Defects
Almost every project that we build has construction
defects. Some are fairly major, such as in a multistory building where a
contractor failed to install 98% of the brick ties needed to keep exterior
brick from falling onto the sidewalk. At a parking structure, a contractor
left out or misplaced much of the reinforcing steel needed in columns and
post-tensioned beams. And at a major new laboratory that we wanted to use to
aid in anthrax research, we cannot because the cracked, ostensibly airtight
walls cannot contain airborne bacteria and viruses.
Believe me, we tried to prevent such errors by using
supervising architects, field inspectors and testing laboratories. But we
erred in that all of us wrongly assumed that the crews who were installing
the work knew what they were doing and cared about providing construction
quality.
Too often, facilities owners blame construction defects
on architects who release incomplete drawings and specifications. We seem to
have forgotten one simple fact. The constructor, whether a general
contractor, construction manager at-risk or a design builder, has complete
responsibility for the proper and timely completion and installation of the
work.
Even if a project’s architect did not provide any
inspection services at all, the project’s constructor is still expected,
indeed required, to perform inspections to insure that the work is installed
properly. Isn’t that what the project superintendent is supposed to do?
Isn’t he or she supposed to supervise the work instead of just making sure
that the subcontractors show up? Doesn’t the contractor have to have a
quality control individual?
We all know about the duties and responsibilities under
construction agreements, but haven’t we forgotten one important point? Who
is responsible for the proper construction of the project? To whom do we
look to complete the work? If not the constructor, then whom?
I’ve seen a lot of changes in the construction industry in the past 30
years. Construction systems have become more and more complicated.
Disciplines have divided and subdivided and whole new trades have sprung up.
The whole concept of the general contractor, like the master architect, is
becoming a thing of the
past. When was the last time you had a project that
didn’t have a project manager, a project engineer and a superintendent? Did
any of them do anything more than push paper? Did any of them walk the
jobsite to make sure that the folks with the hammers and nails weren’t
putting holes in the roof?
Today’s general contractor seldom self-performs a
substantial portion of the work, and functions instead as more of a
construction manager than a GC. To make matters worse, subcontractors are
beginning to do the same by hiring their own subs to actually perform the
work. With tier upon tier and with responsibility spread around, whom do you
deal with when you have a problem on site?
How many times have you heard your GC’s superintendent
say, "It’s not my fault, it’s the specialty contractor’s. Why didn’t the
owner’s architect catch the problem. Didn’t you have an inspector on site?"
I say that the people who pay the bills need to demand
that constructors meet their obligations to install the work right. We need
to put the responsibility for proper completion back where it really
belongs. So what am I doing to address this problem? Besides increasing the
quality and quantity of inspections performed by our designers and project
managers, I’m trying to put the emphasis back on the constructors.
