Secret Green Community Saved from Demolition
by Lloyd Alter, Toronto on 09.19.08
Emma Orbach founded the self-sustaining Brithdir Mawr community in Wales. “It’s a milestone in a free society that a minority of people who wish to live simply on the Earth are now being given this opportunity. The villagers are pioneering a new lifestyle.” Down the road, Tony Wrench has been pioneering "permaculture" for decades, and built the Roundhouse, an "ecohome of wood frame, cobwood and recycled window walls, straw-insulated turf roof; with solar power and wind turbine for electricity, compost toilet and reed beds for grey water. "
There was only one problem: They were doing it secretly, on public land in a national park. In 1998 a pilot doing an aerial survey caught a reflection off a plexiglass skylight and the jig was up.
However, according to Times Online, after ten years the park authorities have thrown in the towel in their attempts to evict the community. It seems that the community has become environmentally fashionable.
“The planners did everything they could to get rid of us, but we have been able to prove to them that it is possible to have a sustainable and low-impact community in the countryside,” Mr Wrench said.
“It’s great that our efforts to build a community using renewable resources have now been supported. We had to prove that we were improving the bio-diversity of the area and conserving the woodland – and we did that. " ::Times and Guardian
TreeHugger on Communal Living
Back to the Commune , Man.
PSS: Cohousing
Thirsty for more? Check out these related articles:
- 1.2 MW DeltaStream Tidal Power Turbines to be Tested in Wales
- Has Obama's Inauguration Speech Been Leaked?
- What's so special about Integrity Block?
- We All Live in Pottersville Now
Party Like It’s 5769 And Have Yourself a Sustainable Jewish New Year
|
Lenovo Launches Six New Power-Sipping Monitors
|
Another article iread stated they where doing it on somebodies property that they own and where paying the guy rent.
I'm actually glad that the planners reacted the way they did. I don't want random people building homes in national parks. I understand what they were trying to do, and obviously the planners eventually did as well, but this kind of activity really should be cleared BEFORE it is built. Even the best intentions can have unexpected consequences, and when it is public land those decisions need to be made publicly IMHO.
I agree with ug333. They should have cleared it before hand, although they probably never would have gotten the clearance.
It's a pretty cool story though, and it actually, technically does improve the biodiversity. That's kinda funny.
I think these people are just lazy squatters. Maybe thats how they role in Wales but I dont think its cool for the USA. I think their lifestyle is great if they buy their own land and pay taxes like the rest of us. National Parks are a place for everyone to enjoy in and not for squatters to take over and live in forever.
There is no way they would've gotten permission to do this - sometimes you need to break the rules a little.
Same here. I'm glad the people who moved in were as green as they are, but they set a bad standard by doing this. I mean, what if everyone decided they wanted to live in a public forest and just did it with no regard for the area? We'd quickly be overrun by little hobbit villages and it wouldn't be a forest for very long. I'm glad they can stay (after 10 years in the US you own the land ONLY if you live openly) but I wish they had set it up proper first.
Maybe there should be some new laws to alleviate land taxes and other government expenses to those who live outside society in such areas. I know I wouldn't mind :p
Think of the tens of thousands of homeless people in cities living on public land. Sure, they are nomadic most of the time, but many of them set up living areas underground in tunnels, in parks and underpasses - entire streets in downtown LA are devoted to tents. We are coming into an era where people are living on pubic everywhere. Why punish people for doing it responsibly?
These people have made something really interesting and beautiful and keeping their space well. If they were leaving a big ugly mess in the park that would be another story. Its the thinking mans alternative to the system and i am up for any new ideas at this point!
and hey, id rather see people do this than buy a trackhouse.
"after 10 years in the US you own the land ONLY if you live openly"
Not so. Adverse possesion laws vary by state and many differ on length of time and circumstances. Common law period is 20 years and some states still use this (e.g. Maryland). And generally, you can't acquire title to public property by adverse possession.
Filthy little hobbitses they stole it from us!
-------------------------
"Maybe there should be some new laws to alleviate land taxes and other government expenses to those who live outside society in such areas."
I agree with the sentiment, however ironic - no taxes to those to squat on publically supported land? And even if they live on private land, do they only pay taxes for govt. programs they themselves use? That's like me asking for a tax break because I don't have children in public school. Or because I don't use the public library, or food stamps, or the Smithsonian, etc. For that matter, how about a fat rebate check for wars I don't support?
Where do we draw the line on such a system? And who supports those that can not support themselves?
Public land is public land. The "settlers" should have followed above-board channels, rather than appropriating park land from the public. Even treading lightly, they're still using something that doesn't belong to them.
That said, I love to see people working and using ingenuity to substantially reduce their environmental impacts, rather than philosophizing about potential solutions. Cymru am byth.
It is worth noting that according to the DailyMail, and the RoundHouse owners themselves, that the dwelling is actually built on privately owned farmland, bought by their friends (and founders of the community) Julian and Emma Orbach, to whom they pay rent.
I'm not sure the criticism's here are warranted - apparently they are not on public land or national park, as is being stated here, on the Times and the Guardian.
Imagine the precedent being set here by allowing them to stay. I agree with the other readers here, they should have asked first or be asked to leave.
For info chaps, a 'national park' in the UK covers 'private land' too so they weren't actually squatting on 'public land'. It is a blanket designation to protect an area of special landscape character. They just hadn't applied for consent from the planning authority (the National Park Authority) to actually build a dwelling on the land.