HOW big a new Distribution Center in Merced, CA, would be:

This enormous project will consume 270 acres on the southeast side of Merced, a community of roughly 70,000 people. The Distribution Center will pave over 100 acres of prime farmland, to create a 1,200,000 s.f. building—the equivalent of six supercenters under one roof, or 24 football fields. The pavement and parking lot for the facility is 4,353,000 s.f. There is room at the site for 300 parking spaces for tractor-trailers.

Did we mention it’s big? Well what this picture doesn’t illustrate are the environmental concerns of a distribution center beyond simple size - the 24 hours of light affecting local wildlife (and people), the millions of tons of particulates spewed into the air by hundreds of trucks and thousands of cars traveling to and from daily.

As the DC has moved forward, most notably with the release of the City’s draft Environmental Impact Report, opposition has risen as well - see the Merced Stop Wal-Mart Action Team. This week, letters have continued to flow in to local papers opposing the development. These are just a handful of our favorite examples:

Letter: China says ‘thank you’ [Merced Sun-Star]

China says “Thank you, Merced.”

Thank you for building the Wal-Mart distribution center in your town.

Yes, the creation of a few hundred jobs in Merced employed thousands of us to manufacture the cheap stuff you buy at Wal-Mart.

And as your fair city basks in the 24 hours of daylight from the towers of stadium lighting and the comforting hum (visible and audible for miles) of idling trucks, grinding gears, the occasional tooth rattling slam of a load hitting the 100 acres of asphalt, and as your school- children breathe the poison belched from 900 trucks a day, China says thanks and keep supporting the People’s Republic of China by shopping at Wal-Mart.

MICHAEL J. LEONARD
Merced

Check out more after the jump.

Read the rest of this story ...

0 comments

---

Chicago Alderman Howard Brookins is bracing for “a floor fight” on an amended redevelopment agreement he introduced Wednesday, which would open the door for Wal-Mart to build its second Chicago store. Last year, a similar request to build a supercenter was rejected by the planning and development commissioner, a fate Brookins hopes to make moot this year. The Chicago Sun-Times has the skinny:

Last year, then-Planning and Development Commissioner Arnold Randall rejected a request for administrative approval to build a 150,000 square-foot Wal-Mart supercenter on the site of the old Ryerson Steel plant at 83rd and Stewart. The developer responded by putting the property up for sale. Brookins’ proposal would strip the commissioner of the power to veto stores over 100,000 square feet.

So, Alderman Brookins is looking to get around commissioner approval by making it ultimately unnecessary - if the planning and development commissioner can’t veto a project, why run a development proposal by the administration in the first place? And Brookins’ reasoning for introducing the measure?

“I’m doing it because I can’t get any other movement any way else.”

Makes sense. In reality, there appears to be much more going on in the Windy City than a simple controversy over a new Wal-Mart supercenter. Chicago is bidding for the 2016 Olympics, and Mayor Daley and his administration seem to want to avoid tackling divisive issues this calendar year while the International Olympic Committee reviews the city’s bid.

“The timing is pretty bad. We’re trying to keep some peace with the unions. We’ve got an October deadline with the [International] Olympic Committee. I don’t think we want to show any problems here with the city and our workforce,” said Ald. Pat O’Connor (40th), the mayor’s unofficial Council floor leader.

Regardless, earlier today Mayor Daley intimated that Alderman Brookins doesn’t have much of a chance for his proposal to go through anyway.

“This is not gonna fly. You know that. They don’t have enough votes,” Daley said.

Read the rest of this story ...