The district promptly rejected the entire field (no small matter) and required the general contractor to replace it, because even if the error was the fault of a subcontractor, the general contractor has the ultimate responsibility for delivering a finished product built to the architect's specifications. Any homeowner would have done the same thing: insisted that its general contractor make the effort to re-build it right. The district has withheld payment to the contractor until the finished project is acceptable. The general contractor has been very responsive and stepped forward to correct the problems.
We understand the scrutiny placed on the district. This is a complex project and the risk and responsibility ultimately rest with the construction team. In order to help identify and analyze the deficiencies and to work with all parties involved to facilitate a work plan for corrective action, additional oversight and inspection costs have been expended by the district. At this time the district is concentrating its efforts on getting the field completed. As previously indicated, the district is tracking its additional oversight and inspection costs and will at a later point address the matter of who bears ultimate responsibility for the additional costs.
This story contains 342 words.
If you are a paid subscriber, check to make sure you have logged in. Otherwise our system cannot recognize you as having full free access to our site.
If you are a paid print subscriber and haven't yet set up an online account, click here to get your online account activated.