Julian Owens - Test in Transparency

PROMPT 1

As Stated in NCARB's 2011-2012 Rules of Conduct:

"NCARB Mission: The National Council of Architectural Registration Boards protects the public health, safety, and welfare by leading the regulation of the practice of architecture through the development and application of standards for licensure and credentialing of architects. Core Values NCARB believes in: • Leadership – Proactive, creative thinking, and decisive actions. • Accountability – Consistent, equitable, and responsible performance. • Transparency – Clear and accessible rules, policies, procedures, governance, and communication. • Integrity – Honest, impartial, and well-reasoned action. • Collaboration – Working together toward common goals. • Excellence – Professional, expert, courteous, respectful, and responsive service. NCARB is a nonprofit corporation comprising the legally constituted architectural registration boards of the 50 states, the District of Columbia, Guam, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands as its members."

Select one of the core values listed above, and ask your Mentor to provide an example or case study from his/her practice in which one of these core values has been CHALLENGED. Your response in your journal should:

•Briefly describe this case study

•List a scenario in which one of these core values might be compromised in practice regularly

We have a number of low income projects with the city currently. With each property we have had to go in front of the Technical Review Committee (TRC). This committee is a branch of the City and it was exponentially difficult to get all parts of said committee to describe exactly what we needed to provide via our drawing set. We went back and forth a number of times and incurred increased expenses due to the time and manpower needed to comply with the repeat changes and schedule the TRC required of each site. The TRC office was across the hall at the city from our client (Housing and Community Development). It showed us how important it was to, as early as possible, put the different parties in the same room to make sure everyone knew what was expected and if there were any changes they would be made prior to the next meeting.  The fact that there are a number of different agencies that are part of the TRC and there are no clear guidelines for each has made this process increasingly difficult to wade through. Even if the client is the City.

Having clear and accessible rules, policies, procedures, governance, and communication absolutely apply to the Board of Architectural Review. Because the review is meant to be about context (height, scale, and mass) it has proven difficult to establish a set of rules that can be considered by the Board and understood by the public and the professional. Sites are different and the public comment always provides an opportunity for increased conflict or consternation.