Rails House Farm: Sheffield City Council decision over plan to flatten 18th century farmhouse

A planning official has issued a statement about proposals for an 'executive home' in the green belt
Watch more of our videos on Shots! 
and live on Freeview channel 276
Visit Shots! now

Lauren Thorpe and Ryan Lawson applied to flatten Rails House Farm on Rails Road in the Rivelin Valley due to difficulties modernising it, including rising damp. They wanted to replace it with a stone-built house ‘in line with modern standards...making use of eco-friendly technologies and modern insulation to provide our forever home’.

They hired experts Rocket Heritage and Archaeology who argued the farm buildings, which are not listed, are ‘not remarkable’ with no original features. And the Rivelin Valley had been ‘strongly industrial’ and its rural nature was relatively modern.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

The firm added: “One former farmhouse alone does not create the tangible character of the Rivelin Valley, and that were it to be demolished those same characteristics of the landscape would still be largely appreciable’.

The proposal sparked dozens of objections over the ‘needless destruction of heritage’, harm to the landscape and environmental impact. Hallamshire Historic Buildings described it as looking like a ‘suburban executive-style dwelling’.

Lauren Thorpe and Ryan Lawson applied to replace Rails House Farm on Rails Road in the Rivelin Valley due to difficulties modernising it, including rising damp. Lauren Thorpe and Ryan Lawson applied to replace Rails House Farm on Rails Road in the Rivelin Valley due to difficulties modernising it, including rising damp.
Lauren Thorpe and Ryan Lawson applied to replace Rails House Farm on Rails Road in the Rivelin Valley due to difficulties modernising it, including rising damp.

Now a city council planning official has written to the couple.

In a letter she wrote it would be ‘inappropriate development in the Green Belt’, would result in the ‘total loss of a non-designated heritage asset’ and damage the character of the landscape.

It states: "There are no public benefits that would outweigh the harm".

And for those reasons the application was refused.