<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
In Australia there are architects and there are 'Building Designers"
- the latter has a TAFE (college) degree and collectively they
design the vast majority of low to medium-rise housing, light
commercial and industrial buildings. "Architect" and
"architectural" can only be used by registered architects who are
governed by the Architects Act in each state (which puts more
accountability, personal responsibility and risk onto architects).
To get around this, one building designer I know of who designs
monstrous, expensive houses markets it as '<b>Art</b>chitecture'.
"Architecturally designed" is a desirable feature for marketing
housing; typically up-market housing (or it's an excuse to over
price); it is often used illegally but without consequence.
Architects get a lot of undue blame because most people do not
really know what architects do and/or think that anyone who designs
a building is an architect. That is not to say that architects
don't have a lot to answer for...but for the most part it is not in
housing.<br>
<br>
In terms of aspirational influence, the architects that I can think
of that are celebrated in Australia (meaning some people outside of
the field have vaguely heard of them) are known as long-standing
proponents of 'sustainable design'. These are Lindsay & Kerry
Clare, John Mainwaring, Gabriel Poole, Robin Boyd. Historically
housing around the western world has little to do with architects,
and the unsustainability of housing has as at least as much to do
with town planning as house design itself. The Garden City movement
that resulted in contemporary suburban planning, characterised by
cul-de-sacs, circles, courts, flower-shaped street plans (much
appreciated by airplane passengers perhaps, but no one trying to
find their way on the ground). Garden City sounds wonderful but
unfortunately results in at least 50%, probably 75%, of blocks
having poor orientation and making it difficult and expensive to
design a house with good orientation. In other town planning
models, the cost of sewer pipe has dictated narrow blocks, so more
can be serviced with less length; again constraining possibilities
for better design. <br>
<br>
Western Australian housing was dominated by a local brick company
who had immense sway and their own people in government so that it
was illegal to build with anything else up until the 1960s or 70s.
Still today Western Australians often see double-brick construction
as superior. This is completely a marketing and lobbying outcome.
BTW, despite being Canadian, I have never been so cold as living in
a double-brick house in Perth, Western Australian, when the
temperature never dropped below freezing. <br>
<br>
I do not mean to suggest that architects don't have a lot to answer
for, but with regards to housing, their influence is very limited.
Frank Lloyd Wright, sometimes touted as a visionary sustainable
architect, does have a lot to answer for suburban sprawl. The 1/4
acre block is his idea; the idea that everyone can have their bit of
paradise because car travel connects everyone. Maybe seemed a good
idea at the time. Terrible consequences.<br>
<br>
-Andrew<br>
<br>
On 14/05/2011 8:24 AM, Graeme North wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:5076DAFE-1530-4323-99CC-4C5D4FB9097F@ecodesign.co.nz"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">So part of the answer to your question Derek, may revolve around the definition of an "architect". </pre>
<br>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>