The MSBA supports Faversham Creek Trust in their campaign to restore the swing bridge, which would allow craft such as sailing barges to use the basin at the head of the creek. On Friday 10 December Helen Whately MP met with representatives from Kent County Council, Faversham Town Council, the Faversham Society and the Faversham Creek Trust to discuss progress since their last meeting in June. The Town Council kicked off the meeting with an update on their legal advice. It said the Secretary of State has the power to issue an Abatement Notice under section 43 of the Medway Ports Act 1973 to compel the party with obligations to maintain this bridge, sluice gates and associated works so as to permit navigation again. The Town Council has written to the Secretary of State for Transport asking him to issue this notice. The meeting agreed that supporting the Town Council to achieve this objective was the best way forward. Money currently pledged by Kent County Council, Swale Borough Council, and Faversham Town Council and raised from the community by the Faversham Creek Trust, is not enough to cover the cost of restoring the bridge. We need Peel Ports to play their part to get the bridge back into working order, this would go a long way towards plugging the funding gap for making the creek basin usable again. KCC confirmed that the Faversham community funding is safely held in a separate account except where individual donors have requested and received their donations back. Kent County Council is helping the Town Council to provide the Department of Transport with further information about the bridge and creek. Helen Whately will press the Secretary of State to take this course of action. While this is a positive step forward there is still a long way to go. KCC confirmed that design work on the bridge and sluices is completed and tender documents are ready. Both Helen and KCC have agreed to update residents about progress so far including future designs for the bridge.
Skip to content
Medway and Swale Boating Association
The voice of boating on the tidal Medway and Swale
I hate to be a kill joy, but let’s look logically at the whole project, the bridge, sluice gates, retaining wall on the north side, dreaging of the basin, 4 items but already the brakes are on with just the bridge & gates, all relying on peel ports to stump up the balance, well dream on with that one, unless the goverment order peel ports to stump up the cash then you will be in a no win scenario, and after 5 or10 the comment will be well the hire of the bridge is untenable, and the powers that be have decided due to lack of funds from peel ports, that we will place a large concrete pipe through the basin and overfill the bridge area with aggregate and and top it of with an ashfelt road, and then fill in the basin for luckury flats, it’s what a developer would do just needs a delaying tactics to make it possible, it would be great to have a floating basin in the centre of the town, visitors with yachts with deep keels would welcome a place afloat to visit and good revenue for the town but it’s long term investment, flats are much more profitable all those rates and all that goes with it, the UK is a get rich quick society and a floating basin just don’t cut it, when it started I said then it’s not just the bridge or the gates it’s the basin the retaining wall as well, then it’s a whole project with a result, a floating basin for yachts but how many can you get through on a tide there’s the first problem, will the good old public put up with the bridge raised for half an hour so vising yachts can go through , unlikely the traffic jam would be halfway up the high street, so you need barriers at each end of the road as well to stop traffic before they enter the the bridge access road both ends, it’s not viable and peel ports know it, and without the millions of tons of silt removed to 3 mts below lowest high tide, it’s a waste of money, better to dreage the rest of the creek and maintain that as a serviceable creek and keep those vessels that are here now with the ability to float and access the creek to the town quay,
West India Dock seems to manage lifting bridge across a major highway A1206 in London and if funding the project involves folks admiring me and my boat from the balcony of a posh new waterside flat, no problem.
As with any of the London marinas access could only be tidal and only in and out at pre booked time periods dictated by tidal window.
Faversham is cracking hidden gem and decent bookable visitor moorings there with powwer and water would be honey pot.
Have visited Town Wharf on several occasions with my boat to spend money in the many excellent pubs and eateries the town.
As matter of interest we have members in our boat club who took boats into the area above the lock gates when the old lock gates still held water and opened in the dim and distant past.
Remember MDL stated that they were going to put marina in the old Dockyard basin .
More power to your elbow FBT. 🙂
It’s interesting to see that someone is at least interested in the swing bridge, but marinas in the Thames, charge eyewatering fees, try at Katherine’s dock, that’s £129 a night for my boat, this is because it’s London and hotels are just as expensive, now I say this because yachtsman who go in chandler’s always m Ian about what things cost, and visitors fees are top of the list, faversham creek is a lovely spot to visit and you have the swale to wait for the tide, and boats would come from France Holland Belgium but Brexit will stop that, but there are local clubs who would visit, to be able to float in a basin in the middle of a historic town, but accountants are the ones who decide, and as I said, all need to be on the same train all going the same way, well peel ports have not even bought a ticket, and they have access to dregging equipment, to clear 50 years of mud, and silt, until they are on board, it’s a dead duck, which is a shame as it would be unique for a creek,
Helen Wheatley will sabre rattle at best, all concerned in the council will abide there time as will peel ports until someone in goverment forces them to do something, if not they will say the temporary bridge is costing to much money, and will be forced to buy the temporary bridge with available funds they do have, and that will be the outcome of delaying tactics, there is not a long way to go, in fact it only relies on the goverment to order peel ports to provide the nessasery extra finance and it would be all hands in deck, but that will only get you a bridge and gates, it will not clear the millions of tons of silt, or build a retaining wall in the north side, that will require considerable extra finance so there is the dilemma who pays for that, if one was skeptical one would have to ask what is it for, a small visitors marina with annual berths unlikely planners will be refusing that for decades, an expensive pond, a project has to have a value, and to the owners of the land or basin a return on Thier investment, it seems lots of different people own different bits, and some do not see any decent return for Thier investment, peel ports is one, there may be others in the background who think, put a concrete pipe through it and fill it in and build flats, now there is a very good return for the owners of said land & basin, the end of peel ports commitment, the council get more rates and no investment at all, that’s a very profitable return on investment by developers and landowners adjacent to the basin, and no bridge no gates no problems,.but I live in hope that I am wrong, but business is business profit is profit, investment needs a return, and so far no plan whatsoever of that is in place at all,