Old Cart & Horses To Be Demolished

[Guest Lakin]

I am trying to find out as much information about a pub called the (old cart and horses)
at 2 Wortley Rd high green Sheffield S35 4LU. Some one as found info that it dates back to
1643 but some one at the council says it dates back to the 1500s.
Its in a Special Character Area.
A well known supermarket is trying to get it demolished to fit a supermarket on the land.
Lots of people are trying to get this stopped but the supermarket will not listen to reason.
Information could help stop it from been demolished.

[RichardB]

Plenty of places for supermarkets other than this, even if it doesn't survive as a Pub ...

[RichardB]

Old Cart and Horses
2 Wortley Road, Mortomley, High Green
Open 1822

1822 Sarah Castege [ Cart & Horses ]
1851 George Beardshall
1861 Mary Beardshall
1865 Mrs M Beardshall
1876 Joseph Cartledge
1879 Mrs Mary Cartledge
1881 Mrs Mary Cartledge
1883 William Henry Campsall
1887 to 1891 William Henry Campsall
1893 William Henry Campsall
1895 -6 William Henry Campsall
1898 Mrs Elizabeth Campsall
1900 to 1905 Mrs Elizabeth Campsall
1907 John T Campsall
1910 - 11 John T Campsall
1912 -13 Michael Rowland
1916 - 17 Michael Rowland
1919 to 1922 Michael Rowland
1923 to 1925 Mrs Ellen Rowland
1929 Mrs Ellen Rowland
1931 - 32 Mrs Ellen Rowland
1933 Mrs Ellen Burke
1936 to 1939 Albert Kinch [ Ye Old Carte & Horses ]
1942 Albert Kinch
1944 Albert Kinch
1948 Albert Kinch [ Ye Old Carte & Horses ]


Picture Sheffield Image

[Guest Lakin]

The land & building was sold by Gwendolen Mary Duchess of
Norfolk & Baroness Herries on the 26 April 1924 too Thomas Rawson & Company
Limited.

It was an old coaching inn before being a pub.
Photo from inside the old cart & horses.
As you can see it as thick wood lintels & thick wood supports holding the building up.
What period were these type of building techniques used.

[Guest Lakin]

I found this to be an intresting test case.

Restrictive Covenants - the "Nuisance and Annoyance" test

We recently reported on the case of Margerison -v- Bates and the necessity of carefully checking title deeds for restrictive covenants that could adversely affect plans to alter or extend a property.

A second case has recently been considered in the High Court which had a very surprising outcome and which reinforces our advice that it is always prudent to have title documents carefully checked before money is spent on carrying out alterations to a property which might 'upset the neighbours'.

In the case of Dennis -v-Davies, Mr. Davies was the owner of a property on a small estate next to the River Thames and he obtained planning permission to build a three storey side extension to his house. Five of his neighbours, led by Mr. Dennis, wanted to stop him building the extension but there was no specific restrictive covenant in either Mr. Davies's or the neighbour's deeds preventing the building from being extended. The neighbours therefore used the rather ingenious argument of claiming that the extension would breach a covenant, to which Mr. Davies's property was subject, namely that he should not do anything with his property which might cause or become "a nuisance or annoyance" to any of the neighbouring properties. The neighbours argued that the extension would wholly or partially obscure their views of the adjacent river and the court decided that the loss of view from three of the five houses would indeed be significant and constitute an annoyance within the meaning of the covenant.

The judge in the case held that the test of "annoyance" is whether "reasonable people, having regard to the ordinary use of a house for pleasurable enjoyment, would be annoyed or aggrieved" and that this must be judged by "robust and common sense standards"! It is generally well established law that there is no right to a view, but in this case the group of neighbours, perhaps surprisingly, succeeded in using the covenant to protect their river view.

This case is a further warning to homeowners that title deeds must be carefully checked to see whether there are any restrictive covenants that need to be considered before any building work starts. Even if there is no specific restriction on building, there could well be a "nuisance or annoyance" covenant which might otherwise thwart building plans.

[ukelele lady]

Hi Lakin, could you tell us which year this was written?

[Guest Lakin]

Hi Lakin, could you tell us which year this was written?

2009

[ukelele lady]

2009

I thought it would have been much earlier than that.

[Guest Lakin]

These are pictures from inside the old cart & horses. I am trying to find out more information about its dates.

I have made a plan map of the building & put the numbers of the pictures on it where they were taken.

I believe pictures 42 to 63 are the oldest part of the building.

Q1 What were the wheels in the walls used for & dates. pic 60/61/62

Q2 What was the long piece of wood on the wall used for. pic 45/47

[Guest Lakin]

Pictures 1 to 65

[ukelele lady]

What a great set of pictures, I now know the place inside out although I've

never been there.

Is the Chinese restaurant a seperate concern and do they also do English food?

[Guest Lakin]

No its all one building so the Chinese restaurant would go.

Do they also do English food. Yes Chips

[Guest Lakin]

I worked my backside off to save this pub. 3 months hard work. Went on 16 April to town council to see if it was a pass or fail. I hit them with every thing i had. I won them. 9 out 9 said reject. What a result.

[RichardB]

Congratulations !,all your hard work has paid off then. Well done.

I worked my backside off to save this pub. 3 months hard work. Went on 16 April to town council to see if it was a pass or fail. I hit them with every thing i had. I won them. 9 out 9 said reject. What a result.

[ukelele lady]

Congratulations Lakin. They've seen sense at last.

How could anyone demolish a building as old as that for yet another supermarket.

Well done, let's hope nothing changes their minds about this in years to come.

[vox]

And from me too. Well done