40. A contract has been finalized and construction has begun on a project that is to be completed in 90 days. There is no float time in the schedule. After the first 30 days, the zoning inspector stops the project because approval of an easement has not been completed. The contractor requests a change order for additional time and money. What should happen in this case?
Answer: A
The contractor should be given the time extension without the additional cost.
In this scenario, since the project has been halted due to circumstances beyond the contractor's control—specifically, the lack of zoning approval for an easement—it is reasonable for the contractor to be granted a time extension. However, since the delay was not caused by the contractor's actions, there should not be an additional cost associated with this extension.
A) The contractor should be given the time extension without the additional cost.
This option is correct because when delays occur due to external factors outside of the contractor's influence, such as zoning approvals, it is standard practice to grant an extension of time to the contractor without imposing additional costs. The contract's timeline is impacted by regulatory processes, thus justifying the extension.
B) The contractor's request should be rejected by the owner.
This option is incorrect as rejecting the contractor's request does not take into consideration the external factors causing the delay. The owner would be unfairly penalizing the contractor for circumstances beyond their control, which goes against standard contract practices in construction.
C) The owner should approve the request.
While this option may initially seem reasonable, it lacks the specificity regarding the financial aspect. Approving the request without clarifying that there should be no additional costs does not align with the correct understanding of the situation, where the contractor should not bear extra expenses due to the delay caused by zoning issues.
D) The local zoning jurisdiction will be responsible for paying the additional cost associated with the delay.
This option is incorrect as it improperly assigns the financial responsibility for the delay to the zoning jurisdiction. The contractor should not incur additional costs due to the delay, but it does not imply that the zoning authority would be liable for these costs, which are typically borne by the project owner.
Conclusion
The correct answer is A, as it appropriately addresses the impact of external regulatory delays on the project timeline without imposing financial penalties on the contractor. All other options fail to recognize the principles of fairness and accountability in construction contracts, particularly in situations where delays are caused by factors outside the contractor's control.