TMBC 2022 LOCAL PLAN CONSULTATION BEGINS 22 September to 3rd November

Simplified forms and shortened questionnaire below

Please have a go at this consultation, even if you just copy and paste my short version, the more responses we get in the better, even if you do no more than write " Stop Borough Green Garden City, Protect Greenbelt and AONB, once it has gone, it is gone forever" just email it to


TMBC's scheme last time was to launch as a consultation "The Way Forward", effectively a draft Local Plan, which they theoretically amended to include all our concerns. The actual truth was it went forward unchanged and fell flat on its face.

So this time they are asking questions about every possible element that is needed to build the Local Plan, and they then theoretically  draft a plan that reflects what we have said. But it is so hugely complex, with even the basic documents running to some 1300 pages - even I didn't read it all.


These are the important documents:

REGULATION 18 LOCAL PLAN which is drafted as questionnaire, but I have edited it down from 130 pages to 8, that just gives you the basic questions:


Or you can copy mine and edit it to suit

SHORT QUESTIONNAIRE pdf version by Mike       SHORT QUESTIONNAIRE doc version by Mike

But there seem to be "tripwire" questions, and I have written a little guide below

The site maps/locations doc is 1300 pages long, so I have included our sites by Ward/Parish below



                                                         BOROUGH GREEN GARDEN CITY SITE  

 GREEN BELT STUDY   This is where TMBC attempt to justify using Greenbelt Land in preference to other unconstrained sites in the Borough to push a large lump of their development needs into our little Green Corner

To be honest, I can't make head nor tail of their sustainability scoring, and as we are not yet commenting on specific sites, it makes sense to defer any comment on that until the Regulation 19 Consultation next year

 INTERIM SUSTAINABILITY APPRAISAL          Site List inc maps and locations

 INTERIM SUSTAINABILITY REPORT    Contains site list numbers and sustainability markers 





There are several questions where TMBC are trying to put Borough Green across as a major centre which they will use to justify turning us from a village into a major town

Q2 We should be in "Other Rural Settlements" not a Rural Service Centre.

Q30 & 31 Again, Borough Green should not be a "District Centre", it should be down with the other Rural Local Retail Centres, we are a hub village for our rural neighbours



Q5 we need to select Option 1, all development outside Greenbelt

Q6 On the grounds that once Greenbelt is gone, it is gone forever, and Greenbelt's main use is openness and to prevent "Coalescence of Settlements", a posh way of saying we don't sprawl into each other, and remain separate and unique villages.

Q41 It is a fundamental principle that you only develop Greenbelt when there are no other options, and there are still plenty

Q42 Is not strictly relevant to us, but where possible greenfields should be protected in the rest of the Borough, but not at the expense of Greenbelt, otherwise we will be growing our food in window boxes.



The Office of National Statistics says that our housing need assessment needs 5% for international migration and refugees, 45% for new homes to get first time buyers, all fair enough. But the other 50% is for "Internal Migration", so people can move to the area from houses elsewhere. I can understand building houses for people who do not have a decent home, but why build to attract people to an area where infrastructure is already crumbling under the load. And TMBC are considering an extra 10% on top of that !

Q3, have  to choose Quantum 3, that I put in - ONS less 50%,

Q4  We should be building for housing need, not to make developers rich.

Q 12 as Q4



Q25 we need to select Option 1, if TMBC want houses, build them in Tonbridge, it is  town with all the facilities


Q9, 10 & 11 refer to the strategies being used to develop the Local Plan. It is a bit esoteric, verging on pedantry, but if the whole plan purpose is to develop 15941 houses, then housing itself cannot be a strategy towards that