CA-2024-002732 - [2025] EWCA Civ 958

In the course of the inquiry, participants made submissions about the SKM review of the green belt. The judge described the SKM review at paragraphs 12 to 16 of her judgment in the following terms so far as material:

“12.

In the course of the appeals, the parties made submissions on the SKM Review which was published in two parts by Sinclair Knight Merz. The 1st Stage SKM Review was the ‘Green Belt Review Purposes Assessment’ Final Report 2013. The 2nd Stage SKM Review was the 'Green Belt Review Sites & Boundaries Study' Report 2014.

13.

The 1st Stage SKM Review analysed the Green Belt of Dacorum Borough Council, St Albans City and District Council, and Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council. It did this by breaking down the Green Belt into ‘Strategic sub-areas’ for analysis. The Appeal Sites both fell within sub-area 'SA-S8 - Enclosed land at Chiswell Green Lane at Chiswell Green (GB25) …..

14.

The 1st Stage SKM Review recommended that eight strategic sub-areas be further reviewed and assessed in the 2nd Stage SKM Review. This included SA-S8.

15.

The 2nd Stage SKM Review analysed S8 at Section 10. At Section 11.2 it ranked all 8 sub-areas depending on their suitability for Green Belt release and future development. S8 was ranked top …with a finding that it was “the most suitable site” for development. Appeal A Site was found to be the least sensitive part of the sub-Area 8 (Inspector's Report paragraph 542 (“IR/542”)). Appeal B Site was found to be more sensitive and it was not recommended for release from the Green Belt for housing (see IR/312 and IR/550).

16.

The 1st and 2nd Stage SKM Reviews were part of the evidence base for the Council's emerging Local Plan in 2019 which was withdrawn at the invitation of the Examining Inspectors. The Examining Inspectors raised concerns about some of the methodology used in the 2nd Stage SKM Review. Therefore the Council decided to commission a new 2nd Stage review from Arup. The Inspector found that these concerns had no bearing on the issues in these appeals (IR/531).”