The condition stipulated that before development began a scheme should be submitted detailing how improvements would be made to nursery, primary and secondary provision in the area. The council argued that the condition made no reference to a financial contribution and cited a unitary development plan (UDP) policy supporting improvements to educational facilities directly related to development. It preferred a condition to a planning obligation to cut administration costs.
The inspector found it unclear how the appellant could improve school facilities without making a financial contribution and noted that the council's statement mentioned that it was seeking £13,200 to deal with the matter. The UDP referred to planning obligations to deal with such matters and did not mention conditions, he remarked. More fundamentally, he added, the council did not challenge the appellant's claim that there was no educational provision deficiency in the area.
Inspector: Tony Davison; Written representations