More often than not, I can only scratch the surface or simply call attention to a matter I believe is a public concern. My view or opinion, however, lacks the depth and science that actual experts can share. Unfortunately, many of those who do know much don’t get asked often enough, not by government, politicians or business owners.
As far as media is concerned, I confess that the only time experts get air time or spotlight is when a tragedy, natural disaster or controversy erupts and that’s when they are tapped to lend authority or depth to the matter. The other problem is even when media share space with the experts, the audience is not receptive, almost indifferent, to non-entertainment topics. As a result, the media platform has no choice but to limit the air time or content featuring experts.
Nonetheless, I use every opportunity to share, repost, quote, etc. any and all material I get based on people’s experience, complaints or “expert opinion.” I sincerely welcome unbiased, positive or helpful views shared with us. I may not always agree with the expert’s opinion but I must honor their expertise.
For instance, I have regularly turned to architect Paulo Alcazaren whenever there is a need for an expert opinion regarding urban planning, but it is not everyday when architect Alcazaren makes time to respond to what I write, especially in an encouraging or motivational manner.
So today, I share the very informative and educational email that architect Paulo sent last week in the hope that politicians, government officials, business owners and Filipinos in general would read and take notes to learn about government centers, urban planning and public welfare, something I am not an expert on:
Hi Cito, great column today. May I comment on your statement, “...I notice that so many provinces, cities and municipalities have been moving to newer, modern capitols, city halls or municipios. They are in the right direction since new townships are developing while old ones are growing.”
I agree that this is happening countrywide, and that despite the new buildings, the staff and processes are antiquated or inefficient. The planning and design of these new complexes, shining new structures aside, leave much to be desired. Few new civic centers are based on understanding the actual services and functions of the myriad number of departments and offices that make up a town, city or provincial complex.
As an urban planner, we’ve seen many of these civic centers badly sited, too far from the population they need to service and not accessible by public transport (96 percent of Filipino families do not own a car). Many are planned with car-centric layouts and are not pedestrian, senior, PWD or bike friendly. A number of these are sited beside new townships, of course, with land donated by developers of these, with the selfish agenda of encouraging development in the area; but with little thought to actual public service.
Added to this is the fact that few of these new civic complexes include public open spaces, plazas or parks. The original plaza complexes in old towns and cities imbued these sites with character and a sense of place. They were sites for social, political and religious events for the entire community. Until the 1940s these older spaces, their monuments and civic buildings were well designed and projected the ideal tenets of democracy, participation and public service.
Since the 1960s, modern complexes have become less about function and efficiency and more about the corruption of values, leading to projects by successive administrations aimed at finding new avenues for graft and corruption. Modern architecture has also devolved so that new civic buildings look more like call center boxes or shopping malls, copying the look of BGC or Makati – aspirational visions of politicians that have no bearing on essential public service.
Few of these projects are based on any data collected in terms of spatial requirements of the public, or the needs for departments to expand as the town or city grows. We conduct POEs (Post Occupancy Evaluations), assessments that are de rigueur in other countries in design and planning of government or institutional complexes.
These are by means of surveys of users and stakeholders, to set baselines and identify real deficiencies of space, equipment or processes of service delivery. Few towns, cities or provinces hire professional planners, architects, landscape architects and other professionals to ensure designs are based on actual data, professional insights and an understanding of all that is needed in creating proper spaces, offices, buildings and sites.
This proper design and planning process encourages the client (LGU or province) to also assess their service delivery and staff competencies to identify what is currently deficient and what can be done to improve plantilla efficiencies and public interface. Many new ill-designed or planned civic buildings only look bright and shiny on the outside and for a short period of time, until the lack of maintenance, changes in administration or expansions are needed.
Few LGUs have dedicated Office of the City/Town Architect. Few city or municipal planning departments have staff with any real experience in planning. Almost no LGU has a parks department staffed by competent landscape architects. Clearly there is a lack of capacity all around, so the first step is capacity building as well as acknowledging the issues you pointed out in your column.
Cheers, Paulo Alcazaren
* * *
E-mail: utalk2ctalk@gmail.com