This is an HTML version of an attachment to the Freedom of Information request 'Site allocation BR05'.

To: 
@roadends.plus.com
Subject: RE: Waste Consultation - 8th February
this is just to acknowledge that your e-mail and comments have arrived safely.
We will write with a more detailed response in due course.
Regards,
Minerals & Waste Policy Team
-----Original Message-----
From: 
@roadends.plus.com 
@roadends.plus.com]
Sent: 06 February 2010 18:24
To: ECE - Minerals and Waste Development Framework
Subject: Waste Consultation - 8th February
I am emailing you my comments regarding the proposed waste sites covered by your
current consultation.
CA24 Hespin Wood:
I think this is an appropriate site given its existing use and distance from
private residences. However, with the forthcoming Shanks Waste site also
proposing to take considerable volumes of waste from Allerdale, there are
concerns over the cummulative traffic impact. I understand Shanks are keen to
get an access point from the M74 rather than rely on the alternative access
points. The new non-motorway route can support some HGV's but the other roads
around Hespin Wood are wholly unsuitable for HGVs
CA28 Rockcliffe
I disagree. Although the site is well removed from private residences, the
supply roads are not appropriate for HGV traffic. We already have considerable
HGV traffic on the C1015 and C1016 roads. This traffic has increased over the
years (BSW timber, Story Ballast yard, other industrial estate logistics. The
road is regularly damaged and safety is a major issue. If these sites are to be
put forward for further development, the surrounding infrastructure needs to be
upgraded. See attached picture of junction of C1015/C1016 near Rockcliffe.
CA29 Heathlands
I disagree. This site is close to Harker Road Ends private dwellings and the
C1015 access road already has traffic volume issues - particularly the route
from Kingstown past Crindledyke. The alternative access from Carlisle via the
C1016 is not viable as described in CA28 above. We already have seagull pest
issues with the Heathlands site and I suspect this would exacerbate this
problem.
CA30 Kingmoor Road
I disagree. This existing site already has issues regarding safe entry and exit
to the site. On a number of occasions, large items of debris have been found on
the road outside the site which have posed a serious safety issue. In addition,

the sites proximity to private dwellings means that any expansion is
unacceptable. Routes from Etterby to the site are not suitable for HGVs.
CA31 Kingmoor Park East
This is a more appropriate site given it is within the boundaries of the
Kingmoor Park estate and is potentially accessible from the forthcoming CNDR. As
stated repeatedly above, the CNDR is probably the only route that should be used
by HGVs accessing the site. Control orders should be in place to
minimise/prevent HGV traffic to any proposed site using minor roads.