top of page

INCOMING MAIL


Letter from Oz

Dear Editor,


G'day. Some years back before the Pandie buggered everything, I made a pilgrimage to

the hub of Anglicanism - good old Canty Cath. During my visit, friends recommended I visit

Faversham's Shep's Brewery to sample their famous amber nectar. However, I only got within

200 yards of the place when I was hit by a pong stronger than that of an outback goldminers's

dunnee so I never got to swallow a Bishop's.


Recently, I returned to your neck of the woods and my Pommie mates assured me that Sheps

had cleaned up their act. They lied, mate. I hadn't even gotten within sight of the bloody place when the same ordurial miasma hit my olfactory senses and damn well nearly killed them dead!


So, no swallowing a Bishop's yet again! You Faversham Pommes seem a pretty bloody

subservient lot to put up with all that. Good luck and g'day.


Yours sincerely,

The Reverend Beryl O'Toole

St Bruces Congregational, Woonamarra Queensland, Australia


 

Dear Faversham Eye,


Good article re house building, surely it must now be apparent that the government is using

house building using private financing to kick start the economy after the downturn caused

by Brexit. What exactly is affordable housing? Developers won’t allow prime positions to

become affordable and who monitors their pricing? How many of the recent developments are fully sold and how many of the plots are being purchased by property companies for

rental income.


As stated developers are not interested in whether infrastructure is capable of sustaining

population increases. An economy built on property ownership is doomed to failure.


Bob Hawes

 

Dear Faversham Eye


Yet again I enjoyed reading the Faversham Eye, thankyou, it’s great to have it back again!

However, I’m disappointed with its coverage of the Creek footpath at Faversham Reach/

Waterside Close.


Although I can imagine that it must have been a real shock for the said close inhabitants to find retrospectively that their houses/ gardens were built across footpaths, to allow this not to be rectified could set a precedent to other (perhaps unscrupulous, at least neglectful) developers.


Unfortunately, the council have missed a trick by not enforcing a footpath along the whole of

the creek in the first place-the opposite side of the creek to Waterside close is practically a gated community like many other modern properties built along waterways. I agree that it’s a shocking amount to be spent on the whole business and you are left wondering how a footpath could have been ‘missed’ off the initial plans 30 years ago! Hopefully lessons will be learnt, and councils will be more vigilant at the planning stage. It’s a shame that the developer (developers always seem to get away with things these days) isn’t expected to foot the bill for their part of the mistake.


All the best,

Naomi Blunt

コメント


bottom of page