PLANS to install a new pontoon to moor up to 132 boats in the estuary at Kingsbridge have won town council support.
Salcombe Harbour Board had originally put forward three ideas for the head of the estuary but was sent back to the drawing board after the council criticised them.
Following consultation, the harbour board has now come up with a fourth plan which the town council and boat users are happy with.
A spokesman said the new proposal includes 132 pontoon berths with improved access via a bridge; retains the use of the current ferry landing and access for the Rivermaid; it reduces the visual impact of
the moorings within the Kingsbridge basin; removes requirement for wall moorings and ladders on the quay wall; and reduces maintenance. The visitors' pontoon landing will be retained and there will be an option to provide dry berthing for visiting yachts.
The disadvantage will be that seven mooring licences on the wall will be lost.
Harbour board chairman Cllr John Carter said: 'We are happy with this decision. The pontoon will be further down so that it doesn't interfere with the head. Hopefully this will entice visitors to come up the estuary to Kingsbridge.'
Cllr Carter said the changes would hopefully be made next winter as planning permission, quotes and tenders were likely to take some time.
When asked how much money the project was likely to cost, Cllr Carter said he didn't want to 'go into figures right now as it could influence the tendering process'.
Town clerk Martin Johnson said that both the town council and the Kingsbridge Estuary Boat Club fell into the 15 reponses to the consultation suggesting a fourth approach.
Mr Johnson said: 'Town councillors were informed that the Kingsbridge Estuary Boat Club had already sighted the revised proposal and supported it. The town council supported the revised proposal as it would vastly improve berthing arrangements in the Kingsbridge basin.'
Kingsbridge Estuary Boat Club chairman John Binns, who is also a town councillor, said: 'We managed to fit a presentation by the harbourmaster into our last meeting at which we had 73 members present and I believe the vast majority of members thought the revised arrangements met most of our requirements for facilities and importantly mitigated the impact on the estuary. About 30 members met later in the meeting to interrogate the proposals more fully and I believe most were very pleased with both the result and that feedback had been listened to.'
The rejected options were:
1. To keep the current berthing arrangements as they are providing 130 berths for vessels of up to 5.5m with 49 on the pontoon and 81 wall moorings. The advantages are that this would require no funds to complete.
2. Provide 124 pontoon berths, six fewer than currently available. It would have improved access via two bridges but be more expensive than the other two options and would provide potential for vandals to jump from quay to pontoon.
3. Provide 148 pontoon berths –with improved access via a bridge. It would also be less expensive than option two, use both sides of the new pontoon, which would be shorter, have improved security and would lose less foreshore.
The initial consultation drew 42 responses, with four supporting option one; two supporting option two; 20 supporting option three; and 15 supporters, including the town council and boat club, who put forward alternative ideas – mainly suggesting maintaining access for the Rivermaid and keeping an area clear at the head of the estuary.
South Hams Council will now look at the proposal.
Comments
This article has no comments yet. Be the first to leave a comment.