In the event of differing interpretations of specifications, what should be considered?

When it comes to differing interpretations of specifications, the correct approach is to adhere to the principle that the City's reasonable interpretation shall be determinative. This means that in cases of ambiguity or differing viewpoints on the specifications, the interpretation made by the City is given precedence, as it is often based on established guidelines, regulatory requirements, and the overall objectives of the project.

This prioritization is crucial because it helps ensure that the project adheres to regulatory standards and follows the intended goals set forth by the City. By relying on the City's reasoned interpretation, the likelihood of miscommunication or misunderstanding between the contractor and the City is reduced, leading to smoother project execution.

Other choices may suggest giving priority to the contractor's viewpoint, treating all interpretations equally, or relying on the interpretation of the first proposal, which could lead to inconsistencies, disputes, or potential non-compliance with legal or procedural standards. Thus, focusing on the City's interpretation provides clarity and helps guide the project's outcomes effectively.