Small Community (Urban) Planning. What is minimum critical infrastructure?


(Tom Schaefer) #1

I’ve been searching the web for information on very small town urban planning, in order to see if one can gleam the minimal infrastructure that would support a small community as a core for growth. It’s either that, or a combination of “every 'steader for themselves” with this common infrastructure. I’ve started a few lists:

Utilities:
-Power (solar/wind electric wave mechanical and maybe electric, maybe current or tidal)
-Water catchment, desalinization, storage and distribution
-Waste disposal and recycling
-Fuel? (Does anyone know what happens to oil rigs when they no longer are economic to pump from and is there a seepage after that?)
-Info Connectivity

-General/convenience store (like south VA beach)
-Grocerie
-Harbor or docking space for larger, not resident’s boats, perhaps drydock
-Hardware store, workshop (with common (hourly rent based?) tooling)
-School
-Bank(?)
-Clinic
-Transportation (goods and people, post office(?))
-Barber?
-Fitness center?
-Common meeting space?
-Movie or performance center
-Hotel

My problem is that the urban planning community is largely focused at environmental and aesthetic issues rather than practical matters. See a list of tools here:
http://designyourtown.org/design_detail/

Almost none of these have any applicability to seasteading communities. Anyway, I hope some thought will be put into the way to organize and pay the least/optimal amount of common infrastructure (initial and operating) when thinking about the $/ft2 of individual seasteads.

Can’t we get one of the universities with urban planning departments to adopt seasteading?

Planning may fail compared to the initiative of individuals, but I suspect that the outcome will be more like this:

https://us.123rf.com/450wm/porpeller/porpeller1511/porpeller151100278/48569058-wooden-slums-on-stilts-on-the-riverside-of-chao-praya-river-in-bangkok-thailand.jpg

without the stilts.

than the pretty images on the home page here and the other artist’s visions here.


(Larry G) #2

Rigs and wells are separate issues. There are regulations on shut down of wells and disposal of rigs.

Because most economic issues of productivity are better solved by businesses than by agencies. Each enterprise has its own unique requirements and challenges to solve. These would be very difficult to solve by central planning.

So in my personal mental model, it’s all about modularity, and extension of services.


(noboxes) #3

But there’s probably regs about Russia selling an aircraft carrier to China too. So a private Chinese company buys it under the guise of making it be a hotel, stuff happens, and presto, the Chinese military has a new unused aircraft carrier! Or, TSI takes in $million in donations, and has no money, but can plan a seastead in French Polynesia! If one has the money or political clout, there’s prolly ways to do an end run around the laws, grab a slightly used floating rig or legged platform, and make it be a seastead. Praps the definition of “artificial reef” and “fish habitat” can be mangled, such that it can be underwater and wrapped in fish net, but not be on the bottom, and have a seastead perched on top of it.


(Larry G) #4

The question was about what happens to them. The procedures are documented. That’s what I am getting at.

Certainly, you can buy one. Lots of people assume there are tons of “abandoned rigs” to snap up in the Gulf of Mexico. That is not the case.

We’ve discussed this project elsewhere, but it may have bearing on this topic: http://opensourceecology.org/wiki/Global_Village_Construction_Set


(noboxes) #5

Maybe i also was misinformed, but in my understanding (not being a lawyer or in the oil industry), there’s only three legal things you can do with a used oil rig: sell it to be reused as a oil rig, tow it to land to be scrapped, or sink it as a fish habitat. No mention of any other use. Plus the oil company would prefer it no longer exist, for liability reasons. Yes, it’s been discussed ad nauseam, but no one has taken any action, as usual.


(Tom Schaefer) #6

I kind of got excited by this story. Have things changed since Deepwater Horizon?


(Larry G) #7

“Abandoned” is a term of art. It doesn’t mean that literally no one has an interest or responsibility for them. It means they aren’t actively working the well. And a well is not a rig. A well is a hole.

An “abandoned well” does not necessarily have a rig associated with it.

Environmentalists tend to get very excitable and often are fuzzy on details.


(Tom Schaefer) #8

I wasn’t “excited” as in environmental alarm-ism. I was excited as in opportunity to seastead on the cheap.


(Larry G) #9

No, but the people writing the article you cited are excitable/alarmist. The POGO blog says 27000 oil rigs. The article they cite says 27000 oil wells.

Fuzzy on details.


(.) #10

Excitable/alarmists are like that. They do not care about details, nor about the Truth.
The writer of the article got money and/or recognition for writing such things.
The new way of slavery is emotional entrapment. Well, that is my opinion.
News is well dramatized and sensational. There is a way to twist it that way, just
has to include death and sex.

Some people just use the emotional entrapment of each other into slavery for kicks, to somehow
glorify their otherwise pity, insignificant and boring lives.


(.) #11

I understand your point of view.
To me, it does not mean much because I am at the west coast.


(noboxes) #12

How cheap are we talking about, if you are buying a massive hunk of anything from the oil companies? And keep in mind they pay on a lease for the bottom land the rig sits on (or floats over and is anchored to), so if you buy the tower as-is where-is, you renegotiate the lease as a non-oil producer, pay that new lease too.

Perhaps Sparky can buy you the oil platform due to be decommissioned 2 miles offshore off Santa Barbara.


(.) #13

Perhaps I can decide for myself what I buy and what I do not.
That is why, it is my money.


(noboxes) #14

I agree, perhaps you can. Which is why i first said “Perhaps Sparky can …”. Sorry for my bad english, i did mean to say “Perhaps Sparky can …”. I did not say “Sparky will …”.


(.) #15

I understand. It is OK. May be you can phrase it the way you do not use my name as an example.
But if you do; God may bless you anyways.

Something relevant: 2 miles is too close to shore. That is still California state waters, and within US.


(.) #16

Bad English is not an excuse. I speak English goodly too.


(noboxes) #17

Of course, your speak Engrish terrible. But peoples under stand you.


(.) #18

It is not about me. It is about TSI.


(Larry G) #19

http://www.dive-the-world.com/dive-resorts-malaysia-sipadan-seaventures-resort.php

http://www.mssa.org.my/site/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=147&Itemid=209

http://www.news.com.au/travel/travel-ideas/weird-and-wacky/malaysian-oil-rig-transformed-into-a-hotel/news-story/77aaeb15331435369836b170cf5cc011

I recently went to a presentation from my local dive shop gauging interest in chartering a group trip to this place.


(noboxes) #20

Perhaps that is why i said “oil platform due to be decommissioned 2 miles offshore off Santa Barbara”, so it could be used like a seastead. There are many more in federal waters off California. If so many people lived on them for weeks at a time, perhaps they could be looked at as minimum critical infrastructure for a community. But i do not know.