Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | BP - His DNA is this long. |
Date: | Fri, 24 Jul 1998 14:18:45 EDT |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
In a message dated 7/23/98 9:55:39 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
[log in to unmask] writes:
<< Imagine how much closer trades have to be watched on a preservation
project. >>
Increases the challenge of project management and causes one to focus more on
communications of the preservation vision than on the physical techniques.
Though the term "watch" in my opinion should be amended to "experienced". An
experienced trade, which is what should be applied to historic preservation,
does not need to be watched like wild children or dogs on the loose. Eliminate
the requirement to only use low-bid contractors, stick to pre-qualification of
experienced contractors, and qualify the craftpersons by having them do site
mock-ups, and the trades will not need to be "watched" as much. Problem is you
have to be willing to pay the cost to support an educated worker. A reversal
of the oversight bias is that we, as citizens, would insist to "watch" those
who choose to hire inexperienced contractors and craftpersons.
][<en
|
|
|