Penrhos Home PagePenrhos home page site mapSite MapPlanning stuff

[prepared for the 2000 application for a low impact dwelling for a permaculture (sustainable) holding]





We are writing to you in your capacity as members of the Snowdonia National Park Planning Committee regarding our application for a permanent dwelling for our holding ( NP5/60/7G). We had hoped to be able to meet some of you in person prior to the committee but the current crisis has prevented this.

The reason we are writing is because we believe you may not have received enough information to enable you to judge our case. We would like to draw your attention to some relevant points from documents submitted with previous applications (which we wrote at the request of the Authority) and also from the Authority’s Officers’ reports. We appreciate that you are busy people and therefor may not have time to read all the evidence that we included with our applications.

These are the points we would like to make.



Planning officers dealing with the applications in 1995 and 1998 plainly state in letters to us (or our solicitor) that viability is required in order to justify consideration of a permanent dwelling; no mention is made of policy. We have been encouraged by the Authority to follow this route.

Furthermore, the Environmental Policy officer shows in his report how the application does not need to go against policy and how the Authority can maintain adequate controls thus avoiding setting a precedent (we have highlighted this in his report, no. 2).

Agricultural Liaison Officer’s report (no. 1)

During the time the liaison officer has been following the case (late 80’s) he has only actually visited the site on one occasion (1995 in the company of the then planning officer and the ecologist). As far as I am aware his latest report is based on driving past the holding. I do not recall him ever asking me anything about permaculture design or what we are doing.


The report states that;

"What is practised today at Penrhos Isaf (horse training) has moved away from the ideas set out with the previous planning application."

This is simply not the case. We submitted a detailed description in support of the previous application (1998, at the request of the Authority); this showed how the horse training fitted in with the other incomes of the holding and how they each supported each other (permaculture design). Horse training is also mentioned in both the 1991 and 1995 applications and was not objected to then. There is therefore no justifiable reason to exclude the earnings from horse training from the overall income of the holding.

In the third point, relating to income, the figures presented by the officer are spurious. In order to arrive at this figure it is necessary to include in the expenses food for three, clothing, fuel and power (including driving to outside work), drawings (including loan repayments) and capital investment in the holding; also, to subtract the monetary value of what we eat or otherwise utilise from the holding (which is not inconsiderable). And of course to include all the expenses and capital investment relating to the horse training.

The purpose of the outside work was to raise funds to develop the holding so of course all that income gets used up. That’s what its for; its like a subsidy or grant but we’ve raised it ourselves. This outside income has now fulfilled its function and will be ending in July 2001 as it is no longer necessary. Figures for the holding when loans had been repaid and the outside work finished were not mentioned. We provided written explanations of all this back in 1998.

We hope you will consider the highlighted points on the enclosed documents. We thank you for your time.


Yours sincerely,

Chris, Lyn and Sam Dixon

Penrhos Home PagePenrhos home page site mapSite MapPlanning stuff