Charnwood 2026 – Core Strategy Further Consultation – Analysis of Responses

In its response, Leicestershire County Council as Highway Authority have confirmed their view that an eastern distributor road is necessary to address problems of congestion on the local highway network and to support further growth in the town. The County Council raises strong reservations over the robustness of the transport assessment commissioned by Charnwood (the MVA study) to inform the Core Strategy. The Highways Agency has raised similar concerns, as have Hathern Parish Council and other respondents.

It is understood that the Borough Council have asked MVA to undertake further work to assess the impact of alternative proposals for SUEs at Loughborough. Davidsons have offered to assist Charnwood and MVA in this work and have made available the results of further transport assessments undertaken at Davidsons’s expense by Leicestershire County Highways using their Loughborough Transport Model. This further modelling supports the conclusion that an eastern distributor road is a key component of a sustainable transport solution for the town.

Davidsons are also aware of Great Central Railway’s (GCRs) ‘Bridging the Gap’ proposals to re-connect the two sections of the historic railway north of the town. Proposals for east Loughborough would not affect these proposals and could assist with GCRs longer term aspirations. Davidsons have offered to work with the Atkins consultants, appointed by the Borough Council to investigate the feasibility of the ‘Bridging the Gap’ scheme, to ensure that proposals for the east Loughborough sustainable urban extension take full account of the GCR initiative.

English Heritage have made a detailed response to the Council’s proposals for development at Garendon Park. They maintain their in principle objection to an urban extension west of Loughborough due to the unacceptable impact on nationally designated assets – the Garendon Park Historic Park and Garden and associated monuments and listed structures. They emphasise that national planning guidance requires that such nationally important heritage designations receive the highest level of protection.

For east of Loughborough, they confirm their conclusion that Davidsons’ proposals would not have a significant effect on the setting of Prestwold Hall, but express some concerns over the impact on Cotes village and Scheduled Ancient Monument. Davidsons are reviewing their proposals to make sure that any impact can be successfully mitigated and will continue discussions with English Heritage to address any remaining concerns that they have.

Proposals for development west of Loughborough will result in the effective merging of Loughborough with Shepshed. This is a concern expressed by local interest groups and the many local residents who have responded to the consultation. In the Core Strategy, the Borough Council explain that they consider Loughborough and Shepshed to be a single urban system. In its response to the consultation, the Government Office for the East Midlands (GOEM) notes that currently the towns do not function as one urban area, but that development west of the town would support the integration of Shepshed with Loughborough. Further, they consider the proposals to locate an urban extension and Science Park between the towns contradicts the principle of a Loughborough–Shepshed Green Wedge, which has long been a key element of the Borough Council’s planning strategy.

It is important that the Borough Council acknowledges that a western extension to the town would result in the effective merging of Loughborough and Shepshed into one urban system, and the proposals should be judged on this basis.

In the Further Consultation document, the Borough Council present a western urban extension at Garendon Park to provide some 3,500 homes as their preferred development solution. In response to the consultation, Fox Strategic Land have presented proposals for some 3,000 dwellings south-west of Loughborough off Nanpantan Road. They suggest an alternative strategy involving west and south-west Loughborough. Bellway Homes have submitted proposals for a 1,500 home urban extension to the south of the town.

This is the reality of a western growth option. To provide the necessary scale of development and a workable transport solution, this option will necessarily involve development west, south-west and south of the town with a full western relief road extending from Woodthorpe to Dishley. The choice for the Borough Council is between this west and south-western option and an eastern development solution.

Leicestershire Wildlife Trust have raised concerns over the impact of the transport infrastructure associated with an eastern development solution on biodiversity interests within the corridor of the River Soar. Other respondents raise concerns in relation to flood risk associated with infrastructure, and in particular road construction within the floodplain.

For the SUE itself, through careful masterplanning, Davidsons’ proposals seek to ensure that any impact on biodiversity interests is minimised. An eastern distributor road would have to be routed through the floodplain of the River Soar. For the southern section to be provided as part of Davidsons’ development proposals, a further investigation of biodiversity impacts and mitigation is being undertaken. Davidsons have worked with the Wildlife Trust to develop proposals for a new riverside park, which provides an opportunity to create enhanced biodiversity interest.

In the assessment of the Highway Authority, an eastern distributor road is a key element of a package of transport measures necessary to support further growth at Loughborough – wherever it is located around the town. As such, it represents an essential element of transport infrastructure. Davidsons are continuing to engage with the Environment Agency in developing proposals for an eastern distributor road that address issues of flood risk satisfactorily. It should be emphasised that the site proposed for the east Loughborough sustainable urban extension does not itself fall within an area of flood risk.