Greetings!
I am writing this letter in regard to the proposed modernization of the Tanauan Public Market.

As a fellow Tanauananon, I fully support the move of the Tanauan LGU, thru our mayor’s leadership and initiative, in proposing this timely project that would truly benefit our local folks, as well as local and foreign visitors to our town. Recently, I’ve read about the news article on the web regarding the LGU’s effort to conduct a feasibility study on the matter and truly this is a step in the right direction (one thing that was not clear though is the parameter of the whole “modernization” project). In view of this, conducting the feasibility study, particularly by integrating the design and concept of the whole site development, including the design of its individual or group of buildings and related engineering components like drainage systems and utilities, is a vital step to determine the viability of the project. I am aware that there are certain individuals who oppose such project (and some are incorporating the issue of the construction of the municipal hall which is a totally different subject), but despite the negative criticisms, I am still convinced of the necessity of such project to replace the existing, old and dilapidated structures of the public market and improve the overall (site) planning of its surroundings in order to promote and safeguard the health, welfare and safety of the general public. The existing structures could become unsafe (or probably they are already unsafe!) and could pose greater danger to life and property. Also worth noting is the fact that there are certain requirements of the current Building Code standards that needed to be addressed (e.g. lack of parking spaces, barrier-free facilities, etc. to name only a few).

In the interest of my architect colleagues and the architectural profession, and in promoting quality planning and design of public and private buildings, I am of particular concern on certain individuals or entities that may be involved in such undertaking, particularly those who are/is conducting the feasibility study. In addition, I will still even be more concerned on the professionals who will be tasked to do the physical planning and architectural design of individual or group of buildings, if these certainly are included in the development. The reason behind is the fact that Republic Act 9266, “An Act providing for a more responsive and comprehensive regulation for the registration, licensing and practice of Architecture, repealing for the purpose Republic Act No. 545, “An Act regulating the practice of Architecture in the Philippines” was passed and became fully effective in the year 2004. This is a valid and subsisting law that prohibits individuals who are not registered and licensed architects to practice architecture in any part of the country.

As of this date, per the Professional Regulatory Board of Architecture, there is “no temporary restraining order (TRO), no writ of preliminary injunction (WPI) and no pending question on the constitutionality on any of its provisions.” All national and local government officials are therefore mandated under law to implement and enforce it. For the past years and decades, we’ve witnessed the poor planning and design of many of our public buildings and facilities around the country, apparently because they were designed by individuals who illegally practiced and offered architectural services — and are not architects registered and
licensed by the state. The fact is, they have done considerable injustice to the Filipino architects and the Architectural profession, and to the general public as a whole. We can notice things such as multiple violations of the National Building Code (lack of parking spaces required, openings on firewalls, improper setbacks, etc.), incorrect building orientations, poorly designed and uncomfortable living spaces, violations of the Accessibility Law on the requirements of barrier-free facilities, and the list goes on and on – and these all contributes to the degenerative quality of the natural and built environment. Besides, these are issues that relate to public interest, safety and welfare — and are clearly attributed to non-architect’s lack of academic training and professional experience in the design and physical planning of buildings and their environs.

I have been following closely the development of this proposed project, even though I’m far away from home, and hope that this becomes a reality in the near future. I trust that the LGU have done and will do the right thing at the get go and pray for the success of this project.

Lastly, I ask the LGU of Tanauan to support the full implementation of Republic Act 9266 as part of the progress of our beloved town.

Together, let’s support all Filipino architects!

All the best,

Hector L.I. Gomez II, UAP
Registered Architect