We have been approached by several parties and numbers of local organizations about mounting an adequate response from the design community to this past week’s disastrous fires in the region.
The Los Angeles chapter of Architecture for Humanity is seeking a partner who would be willing to co-sponsor and host a Wildfire Response Charrette next Saturday, November 3, 2007, from 9AM until approximately 1PM. The goal of this half-day exercise is to organize a design response on behalf of the entire Southern California design community that engages other community and emergency relief agencies to devise plans and strategies for future potential events of this scale. The targeted outcomes of the program will include – but are not limited to – temporary, city-sponsored temporary housing strategies, disaster response plan evaluation, and discussions on how to enhance disaster response and empower those evacuated.
The Los Angeles chapter of Architecture for Humanity hopes to collaborate with interested parties to make this event successful. We are asking permission from the faculty and facilities managers of the local design schools to host the event. We would also like to take this opportunity to invite and encourage any members of the community interested in participating in the charrette. The general details of the event continue to be developed, and we anticipate having a venue come Monday.
Please contact us directly through our website www.afhla.org with any comments, and continue this discussion so that we can further refine the details of this upcoming program. Your consideration is appreciated, and we look forward to hearing from you. Thanks! - AFH-LA
the problem is that people want cheap wooden houses. I dont know how many times I have had new potential clients call our office and within 5 minutes of being on the phone with them they ask how cheap they can build a house for.
Wood stick construction in much cheaper than concrete or steel, but it burns...
LA is facing a legitimate challenge regarding its growth.
mdler - Your connection from burning homes to overpopulation is a bit convoluted. Manhattan has a greater population than Los Angeles, and it isnt burning. It's a question of WHERE the population is living.
The challenge is making Los Angeles a desirable, functional URBAN CENTER, so that the natural landscape surrounding the area can be preserved to be visited and admired, not conquered and lived upon.
Now, how you get water to it without obstructing natural waterways/ water cycles is a different issue altogether...
This is America, where you are free to live where ever and how ever you'd like. I'd just wish we were intelligent enough to realize that its IGNORANT to live that way.
You're right. I agree with that fact. And I know there are FEWER trees in Manhattan.
Rather than argue stats and semantics, the primary reason for the post was to try to generate some constructive discussion on HOW TO RESOLVE this issue.
I still believe that the pattern of development and the way open space is husbanded (or even designed) is more important than population (give us urban designers some credit :) ). In Southern California, sprawl in thin fingers along densely vegetated riparian canyons whose slopes/walls are populated by dry scrub (south face) and chaparral (north face) creates every fire god's dream scenario. Adequate maintenance of those slopes would help a lot (probably with grazers, since as sombeody pounted out here, controlled burning becomes impractical in high density areas), and it is precisely these slopes that have been neglected for years, 'cause lots of vegation looks so good from the homeowners' point of view. Reduce sprawl and reintroduce grazers.
I'm really wondering if Arnold doesn't have something up his sleeve so he can become the PRESIDENT OF CALIFORNIA! Thinking the new
constitution might be in the making....
I actually do remember when open space off the i-15 corridor 'burbs was largely pastoral... thanks to cattle and sheep grazing -- developers not yet ready to build leased the land to rancers. At some point, due largely to complaints about their waste products, the grazers were taken away -- banned, even on undeveloped plots, and they soon became jungle-like in vegetation density. Where there was pastoral landscapes (seasonal grasses.. yellow in summer, green in winter, etc, punctured by occasional stands of scrub, trees, and chaparral) was actually replaced by dense green habitats.. which is what you see today (at least up to the point that it burns). bringing the pasture back as a tool in urban/landscape design would be helpful. Riparian corridors can still be conserved, but they would be buffered from urban areas in this manner.
A few years back the interior of British Columbia had a wicked summer of forest fires that burned thousands of acres of prime resort / vacation residential properties ( not as luxurious as LA ) but non the less somebodies home. All nice wooden houses, cedar shingle roofs etc. after that the Province developed a program called Fire Smart which shaped the finish materials and site development patterns for properties that interfaced with forest edge, which in BC is a great deal of the province. Not a perfect program but really forced the issue as a community driven program to save communities from facing a similar situation down the road.
Tough to get everbody on board but now its mandated by most municipalities and cities that have the same potential issues and you can't get a development permit or building permit without meeting a certain level of the criteria. When you see the damage its crazy why the insurance companies and federal bodies that have to bail out those communities after such events don't make it a mandatory requirement. Its not dictatorial, its good community planning and design that responds to the circumstance of place.
if one more speaker at greenbuild blames these fires on climate change, I'm going to scream!!!!!!! people are to blame, not the climate. the risk of fires in an urban/wildland interface is directly correlated to the population - not drought,not santa ana winds, or fire suppression.
idiocy is to blame too, treekiller, not just population. specifically, people's desire to sprawl in their mcmansions along narrow fingers on the ridges of lushly vegetated canyon systems (which I remember growing up as being pastoral landscapes, before they got rid of all the grazers who used to keep the vegetation under control 'cause they stink and moo and baa and 'cause the lush forests are sooo beautiful to look at), is to blame. Bring back the grazers, mandate undergrowth clearance and criminalize non-compliance, control sprawl, concentrate people compactly at discrete locations, and you can have your population. Sometimes, we don't need global warming to help nature kill us...
invent a fire shielding device for houses in wildfire prone areas. it could be a parachute/tent-like structure, which can be folded and tucked away, made of highly fire resistant material that can be mechanically deployed like an umbrella and then completely wrap the entire building...
idiocy is definitely partially to blame, but so is the climate/geography, more so than overpopulation and trees I beleive. Comparing Manhattan to LA is pointless -- and if you look at the larger NYC metro region, there are tons of trees, they're just not in an arid climate/landcsape. LA is the southwest, it's very dry much of the year and more so with drought, so whatever trees/scrub/grass/kindling there is ignites instantly.
In the Bay Area after the big fire, they designated 'fire districts' of different danger levels that dictate the exterior finishes of your house, and that you keep dry grasses and brush away from buildings. Pretty simple stuff actually.
so a 10 yr old kid will end up being tried for starting the fires...apparently at 10 yrs of age he is supposed to know better than to play with matches in the forrest
what about all the stupid fucks who built those wooden houses in the forrest anyway...those who grew non-native species of plants in their yards...the developers and politicians who turned a blind eye in favor of $$$
Lack of political will is kind of a byword for my city. San Diego will fubak decide to deal with the problem of its spatial form after it burns down a few times.
SoCal Fires - Where do we go from here?
We have been approached by several parties and numbers of local organizations about mounting an adequate response from the design community to this past week’s disastrous fires in the region.
The Los Angeles chapter of Architecture for Humanity is seeking a partner who would be willing to co-sponsor and host a Wildfire Response Charrette next Saturday, November 3, 2007, from 9AM until approximately 1PM. The goal of this half-day exercise is to organize a design response on behalf of the entire Southern California design community that engages other community and emergency relief agencies to devise plans and strategies for future potential events of this scale. The targeted outcomes of the program will include – but are not limited to – temporary, city-sponsored temporary housing strategies, disaster response plan evaluation, and discussions on how to enhance disaster response and empower those evacuated.
The Los Angeles chapter of Architecture for Humanity hopes to collaborate with interested parties to make this event successful. We are asking permission from the faculty and facilities managers of the local design schools to host the event. We would also like to take this opportunity to invite and encourage any members of the community interested in participating in the charrette. The general details of the event continue to be developed, and we anticipate having a venue come Monday.
Please contact us directly through our website www.afhla.org with any comments, and continue this discussion so that we can further refine the details of this upcoming program. Your consideration is appreciated, and we look forward to hearing from you. Thanks! - AFH-LA
would the fires have been so disastrous if people hadnt built houses where they were burning?
set detroit of fire...maybe we can get some money over here to rebuild..........
maybe the owners can buy a house somewhere else.....
the solution to the problem is to not build wooden houses in the forest
the problem is that people want cheap wooden houses. I dont know how many times I have had new potential clients call our office and within 5 minutes of being on the phone with them they ask how cheap they can build a house for.
Wood stick construction in much cheaper than concrete or steel, but it burns...
it's burning......... go see the doctor
the real problem lies in overpopulation
LA is facing a legitimate challenge regarding its growth.
mdler - Your connection from burning homes to overpopulation is a bit convoluted. Manhattan has a greater population than Los Angeles, and it isnt burning. It's a question of WHERE the population is living.
The challenge is making Los Angeles a desirable, functional URBAN CENTER, so that the natural landscape surrounding the area can be preserved to be visited and admired, not conquered and lived upon.
Now, how you get water to it without obstructing natural waterways/ water cycles is a different issue altogether...
This is America, where you are free to live where ever and how ever you'd like. I'd just wish we were intelligent enough to realize that its IGNORANT to live that way.
Any news on the mountain lion population? they seem to kill more people each year...
jackjood
in LA, population growth has been diretly linked to the size of fires
the reason that NYC isnt buring is cause there aint any god damned trees
mdler,
You're right. I agree with that fact. And I know there are FEWER trees in Manhattan.
Rather than argue stats and semantics, the primary reason for the post was to try to generate some constructive discussion on HOW TO RESOLVE this issue.
I still believe that the pattern of development and the way open space is husbanded (or even designed) is more important than population (give us urban designers some credit :) ). In Southern California, sprawl in thin fingers along densely vegetated riparian canyons whose slopes/walls are populated by dry scrub (south face) and chaparral (north face) creates every fire god's dream scenario. Adequate maintenance of those slopes would help a lot (probably with grazers, since as sombeody pounted out here, controlled burning becomes impractical in high density areas), and it is precisely these slopes that have been neglected for years, 'cause lots of vegation looks so good from the homeowners' point of view. Reduce sprawl and reintroduce grazers.
i agree with densifying LA. this is a policy issue that will hopefully be addressed in the near future.
fyi, the city still likes sprawl
GOATS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
treekiller
you said that you know the firefighting goat in LA??? Hook me up
I'm really wondering if Arnold doesn't have something up his sleeve so he can become the PRESIDENT OF CALIFORNIA! Thinking the new
constitution might be in the making....
I actually do remember when open space off the i-15 corridor 'burbs was largely pastoral... thanks to cattle and sheep grazing -- developers not yet ready to build leased the land to rancers. At some point, due largely to complaints about their waste products, the grazers were taken away -- banned, even on undeveloped plots, and they soon became jungle-like in vegetation density. Where there was pastoral landscapes (seasonal grasses.. yellow in summer, green in winter, etc, punctured by occasional stands of scrub, trees, and chaparral) was actually replaced by dense green habitats.. which is what you see today (at least up to the point that it burns). bringing the pasture back as a tool in urban/landscape design would be helpful. Riparian corridors can still be conserved, but they would be buffered from urban areas in this manner.
mdler's goats would work as well.
i think that developing the Six Flags site will help things
mdler, where you born in LA, or did you, um, move there?
I moved here...
Does overpopulation begin with the person who moved there the day after you?
I was born in SoCal! So there! Everybody else out!
..just kidding.. I like the company
yep
im thinking about moving out of SoCal, so there will be some more space
I always did think that the border wall with Mexico should be reployed to run north-south
jack,
How did the workshop go. Think I've secured funding for AFHLA and SD for 'urban acupuncture' projects. Will know by end of week.
Cheers
C.
A few years back the interior of British Columbia had a wicked summer of forest fires that burned thousands of acres of prime resort / vacation residential properties ( not as luxurious as LA ) but non the less somebodies home. All nice wooden houses, cedar shingle roofs etc. after that the Province developed a program called Fire Smart which shaped the finish materials and site development patterns for properties that interfaced with forest edge, which in BC is a great deal of the province. Not a perfect program but really forced the issue as a community driven program to save communities from facing a similar situation down the road.
Tough to get everbody on board but now its mandated by most municipalities and cities that have the same potential issues and you can't get a development permit or building permit without meeting a certain level of the criteria. When you see the damage its crazy why the insurance companies and federal bodies that have to bail out those communities after such events don't make it a mandatory requirement. Its not dictatorial, its good community planning and design that responds to the circumstance of place.
if one more speaker at greenbuild blames these fires on climate change, I'm going to scream!!!!!!! people are to blame, not the climate. the risk of fires in an urban/wildland interface is directly correlated to the population - not drought,not santa ana winds, or fire suppression.
idiocy is to blame too, treekiller, not just population. specifically, people's desire to sprawl in their mcmansions along narrow fingers on the ridges of lushly vegetated canyon systems (which I remember growing up as being pastoral landscapes, before they got rid of all the grazers who used to keep the vegetation under control 'cause they stink and moo and baa and 'cause the lush forests are sooo beautiful to look at), is to blame. Bring back the grazers, mandate undergrowth clearance and criminalize non-compliance, control sprawl, concentrate people compactly at discrete locations, and you can have your population. Sometimes, we don't need global warming to help nature kill us...
invent a fire shielding device for houses in wildfire prone areas. it could be a parachute/tent-like structure, which can be folded and tucked away, made of highly fire resistant material that can be mechanically deployed like an umbrella and then completely wrap the entire building...
dammson- is that 'device' deployed by rockets?
idiocy is definitely partially to blame, but so is the climate/geography, more so than overpopulation and trees I beleive. Comparing Manhattan to LA is pointless -- and if you look at the larger NYC metro region, there are tons of trees, they're just not in an arid climate/landcsape. LA is the southwest, it's very dry much of the year and more so with drought, so whatever trees/scrub/grass/kindling there is ignites instantly.
In the Bay Area after the big fire, they designated 'fire districts' of different danger levels that dictate the exterior finishes of your house, and that you keep dry grasses and brush away from buildings. Pretty simple stuff actually.
so a 10 yr old kid will end up being tried for starting the fires...apparently at 10 yrs of age he is supposed to know better than to play with matches in the forrest
what about all the stupid fucks who built those wooden houses in the forrest anyway...those who grew non-native species of plants in their yards...the developers and politicians who turned a blind eye in favor of $$$
WAY TO PASS THE BUCK, ASSHOLES
oh I feel the smell again.
Lack of political will is kind of a byword for my city. San Diego will fubak decide to deal with the problem of its spatial form after it burns down a few times.
Interesting somewhat contrarian article in Slate:
http://www.slate.com/id/2178805/nav/tap3/
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.