# Berry Hill Phase 2 (Plots 9A, 9B, 10, 12A), Mansfield

- **Decision:** allowed, 7 September 2026
- **Decided by:** Planning Inspector: Elaine Moulton
- **Authority:** Mansfield (East Midlands)
- **Appeal reference:** APP/X3025/W/25/3370422
- **Application reference:** 2025/0159/VCON
- **Procedure:** written-representations
- **Development:** s73 variation/removal of highway conditions on reserved-matters approval for 484 dwellings (strategic urban extension SUE3)
- **Homes:** 484
- **Site context:** settlement-edge
- **Green Belt:** no
- **Framework applied:** August 2026 NPPF
- **Determinative policies:** DM6, TR4
- **Development plan policies:** Mansfield District Local Plan 2013-2033 SUE3, IN8, IN9
- **Main issues:** highway safety effect of varying conditions
- **Tags:** tier-2, transitional-no-consultation, s73-conditions, old-style-acp, large-scheme

## Summary
Bellway's non-determination s73 appeal to vary or remove five highway conditions on reserved matters for 484 homes at the Berry Hill urban extension, Mansfield. Allowed, with a full planning permission issued and the disputed conditions reworded rather than simply removed.

## What made the difference
The inspector held that a s73 application on a reserved-matters approval results in a new full permission (DL ¶¶5–8), then reworded the parking, bus-route and visibility conditions so that they meet the DM6 tests without leaving a highway-safety harm (DL ¶38). The 2026 Framework was applied without seeking further submissions, because the relevant policy had "not been significantly changed" (DL ¶10).

## Policy findings
- **DM6: pass.** conditions 10 and 13 reworded (not deleted) to meet DM6 tests; condition 11 replaced by bin-collection-point condition; 'unless otherwise agreed' tailpieces removed (DL 13, 38-44)
- **TR4: pass.** no conflict with local highway-safety policy IN9 once conditions amended (DL 38)

## Key facts
- A s73 application cannot grant a new reserved-matters approval; allowing it produces a full planning permission (DL 5-8; Fulford PC [2019] EWCA Civ 1359 distinguished)
- Framework published during the appeal; "policy content insofar as it relates to the main issues ... has not been significantly changed", so no further submissions sought (DL 10)
- Costs application made (separate decision, not read)

## Sources
- https://acp.planninginspectorate.gov.uk/ViewDocument.aspx?fileid=66048769

---

Source: https://planningdistilled.org/research/england/nppf-navigator/decisions/APP-X3025-W-25-3370422.html

A summary of a public planning decision, written from the decision letter. Not legal advice. © Planning Distilled. Released under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/): share and adapt freely, with credit to Planning Distilled. Quotations from decision letters, plans and the Framework remain the copyright of their publishers.