homepage logo

Resident against foot bridge

By Staff | Apr 30, 2011

I am Judy Shanholtz. I live at 207 Rocky St. I am totally opposed to the development of Rocky Street with a walking bridge for the following reasons:

This will not be a sidewalk in a neighborhood in a high density zoning, residential 2. The will be a bridge in a green space in a secluded wooded area, which is zoned a conservation space.

It doesn’t matter how many hours police are on duty, this is such a secluded area, police will have to get out of their cars and walk the bridge to patrol the area on a regular basis.

The temptation to trespass onto land next to the narrow town owned land will be great. This is a semi-secluded area with little visual contact with the adjacent owners. Past experience of the adjacent owners is that numerous people leave town land to walk up and down the stream, enter buildings next to the run , and climb onto the pillars. Adjacent land owners are understandably nervous about the liability they assume from trespassers from town land. Also, this will draw vandalism.

I have heard the SRRP are indicating that if they cannot develop Cullison Park into a parking lot for 92 cars that they want to have the walking bridge on Rocky Street. I do not accept that two ought to be put side by side. This is wrong to bait and switch. The two issues have nothing to do with each other. Town government commissioned a scientific survey of Rocky Street conducted in 2010 that stated that mature trees should remain in place and every effort should be made to protect their root systems, in order to assist in maintaining the stability of the slopes along Rocky Street.

I continue to oppose the proposed Cullison Park parking lot. My father, John Thompson, initially intended to purchase the land from Mrs. Cullison, but her wishes were to donate the land to the Corporation of Shepherdstown to be used for a park only. My father donated many hours with his equipment to make the land suitable for a park

If Shepherdstown government accepts certain grant money from the Federal government, then by requirement, you will have to allow so many spaces for RV’s. Perhaps now I understand why SRRP wants running water and toilets at Rumsey Park. Who’s going to pay for water and sewer hook-ups and make the monthly payments? Residents can barely afford to live here on a fixed income now as it is. So definitely I am opposed to the Cullison Park development.