To the bunkers?

http://www.architectswithoutfrontiers.com.au/site/index.php

<p>Sod. Everyone needs proffesional advise. A google search is like saying there are a million trees over there, go and pick our own fruit. Unless you know what your looking for you can get easily lost.</p>
<p>As for puritan pastrolism, don't know what you're talking about but flaming is a bit passe these days.</p>

<p>Cabbie. Not sure of your motives but  a very moving piece. I can only thank that I was never as close to hell as all those people were, but even as what I went through in the 07 fires was marginal compared to that it still shocked me to open it up and it had me crying with the memory of it. Thanks, whatever your intentions.</p>
<p>I really do empathise and I really believe that good advise from anyone with an inckling is better than no advise and a disjointed google spree.</p>

$

<p>How can you prevent something that is undefinable like design anyway?</p>

<p>In the PDF are two "FAQ" regarding the place of design in the new standards:

<i><b>Q. Does the new building standard focus on materials used rather than the design?</b>

A. The new building standard sets out suitable materials and construction methods appropriate

to the bushfire risk – it does not prevent good design being used that is appropriate for the

specific location.





<b>Q. Will I still be able to design a home the way I want it?</b>

A. Design decisions will continue to be made by property owners and their architects,

designers and builders.

The new building standard stipulates construction methods and materials to better protect

homes from bushfires but it does not specify design requirements

</i>





"Well that's a relief, good design hasn't been banned. But does it prevent "bad" design? Could I still build a parapeted flat-roofed house with a zigzag plan, if I did it in tilt-up?  "</p>
<p> </p>
<p>You could if you sunk it into the site and put an earth and turf roof on it, peter.</p>
<p>I would have thought 'good design' included the notion of designing fire prevention into a building. Just as sustainable design is not only about a solar panel in the right spot, fire prevention design is not only about concrete cladding and steel in large dimensions.</p>
<p>Why can't 'good design' be talked about in terms that include practical considerations like fire prevention. Why is it that Kashmir can understand it in terms of undefinability. (no offence intended kashmir) Design is not all indefinable airy fairy, I like, I want.</p>
<p>And if it is, why do you call yourselves architects when that is the description of a hair stylist. Do you actually have any advice to give beyond regurgitating AS3959-2009 and the building code.</p>
<p>Sod seems to think that you'll get better advise on 'good design' by going to a drafting ofice. What does he think a university architecture degree is for, to paint pretty pictures on a computer or something?</p>

<p>simon simon simon....ta ta....</p>
<p>how is an architect suppose to follow a standard that isn't even published as yet.......????????</p>
<p>you should really be called all the names under the sun......your ingnorance precedes you....</p>
<p>an ounce of common sense would inform you that good design is only a catch phrase.....</p>
<p>codes and standards are the rules we all operate under......a clever chap is the one who knows the rules </p>
<p>this is where invention and innovation begins......</p>
<p> </p>

<p>"swinemon - didn't quite say you'd get better advice from a drafting office, more that you don't get much from your avererage architect on the issue of fire prevention, except implenting regulations ( something a good drafty like me could do!). just look a the shitfull concrete boxes on the homepage to see what happens when architects engage with the problem. degrees are useless as you well know and my computer is still an unadorned beige box."</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Well SOD, if your average architect couldn't give a stuff about fire prevention and they just hand that sort of concern over to draftees, it's probably no fault of the universities. If your average architect is well, ...ordinary, does that mean we should follow their example.</p>
<p>Frankly who gives a f... for average architects? If I told you to jump off a bridge, would you do that? Well why give credence to being average? Why would I or anyone care about what some average hack can and can't do?</p>
<p>I think you're referring to people who are just god-damned lazy and I don't think that's what this thread was about. In fact I don't think that's what this whole site is about.</p>