Do we need the reservoir?

I write further to the article “Reservoir plans are unveiled in Crich” in this week’s paper, as I was amazed by the lack of balance on this occasion compared to your normally excellent standard.

The article presented the views of Severn Trent on the importance of this reservoir, yet did not mention that their lack of maintenance has resulted in the failure of the roof structure.

Although concerns about traffic and noise were mentioned, there was nothing about the impact that the loss of land will have on several local farmers due to the needless extension of the project beyond the current land boundaries of Severn Trent. By Andy Dawe’s own admission, the project could be undertaken within Severn Trent boundaries, retaining a perimeter barrier of trees and augmenting the current access with a short roadway from Chadwick Nick Lane to Crich Common. Such a proposal would have much less impact, be it measured in terms of noise, dust, flora or fauna.

The trees that would be cut down are conifers rather than typical local woodland and would need to be felled anyway to gain access to the construction site.

There was also no mention of the 300,000 vehicle movements which will arise from the project on our small lanes. The current proposal will mean four and a half years of misery for many nearby residents plus a permanent loss of income for the farmers.

It would be good if a response from a resident or the Parish Council were published to demonstrate how the current infeasible proposals could be developed into a more reasonable plan, if indeed the scheme is “vital” to the East Midlands.

Paul Eastwood