• Forum/Server Upgrade If you are reading this you have made it to the upgraded forum. Posts made on the old forum after 26th October 2023 have not been transfered. Everything else should be here. If you find any issues please let us know.

Fat Fluffs needs your help

Just to clarify a couple of things.

If considered expedient to take enforcement action this can be in tandem with any planning appeal as an enforcement notice has a time to come into force and can also be appealed. The compliance date would probably be delayed if a planning appeal is scheduled to be heard.

In fairness, any operations where employees are involved are likely to be a change of use. Pre planning advice is always given on a without prejudice basis and dependent on the information provided. For example, enquiries about sheds in residential curtilages would be based on permitted development rights for residential uses. If the COU was not mentioned at this stage then the advice would have been on maintaining the status quo.

I think a case can be made for Very special circumstances, it's always about how you package it. The planning officers report is clear that refusal is procedural on Green Belt grounds, there is no perceived amenity impacts and from what I can see limited visual impact issues. The best thing that fat fluffs can do before planning committee is to work on a speech which works on hearts and minds for members as this may help them think about the extent to which they may be amenable to overturning their officers recommendation.
 
Several years ago a rescue run by a lady called Sally Machel in Watford was forced to close as her neighbours said she was running a business as she had boarders to support the finance for running the rescue.

She had hutches and runs in a very large back garden -

In the end she was forced to close and was so upset about the ill-feeling by neighbours that she sold up and moved.

Really it was just a couple of neighbours who wanted to sell their land for building and were worried the rescue would have put off buyers.

So sad.

We are SO lucky that our neighbours all have various outbuildings etc and no one in the village minds. We are opposite the hay farm which has loads and loads of barns etc (obviously) as part of the farmyard for his hay and straw, and then last year they started putting up various sheds etc in fields for pheasant rearing, and someone else in the village has a hundred parrots in massive aviary systems, and the other farmer has cow barns . . . then there are the couple who have converted the garage . . . our massive run and bunny chalets are just seen as 'normal' round here!!!
 
This is dreadful:( The rabbit situation around here would be even worse without them. They don't deserve this, they do such a good job.

I hope that if the decision goes against the building work they can still use hutches and aviaries at least. We try to keep all our rabbits outside as they prefer it anyway. Usually we only have the guinea pigs in the barn.
 
Planning application update

Ive been and found the actual planning committee report for this. You can see the report at http://eservices.solihull.gov.uk/mgInternet/documents/s17994/Report%20by%20the%20Head%20of%20Development%20Management.pdf

The rest of the documents can be accessed from this link to the agenda, all item 7
http://eservices.solihull.gov.uk/mgInternet/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=251&MId=3659&Ver=4

@Hannah - have you seen the actual planning reports? They seem to be dismissing the very special circumstances aspect.

Reading the report, it does not look good. They are recommended refusal. Report says 82 letters and emails of support have been received, together with 23 letters and emails of objection (including from the Hampton Society, Hampton in Arden Parish Council and Cllr Rolf).

Its too late to comment on the planning application, but for anyone who feels they would like to be 'proactive' here is a link listing the members of the planning committee which if you click on each it gives you an email address for each which you can use to express your concerns.
http://eservices.solihull.gov.uk/mgInternet/mgCommitteeDetails.aspx?ID=251

Its an election year, general and local, and no councillor wants bad publicity at the moment. Some of those on planning committee are up for election this year. Lets show them the power of social media and online forums!
 
Last edited:
I have seen them - I am assuming there will be an appeal. This should be supported by a strong case for VSC as there is the opportunity to make the case to the Planning Inspectorate. Fat fluffs should get a planning consultant to support them in pulling together, there are a number of good ones out there who won't cost the earth and are worth their salt in helping sort this out. Details for West Midlands ones can be found at https://www.rtpiconsultants.co.uk/static/files/regional/WestMidlands.pdf

Slight disclaimer here - I am a planning consultant but not based in the west mids so not touting for work, trying to give helpful advice only.
 
Hello all,

I've not been on here for a while but as a founder trustee (now retired) alongside Chloe and others of Fat Fluffs I thought it would be good to comment.

The rescue recently moved along with Chloe and Andy from Solihull where they had been for seven years with no issue from solihull council. This is the same council which is currently requesting the application.

It is true that the rescue is currently on green belt land which covers a small proportion of Chloe's back garden. If the sheds had been put closer to the house they would not be on green belt. At no point during the sale were Chloe and Andy made aware that any proportion of the land was green belt either by the estate agent or during the searches. If they had, they would not have bought the house. The green belt is 100% a back garden, a fairly normal back garden in the middle of a fully developed road. It is not a field or an open space, although it does back on to farmland.

The sheds are fully within permitted development rights, be it green belt or not if a not for profit charitable organisation can be considered a hobby as it has been done in Solihull for 7 years. In terms of this current application my understanding is that it does not matter where the sheds have been built gb or no gb. If the council decides that the activities going on in the shed are more than a hobby it needs change of use. There is no legal definition of hobby.

Fat fluffs do have a planning advisor who has been helping them all the way through and has asked to speak for them at the hearing as he is fully supportive.

It would be a terrible shame to loose Fat Fluffs who not only spend a great deal of time and effort rehousing or providing sanctuary to needy bunnies including those which cannot be re homed, they also offer a tremendous amount to the local community. The local college sends young adults there on animal husbandry courses for volunteer work/experience. It provides a place for those who are considering vet science a place to volunteer. It has visited local children's groups including special needs providing fun and informative sessions. It provides adult eduction in the local area by talking to people at a large number of events and the like by talking to people and giving out leaflets on how to look after your rabbits and stressing the importance of neutering, stopping people getting in to the severe repocussions that can occur through mis treatment or out of control breeding.

You can sign the petition and if you live in the local area comment on the application, contact the councillors, mp, local news and Tv and so on. Believe me when I say Chloe and Andy have been overwhelmed by the support they have received any everything that you can do is hugely appreciated.

Lucy
 
Last edited:
We managed to register our support for Fat Fluffs application and have encouraged people to support the application via FB

I agree with the earlier comment that the area is rather conservatives with potentially lots of NIMBY types. It's worrying that one of the objectors is a councillor.

I'm sure I saw some positive news on FB that over 2000 registers of support had been sent in, so fingers crossed the board are compassionate.
 
The councillor is a good friend of the neighbour that first objected to the council ( nb not the immediate next door neighbours who have been extremely supportive). We hope that the weight of the councillor will be reduced as it is not an unbiased assessment.
 
Signed, commented, retweeted (therefore shared on FB too), and seen on other people's FBs who aren't on here: it's getting good support but who knows what'll be enough!
 
:wave: Thank you for clearing that up Lucy. I didn't think they would knowingly build on green belt.

Lets hope for good news tomorrow!
 
Today is decision day for Fat Fluffs. I so hope they are able to remain open, I have everything crossed for a good outcome.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

C
Amazon links for litterbox and carpet?
Replies
18
Views
321
CookieDough4Ever
C
J
One rabbit is less interested in bonding than the other?
Replies
11
Views
2K
tonibun
T
InspectorMorse
The Cost of Veterinary Treatment
2 3
Replies
47
Views
4K
Barn Yard Bunnies
Barn Yard Bunnies
Back
Top