BULLAMANKA-PINHEADS Archives

The listserv where the buildings do the talking

BULLAMANKA-PINHEADS@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Sender:
"The listserv that Ruth calls \"Pluto's spider-hole.\"" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
Date:
Tue, 19 Sep 2006 18:28:03 -0500
In-Reply-To:
MIME-Version:
1.0
Reply-To:
"The listserv that Ruth calls \"Pluto's spider-hole.\"" <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (67 lines)
Ilene,

I, too, tend to favor a team approach whenever that is possible. Each of us 
has dedicated a lifetime of work to our respective careers. Each of us who are 
any good at what we do know a lot more about what we do than someone from 
another discipline. I just found this particular presenter exceptionally 
arrogant, and happen to know (for almost 20 years) the contractor he 
ridiculed. 

I think most professionals would agree that performance-based specifications 
are the most effective approach. In the case of materials specifications, it 
is also almost always the only legal way to go on public projects. Contractor 
prequalification is a sticky issue in some venues, isn't it? It serves 
everyone's interest if it is done effectively, though.

Mike E.
---------- Original Message -----------
From: "Ilene R. Tyler" <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Tue, 19 Sep 2006 09:15:25 -0400
Subject: [BP] APT

> Mike, I'm sorry I missed you, and yes I was at that session.  I didn't
> react quite as strongly about the means and methods lecture, and there
> were a few who questioned the speaker about his approach.
> 
> I like to leave room for contractor/craftsman creativity going into the
> project, as this develops true partnering and shared ownership of the
> project's outcome.  There needs to be open and respectful 
> communication, and an understanding client.  That can be the most 
> satisfying part of the process, but it suggests risk in not knowing 
> everything in advance.
> 
> Doing a full "drop" is a possibility for larger projects, but often
> there is no time, and the client may not allow the expense.  Otherwise,
> the specs become performance-based for the actual work, including
> testing to determine formulas, etc., during the construction phase.  If
> the contractor selection is price-based, or without control of
> sub-contractor qualification, then there is often a need to educate and
> monitor more than if the entire project is pre-qualified based on 
> proven experience.
> 
> Either way, I expect to learn and assist.  And, it's good to share in
> venues like APT.
> 
> QUINN EVANS | ARCHITECTS
> 
> Ilene R. Tyler, FAIA, FAPT
> 
> 219 1/2 N. Main Street
> Ann Arbor, MI  48104
> [log in to unmask]
> www.quinnevans.com
> v 734.663.5888
> f 734.663.5044
> 
> --
> To terminate puerile preservation prattling among pals and the
> uncoffee-ed, or to change your settings, go to:
> <http://listserv.icors.org/archives/bullamanka-pinheads.html>
------- End of Original Message -------

--
To terminate puerile preservation prattling among pals and the
uncoffee-ed, or to change your settings, go to:
<http://listserv.icors.org/archives/bullamanka-pinheads.html>

ATOM RSS1 RSS2