Clearly Jebmag is paranoid, likes to jump to conclusions and attacks anyone who doesn't share his views instead of engaging them in a healthy debate, instead resorts to name calling and hostile accusations.
And yes I am helt1skelt1 at inquirer but I only posted TODAY, but it was yesterday when you accused me of multiple posting when I had only posted my comments here,
And no, I am not sphynx, nor do I know him
And no, I am not related nor employed by LVL
I'm just sharing my views and if anyone else shares the same view, those are not me, I hope you understand that
This is my last say on the subject of multiple posting, "you can never win an argument with a fool, they will just drag you down to their level"

Jebmag,

I am not Dyu and yes I am an architect.

For the record, please note that the correct procedure is you should commission the architect before he even starts his study. As noted, the government has just commissioned LVL for the project, meaning today or tomorrow is their day 1 for the project after being commissioned. Of course, we cannot suddenly expect them to release a study within a day after commissioning.

Second, the proper procedure is that the contract is in a "progress billing" format. Meaning the commissioning is tantamount to a downpayment which is a small fraction of the total professional fee by the firm. Once the schematic design has been approved by the government, it would be 1st progress billing then proceed to design development stage sir.

I am not here to anger but merely to inform.

The reason I stated the competition, is to inform the public that the competition doesn't immediately mean a downpayment or immediate requirement of commissioning. But again, there are rules to be followed when it comes to design competitions.

I also did not call Cobonpue et al incompetent. Please recheck my post. I merely stated that LVL has the credentials to at least support them as a logical architectural firm choice.

Let's put it this way, if you were a client who wanted to have a house designed and had to chose between an architect who designs warehouses/office and one who did houses, wouldn't you pick the one with experience in houses as a plus point on his part?

I am also not discrediting the proposal of Cobonpue et al. Please recheck again my statement about it. I applaud them for it. About the commissioning, then it is in fact a suggestion/schematic study or somewhere in the middle of design development stage. Since it is probono, then terminating their services is also possible and legally doable, eventhough they do not have a contract to begin with.

Like the example if they did not really like the proposal by LVL, then they can also terminate their services. Simple as that Jebmag.

Cheers sir.

Dyu (or 17 Sphynx17 or whatever your next name will be), where is LVL's proposal? Its obvious you're an architect from your knowledge of the subject or a wannabe. You have been championing design competitions na as Dyu. Tell your bosses to show their proposal. Let the people decide. I dont think anyone should be win the contract until they show a proposal. We saw Cobonpue's. Where is LVL's?

I’m just wondering why people are so adamantly against LVL or speculate immediately that there is “under the table” arrangement from the very beginning.
For those who are not aware, before an architect/architectural firm should start their study, the flow should really be that they are commissioned first before they start doing ANYTHING. This is the actually the right/legal way it should be done. Although I know most of you think it is study first before payment.
I do not know why Cobonpue et al did what they did. Maybe they just wanted to put their idea/vision out there and really wanted to help and I applaud them for that. But they should not expect that they are the official designers without proper documentation/agreement. Their name would be part of the concept that I guess most of the readers are aware of and that doesn’t change anything about who is really commissioned and who is not.
I, for one, really believe we should not waste the people’s money on NAIA as it doesn’t seem like a logical course of action. It is not a long term solution. Whatever is done would just a stop-gap measure or “band-aid” but it doesn’t really help much in terms of long term goals/targets.
For those that contest LVL’s credentials, well, I would like to ask, who among the Philippine Architects/Firms do have any actual real world experience in designing something of the caliber of an international airport? Reading in books help, but actual real world experience goes a long way beyond what books can really offer you as experience provides you better insight.
Second, those question why chose the same designers of NAIA 1 to upgrade it, I ask you this. How long ago was the building designed/constructed? It was around 30 years ago? How can you compare their design then to what is being designed/built now or in the past 10 years? Also, you haven’t even seen what LVL is proposing to do and you immediately shoot them down for it? Why?
Third, why are we immediately assuming that there is “under the table”? Wouldn’t it be easier to simply request for transparency to be available to the public? Don’t know how it would happen but we have a pending Freedom of Information (FOI) Bill that I think should remedy this.
But on another note, I think a competition would be a great idea for these types of things for local architects. But keep in mind, it should not be a straight forward competition of just providing a design proposal, presenting it and immediately awarding it to the winner.
It should be separated into 3 stages. Stage 1 is the “open to all architects/firms approach” wherein you gather all submission until a deadline then shortlist the selection to FINALISTS. I emphasize on the plurality of the finalists. Stage 1 would contain the design concepts (interior/exterior) and an overview of the design and general idea of what is planned for the project.
Stage 2 is then the submission by the finalists of design development plans/drawings. These would include passenger capacity projections, further study of flow of traffic (vehicles, persons, luggage, equipment etc), include initial engineering ideas with regards to developing works to be done (especially the special designs that would need to be integrated to make your proposal work), environmentally sensitive design considerations and how they were achieved/assumed to perform (this may include LEED considerations, passive cooling, water conservation/collection/treatment, etc). But the finalists of stage 2 would automatically receive a certain amount for their development of their designs. Why (some may ask)? Well, doing these requires a lot of work, a lot of different professionals and there needs to be a way to at least reimburse them for the effort they have put forward to complete the design development stage of their proposal.
Stage 3 is pretty much straight forward, the actual winner of the competition is commissioned to prepare and finalize the construction drawings and they will be tasked to also provide supervision work while the project is under construction.
Bidding as to who the contractor would be is another matter altogether and it is not included in the actual DESIGN COMPETITION as the contractor is not related to the design phase/stage of the whole project.
So this is how I see it.
PEACE guys!

I still think doing any work though on NAIA 1 is pretty much a pointless and wasted endeavor as there is a limit to how much work/change you can really do on it. But if a design competition would be done for this type of project, I think my concept of how the competition should be structured is more or less at least in the right place.