1. Skip to navigation
  2. Skip to content
  3. Skip to sidebar




Requirements – single family seastead?

Home Forums Archive Structure Designs Requirements – single family seastead?

This topic contains 22 replies, has 9 voices, and was last updated by Avatar of xmaraner xmaraner 4 years, 3 months ago.

Viewing 8 posts - 16 through 23 (of 23 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #10352
    Avatar of xmaraner
    xmaraner
    Participant

    This topic is an essential starting point for seasteading, and I am glad to see it here, although, it could aguably go into the main TSI forum.

    It seems to me that for the majority of history, colonizers (ie, homesteaders building fixed permanent dwellings ) have been preceded by nomads (small groups living off the land, perhaps seasonally). It seems to me many of the steasteading plans do not take this into account. Therefore I do think that at least initially, modularity is requirement. To a limited degree this also implies that scalability is a requirement.

    Modularity implies a certain standard of construction for units for compatibility. Just as the protocols for communicating between computers allowed the growth of the internet, so too does there need to be a standard of interconnecting seastead units, before growth can take off.

    Before THAT can happen, there needs to be a critical mass of units to connect into a community, which to me implies that the lifestyle has to be appealing enough to entice that many people with the right mix of skills. This is the crux of the question then, and is tough to gage. As Vince says, the market will decide. However, we can (and should) try to anticipate the market.

    With Xmaran, I’ve come to think that the best method to capture the desired market base and define the “protocol” is through open source design. Xmaran is a sail cruiser with a (tileable) hexagonal plan, that I envision as historically comparable to something between a conestoga wagon and a log cabin design. We’re still in the process of defining requirements, and welcome input. Conceptual requirements center on:

    *Cost under $500,000. This is comparable to the range of traditional single family housing as well as in line with the cost of a traditional sail yacht.

    *One unit per family. Comfort and safety should be comparable to land living for a middle class European family (average size 2.5-3 people). Lifestyle will obviously differ and this is an area that can be exploited to attract the critical mass. I say European, because most middle class Americans (and Canadians) are accustomed to too much interior space per family (http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/peo_siz_of_hou-people-size-of-houses) for a reasonably sized sail cruiser. While 5 rooms per unit can easily be achieved with Xmaran, square footage will almost certainly be less than 500sf, in order to keep the vessels in a reasonable cost range and be able dock at most marinas. Exterior spave will of course be greater, and will necessarily dictate temperate locations.

    Greg

    http://Xmaran.org

    #10354
    Avatar of xmaraner
    xmaraner
    Participant

    Absolutely a bargain, and perfectly reasonably for oceanfront property with a water view on six sides! DIYers of course can probably manage it for substantially less.

    Greg

    http://Xmaran.org

    #10355
    Avatar of OCEANOPOLIS
    OCEANOPOLIS
    Participant

    Good luck finding buyers.

    #10357

    Housing cost must be simiar to land based housing (cost per squaremeter) .

    The next neighbour must be at least 100m away of your living room window.

    Connection between individual units of different size and shape must be possible. (strongly individualistic solutions must be possible)

    The SEASTAR concept and GRID SEASTEADING delivers this.

    Wil

    concretesubmarine.com

    #10364
    Avatar of
    Anonymous

    I have a concept for an SFS, I don’t know if it will be stable, but I would like your opinion of the idea of a rooftop ” right of way”.

    The SFS will be 10 mtrs square with walls right on the edge to maximise use of space, it will have 3 floors and a roof, the top floor will be a hydroponic greenhouse for the production of fruit and vegetables so it will have transparent walls and most of the roof will also be transparent, a 2 metre wide path around the edge of the roof will allow people to walk on the roof.

    The SFS will have fenders and flexible couplings to enable adjacent SFS’s to be securely joined with no gap between them, this may create problems with noisy neighbours, but that’s not the subject of this post. There will be a safety rail around the edge of the roof with unlocked gates to allow people to cross from one SFS to it’s neighbour, and in this way people will be able to walk to any other SFS in the community.

    An alternative would be to have walkways between SFS’s allowing some separation, but the connection may not be strong enough to withstand flexing due to wave action.

    Would you object to people crossing your property en-route to another SFS, it would be a way of creating community spirit and making new friends, but if the majority consider it Trespass then the idea is a non-starter.

    #10367
    Avatar of xmaraner
    xmaraner
    Participant

    One way to look at it is that part of each STS is a business, with a storefront and/or office. It is in each propietor’s best interest (depending on their business model) to create public access to their goods and services.

    No doubt, the concept of common property is anathema to many of the libertarians here. However, the idea of forming a community is to leverage synergies of living and working together. There are obvious benefits that accrue to individuals because they are part of a community: safety, security, social options, transportation efficiencies, infrastructural and industrial economies of scale, and economic competition, to name just a few. Although there is a net positive value to these benefits (else who would do it?), there are some costs to maintaining a community. I would suggest that rather than individually setting up rooftop tolls, and/or creating a community tax (cringe), that at least part of the costs of maintaining a community be a default right of way. In a modular system, if someone wants isolation, all they need to do is disconnect from the community and sail away.

    Greg

    http://Xmaran.org

    #10368
    Avatar of
    Anonymous

    Thanks for your reply, it was my intention that others would have free access through each rooftop to reach other SFS’s without charge or hindrance. my SFS includes a workshop that could be used to earn a living and a market stall could be set up on the roof if the product will fit through the doors, otherwise one section of wall on the first floor pivots down to become a loading bay with electric hoist, this prevents SFS’s being linked more than two units wide, but a rectangular block with “holes” in it allows 80 SFS’s to link with all having their loading bays accessible yet only requiring an area of 140 x 100 metres, so it could be surrounded by a floating breakwater and possibly wave power station.

    #10369
    Avatar of xmaraner
    xmaraner
    Participant

    ellmer - http://yook3.com wrote:
    Housing cost must be simiar to land based housing (cost per squaremeter) .

    Housing construction costs will be determined by the technology and the physical demands of the location. Since land based housing has a huge lead (er, thousands of years) in technology, it is simply not reasonable to expect that the housing cost be the same for a seastead as a for a landstead. The structural engineering requirements for a seastead are obviously much greater than they are for a landstead. This is going to be reflected in the cost per square foot. Supply and demand of surface area will eventually trump construction costs, and as land becomes more overcrowded, more people will want to pay a premium for space (and freedom). Freedom ain’t free.

    ellmer - http://yook3.com wrote:
    The next neighbour must be at least 100m away of your living room window.

    Modular living at sea simply isn’t comparable to land living. In an Xmaran community, if you don’t like your neighbors you move your unit somewhere else. Because they are sail powered, the cost of moving is negligible. The reduction in freedom of mobility by foot is more than offset by the freedom of mobility of the entire SFS.

    ellmer - http://yook3.com wrote:
    Connection between individual units of different size and shape must be possible. (strongly individualistic solutions must be possible)

    The SEASTAR concept and GRID SEASTEADING delivers this.

    I agree that customization is a requirement, but there has to also be some standard of conformity, and aguably some standard of structural integrity, since flotsam can be a serious safety concern for the community, especially in a storm. For Xmaran, I envision as many flavors as there are of linux OS.

    I do really like both of your concepts, especially SEASTAR, but I believe XMARAN offers more mobility/freedom at sea. Realistically, I also think the per unit cost will be significantly lower, and Xmaran will also be able to capture some of the yachting/cruising market out of the box.

    How do you envision people will move between units for SEASTAR?

    Greg

    http://Xmaran.org

Viewing 8 posts - 16 through 23 (of 23 total)

The forum ‘Structure Designs’ is closed to new topics and replies.



Posted on at

Categories:

Written by

Blog/Newsletter

Donate