The proposal safeguards land for a local centre and employment uses but does not provide for the delivery of these components of the development. In the absence of a robust delivery strategy and due to concern about the employment component in particular being attractive to the market place, there is considerable uncertainty that the full scheme would be delivered, resulting in a real risk of an isolated commuter settlement without a genuine mix of uses, contrary to paragraphs 7, 17, 19, 38 and 95 of the National Planning Policy Framework. Nothwithstanding the presumption under paragraph 14 of the NPPF, the adverse impacts would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits of the scheme.

The local planning authority considers that there are reasonably available sites within the Borough on Flood Zone 1 that could accommodate the proposed development. These sites are therefore sequentially preferable to the proposed development site which is located, in part, on land within zones 2 and 3. For this reason, the proposal is contrary to guidance within the National Planning Policy Framework at paragraph 100 which states that inappropriate development at risk of flooding should be avoided, and paragraph 101 which states that development should not be permitted if there are reasonably available sites appropriate for the proposed development. The proposal is also contrary to ID: 7 paragraphs 018 and 019 of Planning Practice Guidance, which requires new development to be steered towards locations that are at the lowest level of flood risk with sites only considered to be suitable for development where there are no reasonably available sites in flood zones 1 and 2. The proposal does not constitute sustainable development as defined by paragraph 7 of the National Planning Policy Framework and is contrary to policy CS16 of the Charnwood Local Plan Core Strategy 2006-2028.

Whilst it is acknowledged that the Council does not have sufficient housing land available to meet housing needs for a five year period and that there is a presumption in favour of sustainable development, the benefits secured by the additional supply of housing land does not outweigh the cumulative detrimental impacts of the development considered to be those to the setting of heritage assets known as Cotes Scheduled Ancient Monument, Cotes Old Hall, Manor Farmhouse and Hall Farm; the siting of the development in relation to this sensitive Wolds and Soar Valley landscape, due to the prominence of part of the residential development, and dominance of employment development in its location on this prominent slope and significant detrimental visual effect on the open character of the land when viewed from adjacent Public Rights of Way; the significant loss of 89ha of Best and Most Versatile land; the harm to biodiversity including to bats and loss of ecological networks. Taken together notwithstanding the presumption under paragraph 14 of the NPPF, these cumulative adverse impacts significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits of the development in meeting the Borough's housing supply shortage and therefore the proposal fails to contribute to the achievement of sustainable development in performing the environmental role of sustainable development, contrary to paragraphs 6 and 7 of the NPPF. The proposal is also thereby contrary to paragraphs 17, 109, 112, 117, 118, 132 and 134 of the National Planning Policy Framework and does not therefore constitute sustainable development. The proposal is also contrary to policies CS11, CS13, and CS14 of the Charnwood Local Plan Core Strategy 2006-2028 and policies ST/1 and EV/2 of the Borough of Charnwood Local Plan 2004.

The River Soar, floodplain and Great Central Railway line and embankments result in a lack of direct connectivity between the development and the existing urban area of Loughborough. The proposal would not be in a location where services are readily and safely accessible by walking and cycling particularly and is not particularly well located or sufficiently accessible to support Loughborough's Priority Neighbourhoods. Taken together with doubts about the proposal's ability to deliver sufficient community facilities to achieve a genuinely mixed use development the proposal is therefore contrary to Leicestershire County Council policy, contained in the Local Transport Plan 3 which seeks to deliver new development in areas where travel distances could be minimised, and genuine, safe and high quality choices are available (or could be provided) for people to walk and cycle to services nearby. The proposal is contrary to policy TR/6 of the Borough of Charnwood Local Plan 2004 and policies CS6 and CS17 of the Charnwood Local Plan Core Strategy 2006-2028. The proposal is unacceptable and considered contrary to the aims of paragraphs 17, 32, 34, 37, 69, 70 and 95 of the National Planning Policy Framework and does not therefore constitute sustainable development as specified within paragraphs 7 and 8 of the National Planning Policy Framework. Notwithstanding the presumption under paragraph 14 of the NPPF, the adverse impacts would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits of the scheme.