A Radical Proposal: No land sales on Alpine Meadows...

Forum to discuss and coordinate the expansion of the CDS and the redevelopment of existing territories.

Moderator: SC Moderators

User avatar
Sudane Erato
Forum Wizard
Forum Wizard
Posts: 1186
Joined: Thu May 25, 2006 8:44 am
Contact:

A Radical Proposal: No land sales on Alpine Meadows...

Post by Sudane Erato »

There appears to be some difference of opinion concerning how the land on a new sim located between NFS and CN should be used. I should like to offer a proposal which is different than any proposed so far.

From the very first beginnings of the concept of a sim between NFS and CN (when it first became clear that CN and NFS could not be adjoined because of elevation differences), that sim was conceived of as a "connecting" space. Not a destination at all... not an energy and cultural center at all, like NFS and CN both surely are, but rather a space which would add value to our little continent by joining the sims, making a single community more "one", and making a single visual experience for resident and visitor.

That is certainly what I read when I saw the proposed Alpine Meadows sim. The theme was a steep alpine environment... a stream, roads connecting the two sims, places for relaxation, sports, entertainment. Quite honestly, the appearance of houses seemed an after thought, almost, because, of course, we have to collect tier for the sim in some manner. And, of course, it is this concept which was selected as the guiding theme by the community.

Now, of course, the community must itself shape that image into a real thing. It seems to me that what we see as we try to shape the image into a real thing is a proliferation of buildings, since, almost without exception in Second Life, people equate owning land with being able to build a building which makes full use of every last resource of that land. The result is becoming a hillside of buildings.

I submit that this is utterly contrary to the proposal which was presented and aproved by the community. Now... of course, this is *entirely* within the community's right to decide. There is no question at all that while a single individual may have proposed a vision for our new sim, the community itself, as a whole must shape and form and create that new space, whether or not it conforms to the original vision.

But let me say this. Even with Moon's "Plan#10", which was approved *in principle* at the last Guild meeting, with its 7 parcels, each with a build which, if I foresee correctly, will be a huge building using every last resource available to it, the hillside will contain a density of buildings easily rivalling the main valley of NFS. And I have heard proposals increasing that number of parcels from 7 to 12 to 15 to 20 and more.

In RL I live in New York City, and I frequently travel outside the city to nearby towns. I submit that the north valley of NFS has a build density very similiar to the towns immediately surrounding New York City, and an "Alpine Meadows" sim as proposed will clearly have a density equal to this or higher.

I would like to propose an alternative. On the assumption that the Alpine Meadows sim is a sim not for a select group of people who might live there, but rather a sim which connects our existing communities and increases the value of our towns and private land, I propose that *none* of the land on Alpine Meadows be sold. I propose that the sim be purchased by the community, for the greater good of the community. And I propose that it be used for the purposes for which it was proposed and intended even before proposals were submitted.

What does this mean?

Those who are interested have been able to read every month the financial picture of our community on the "Finance" page of the website. http://neufreistadt.info/id13.html Those who do can see that we can, indeed, with our current cash, buy a sim. If we were planning this sim as a 'destination" sim, like NFS and CN, this sum of money would probably be insufficient, since we would need to project several months of tier shortfall as land is slowly sold and begins to generate income. Even without this need for cash for tier, an outright cash purchase of a sim right now would leave us with a very slim cash margin... but we could do it.

So, we could buy it. How would we support it?

In explaining my proposal, let me be very clear. This sim benefits the entire CDS community... *not* simply the potential residents of it. This proposal is a radical acknowledgement that the benefit here to be gained is to the whole community... and therefore the enitre community should support it.

We already know that our existing tier (monthly taxes) will go up as a result of purchasing this sim. We pay now approximately US$400/month tier. With the addition of this sim, the total bill will be approx US$700. With the current proposals, unless we plan to have the new residents pay a huge premium to live on this much more expensive sim, we will have to equalize the tier payments across all three sims, meaning that everyone's tier will rise.

My support system has two parts.

Part One is to suggest that we simply raise every person's tier a bit more, with the assumption that since no private property will exist on the new sim, existing private property owners monthly payments will need to cover much of the cost. For those who balk at an increase in tier, please remember that tier will increase anyway, by a certain percent, and many of our citizens pay US$1.50/month and less. As it is, our tier rates are very low compared to much of SL. Remember, too, that before too long, LL will in their infinite wisdom raise the tier on NFS and CN to US$300/month, so our tier rates will have to rise in any case.

Part Two is to propose that, while not offering land to sale to individual citizens, we do make land available to bonafide, RA approved NGOs, on a very limited basis. I would presume that "the Monastery Project" intends to gain a charter from the RA, and so would be an example of a suitable use of the sim. The land would not be "sold" to the Monastery, or to any other NGO, just like the land now used by the MoCA and by the School is not owned by them, but rather owned by the CDS. And, like the MoCA, the School (and I hope soon the Kirche), these institutions would pay their share of the monthly tier.

So, a suitably constructed monastery might be a consistent use of the sim as proposed here. Another use might be as an extension of the MoCA... not a building per se, but rather an outdoor location for artworks. Other suitable uses might be those small (emphasize *SMALL*) buildings which might be associated with the recreational activities that the sim provides... perhaps a ski lift, or a quiet meditation area.

All land in the sim would by owned by the CDS. No "double primming" would be necessary. Much like the "prim bank" now used in NFS to allocate prims between and among the needs of the various NGO's and GO's, the prims on Alpine meadows would be allocated among those activities which are located there... organizations which serve the entire community of CDS.

I offer this proposal as an option which achieves two things:

1) It conforms to the original vision of the new sim as a transitional sim, a vision in place long before the approval of the Alpine Meadows concept (and probably the reason that the Alpine Meadows concept was so universally welcomed), and

2) It structures the new sim as a resource truly functioning as a resource for the whole community, and not just for those who live on it.

Sudane....................

Dnate Mars
Veteran debater
Veteran debater
Posts: 285
Joined: Fri May 26, 2006 9:32 am

Post by Dnate Mars »

Actually, I really like this idea. The biggest issue will then be that we are not expanding the population of the CDS. We could then turn this into a park. We could have bikes, river rafting, and other recreational sports in the sim. It would be a great spot to have outdoor concerts or other events. We may even want to make part of it a little sandbox that people can play in (maybe 60 min return time?)

If we expand to sim #4 quickly, it should help defray the costs even more. We may also want to rent out the sim for some of the longer events that we could attract. If we have the NGOs pay for parts of it too, like the monetary or a MoCA exhibit, it may just work out well for us.

Jon Seattle
I need a hobby
I need a hobby
Posts: 648
Joined: Mon May 29, 2006 6:18 am

Post by Jon Seattle »

A very interesting proposal, and I hope, one that we will seriously consider. As we eventually grow in residential space the cost of supporting this sim will decrease per capita, and potentially it will add value to our continent.

What would it do to each individual citizen's tier?

User avatar
Nikki
Seasoned debater
Seasoned debater
Posts: 89
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2007 8:43 pm

Post by Nikki »

Personally I would like to see the area between Neufreistadt and Colonia Nova be mostly a kind of open land. Naturally it could also have some signs of civilisation, such as a monastery, rock walls, a vineyard, etc. For me it would be fine for a couple of private houses to also be there. However, to hold this area mostly for the community seems to me like a good idea. For example, a pretty meadow could be used for many things for the community. I would also accept a modest increase in my land fees to support it. Hopefully Jon’s question will answer how much this would be.

That said, if it were possible for the costs of the new sim to be paid for partially by some people who had structures on it that would be helpful. For me it is not a concern if only a few people or organizations maintain structures on this sim, because, as Dnate has pointed out, the CDS is planning to continue to grow.

User avatar
Sudane Erato
Forum Wizard
Forum Wizard
Posts: 1186
Joined: Thu May 25, 2006 8:44 am
Contact:

Post by Sudane Erato »

[quote="Jon Seattle":s25ap16p] What would it do to each individual citizen's tier?[/quote:s25ap16p]
In a simplistic sense, it would increase everyone's tier by 700/400, an increase of 75%. If I pay $4 now, I would pay $7 then.

But this only takes into account Part One of the support proposal. This 75% would be lowered by the amount of revenue which is generated by the NGO's which would occupy the land, such as the Monastery. That remains to be determined.

I would also add that a very worthwhile plan might be to engage in a fund-raising program for the new sim. Since the sim would be purely for the community as a whole (which includes the NGO's, since by definition their existence benefits the community), we might wish to accept donations from those willing to contribute to the purchase of the sim. I for one would surely be willing to contribute... I'm sure many others would too.

Sudane.....

User avatar
Arria Perreault
I need a hobby
I need a hobby
Posts: 630
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2007 5:14 pm

Post by Arria Perreault »

I find this idea very interesting and very conform to the idea of the CDS. I think that we have to take it seriously in consideration. This sim would really become the place where people from NFS and people from CN can meet. The feeling of community can increase with such projects. As citizen, I agree to pay more fees to get a higher quality of virtual life and also to make a donation.
For the Monastery project, we can discuss in detail what are the consequences. Anyway it seems to be a good solution for this project.

User avatar
Nikki
Seasoned debater
Seasoned debater
Posts: 89
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2007 8:43 pm

Post by Nikki »

Partly as a continuation above, I will say I would be in agreement with paying this much of a higher fee (75%). I would also be willing to make a one-time contribution toward purchase of the sim.

Dnate Mars
Veteran debater
Veteran debater
Posts: 285
Joined: Fri May 26, 2006 9:32 am

Post by Dnate Mars »

We could also have a wishing well and/or fountain in the sim and collect donations.

I guess with the fees, if we add a 4th sim, then the price only goes up 1000/700. Or maybe it would be a good time to just start factoring in the extra 100 per sim that we know is coming soon.

User avatar
Moon Adamant
I need a hobby
I need a hobby
Posts: 825
Joined: Sun May 28, 2006 1:26 pm

Post by Moon Adamant »

My comments:

First of all, i trust Sudane's input about finances, so if it is possible economically, she says, i trust that it is economically possible :) But i think it is legitimate to make an economical plan, so that everyone knows what is the increase on their tier. Also, and very important, any final proposal will have to be presented to the RA and voted, accompanied by the respective financial plan.

I point out then that if no need to sell private land, no need to have builds saving those of a decorative/landscape nature - or only buildings connected to events like temp exhibitions and/or NGOs' presences like a MoCA park, the Monastery, etc - this to say,[i:j11jubcw] low-prim and low-performance installations that don't need to be competitive as regards sales[/i:j11jubcw] - then perhaps the proposal about voids can indeed be considered again, in parallel with a proposal for a normal sim.

If we pick the voids option, just a remark that we will have to move elsewhere on the grid, and we can discuss where best to hold the 3 other voids - if completing (to some extent) the NFS massif or to place them advantageously to preserve our sim slots in the grid.

Just my first impressions.

Dnate Mars
Veteran debater
Veteran debater
Posts: 285
Joined: Fri May 26, 2006 9:32 am

Post by Dnate Mars »

Just to note, AFAIK, you can also change a void into a full sim and full sims into voids. I don't know what the fees that would be involved, but it is possible.

Sleazy Writer
Lurker
Lurker
Posts: 5
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2007 7:47 pm

Post by Sleazy Writer »

I'm glad this is being seriously considered and would gladly pay 75% extra, but

- expect people to leave over a ~75% fee increase

- I totally agree with Nikki that we can put in a few strategically placed residents, while keeping this "Alpine park" idea intact. This would be to lower the fee increase, not for boosting population.

- MoCA is not self sustaining (afaik), so counting on a MoCA expansion is kinda ambitious. O.t.o.h., the New Guild prim land could be relocated to the 3rd sim, freeing up a CN parcel.

- Voids seem to me better value for money and from what I've seen each one can sustain at least one resident

- skybox-only lots could financially support an empty sim, but these would need very attractive prices. The mainland proves that people are crazy (or desperate) enough to live in skyboxes. The MoCA could be relocated to a skybox.

- skybox-only lots (weird as it is) allows population expansion.

Dnate Mars
Veteran debater
Veteran debater
Posts: 285
Joined: Fri May 26, 2006 9:32 am

Post by Dnate Mars »

In regards to the MoCA, I was thinking of it using the park for when they have some of the higher prim exhibits. There is a lot of art that can be displayed with 10,000 prims. There is a lot that can really help the community. The only down side is that it just means we need to start thinking of how we want to design the 4th sim for people to live in.

Sleazy Writer
Lurker
Lurker
Posts: 5
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2007 7:47 pm

Post by Sleazy Writer »

[quote="Dnate Mars":3vf62snt]The only down side is that it just means we need to start thinking of how we want to design the 4th sim for people to live in.[/quote:3vf62snt]It's premature to discuss this, but if the next step is four [i:3vf62snt]well placed[/i:3vf62snt] voids, then 'Nea Hora' could be the step after that.

- - -

While I agree with Sudane's reasoning that connecting both sims must have been an important reason for Alpine Meadow's popularity, I doubt that her plan is close enough to Rose's proposal that the citizens voted for (>50% fee increase is not 'peanuts'). If it's not close enough, Sudane's proposal would need another CDS-wide voting round. And does the New Guild [i:3vf62snt]want[/i:3vf62snt] to reshuffle their own sim design procedures so that we can have another sim voting round?

Claude Desmoulins
I need a hobby
I need a hobby
Posts: 730
Joined: Thu May 25, 2006 9:28 am

Post by Claude Desmoulins »

[i:3rp28qp1]...takes several cleansing breaths after considering a 75% land fee increase, then proceeds with several disconnected thoughts.[/i:3rp28qp1]

1. If you do this, given that the primary concept is for Alpine Meadows to remain mostly open space, would not many of the prims sit idle most of the time? If so, it would make a lot of sense to consider doing voids and at least maximizing the amount of open space we get for our investment, although I acknowledge that going the void route would likely limit the recreational activities possible on the sims.

2. When CN went live, one of its explicit goals was to reduce the amount of public land/prims. NFS has something like 50% public land/prims. CN has closer to 10%, If we adopt Sudane's proposal, it takes the proportion of public prims for the whole CDS back over 50% (100% of AM+50% of NFS + 10% of CN= 1.6/3 sims of public land)

Throughout the last couple of years, the government has been very cautious about asking all citizens to subsidize anything. Instead those citizens who want to support improvements and initiatives for the benefit of the whole community have been encouraged to create NGO's and fund them privately (for example MoCA and the Monastery NGO). This proposal, if enacted, would be a significant change of course.

michelmanen
I need a hobby
I need a hobby
Posts: 812
Joined: Sun Nov 19, 2006 2:53 am

Post by michelmanen »

I wonder if the CDS really has a long enough waiting list to sell the land that would instantly become vancant if tier fees would rise by 75 per cent... Whilst it is indeed the RA's prerogative to make such decisions, it is also the prerogative of individual citizens to draw their own conclusions and act accordingly, based on the new financial realities.

I would certainly hope that such proposals will not be implemented before as wide a consultation as possbile is conducted with as many citizens as possible to determine what their reaction to such a move might be. In particular, on a personal note, I'd like to emphasize that it is one thing to go from $1.50 a month in tier fees to $2.625.... but an entirely different one to move from $150 a month to $262.50.

I would most strongly advise careful thought and extensive consultations with all citizens before going ahead with such proposals.

Post Reply

Return to “Sim and City Planning”