'Lens' Construction Manager Contract Set for Council Vote

The proposed agreement with Skanska USA Building is for pre-construction and construction services not to exceed $890,000.

The City Council will vote on a proposed contract Thursday that would approve the construction manager for the "Lens" pier and would also set the guaranteed maximum price of $890,000 for preconstruction services. 

  • Preconstruction Phase - Basis of Design Fee, $50,000. 
  • Preconstruction Phase - Design Service Fee, $340,000. 
  • Geotechnical Testing Services - $500,000. 

According to city documents, Skanksa USA Building's services are split into two phases. 

Phase 1, Skanska shall provide cost estimating, constructability reviews and value engineering services for Michael Maltzan Architecture during development of design documents by Michael Maltzan. Phase 2, Skanska shall provide a guaranteed maximum price, which shall become part of a guaranteed maximum price amendment for the construction of the new pier within the city's budget of $50 million.

Preconstruction services begin with Skanska working closely with Michael Maltzan Architecture to develop a cost plan, which is a deliverable required to be provided by Michael Maltzan at the end of the basis of design phase ... Skanska will provide preconstruction services that include but are not limited to refinement of cost estimates during the design phases, constructability reviews, value engineering, project scheduling and procurement coordination. 

On Aug. 2, the council voted to authorize city staff to begin contract negotiations with Skanksa for a construction manager at Risk Agreement with a guaranteed maximum price. 

The existing St. Petersburg Pier is scheduled to close on May 31, 2013, with demolition expected to begin in Fall 2013. 

St. Petersburg officials are continuing with plans to build the "Lens," which is the design slated to replace the existing inverted pyramid, despite pending a legal threat and new petition drive. 

Mayor Bill Foster said last month that the city and Michael Maltzan Architecture will continue with the plan to build the "Lens" until a judge tells them to stop. 

"This is coming along and move forward is what we will do," Foster said. "I assure you that my staff is prepared to move forward with permitting, demolition and construction until somebody tells us to stop.

"I am excited about the potential for the new pier," Foster said last month. "There are some in the city that disagree and that’s the American way. If things turn into a campaign then people in this city will be able to take a side ... and this may end up on a ballot, but until then we are going to move forward."

Donald H October 02, 2012 at 11:07 AM
Despite the fact that a majority of the citizenry of St. Pete signed petitons & wanted to vote on this issue it still being rammed down our thoats with absolutely NO respect for our wishes & wants...!!! If we are a lucky a "killer Hurricane" will come ang and wash the damned thing away...!
Dharma October 02, 2012 at 01:03 PM
I don’t know anyone who does what this? Not one person has ever said a thing to oh, great, let’s put up a new pier. In fact I hear things like so far they haven’t ever had a good reason for this... anytime they ever put in a new one. But for me all I want to say is why; do they keep putting up so many big things that just aren’t the least bit representative of this community! Of our tropical community instead they are acting like we are this big city that is huge and very different of our tropics. People come here because it is the tropics, not because its Moscow or Seattle.
Red October 02, 2012 at 02:12 PM
The "ALL SEEING FEW"of our city counsel have a secret view into the needs of our city. Just accept your nose ring and stop complaining about a vote. They decided what we would be "blessed" with long ago. . .. ... and you though you really had a choice. Silly rabbit.
sparky October 02, 2012 at 02:21 PM
Its the entrenched administration doing what it pleases and continuing to spend money like we don't have a 12 million dollar deficit...Yes, I know that money can't go into the budget. But look at the cost of the current pier and the cost of the Lens to the city...they are cooking the lens cost with expected retail rentals on Spa Beach- they are taking away our park area for commercial development so you can walk out and look at the water because you can't see it from shore because of the retail development. Vote out all current council members and the mayor who have supported this effort. Wingay Newton is the only straight up guy on the council.
cherylwithac October 02, 2012 at 02:24 PM
From what I understand, the City Council perceives St. Petersburg to be a small New York City.
Peter J Dunlay October 02, 2012 at 03:10 PM
May 30th, 2013: Occupy the St. Pete Pier! No demolition without the approval of the Citizens of St. Pete! Anyone game? Oh,and also, prepare to remove from Office any and all who "foisted" this plan on the Public! Elections are coming!
DRaymond October 02, 2012 at 03:59 PM
A majority of citizens did not sign the petition and the required minimum number of signatures to add a referendum to the ballot was not reached before the set deadline.
Sam October 02, 2012 at 04:01 PM
The city ran a budget deficit of 13 million last year. Wonder what it's going to be this year? The Rays want a new stadium at a cost of millions. Attendance is way down! Wonder why? Florida has one of the worst unemployment records and highest forclosure rates in the USA. Housing prices are still in decline. The LENS is underway with a contract for almost a million for preconstruction services. What's the total cost going to be? Where is the money going to come from to support this project? Here we are in the middle of one of the worst economic downturns since the 1930's and the tax burden is being escalated. Government has gone overboard in spending at the Federal, State, and Local levels. The city of St. Petersburg is a place where people come to retire. I am sure that most are not retiring at a high income level. We are seeing medical, food and energy costs skyrocketing! All this on fixed incomes. The squeeze on retiree incomes in the future, by this unconscionable spending, will have disastrous results on our elderly population and society. In general I have not seen any politicians take paycuts or share in the economic hardships carried by millions of Americans. POLITICIANS ARE SUPPOSED TO PROVIDE LEADERSHIP AND SET EXCELLENT EXAMPLES AS AS CITIZENS. Today, nothing could be further from the truth!
N.A.W. October 02, 2012 at 04:44 PM
DRaymond 11:59 am on Tuesday, October 2, 2012 "A majority of citizens did not sign the petition and the required minimum number of signatures to add a referendum to the ballot was not reached before the set deadline." The city requires 10% of the total registered voters to sign petitions in order to qualify with the supervisor of elections. That would be 15,652 petitions signed. 23,000 signed petitions were collected, far surpassing the required amount in a landslide petition campaign. Deadlines for petitions are regulated by the supervisor of elections, not arbitrary deadlines set by mayors. Petitions are good for 2 years from the time of signature. In fact the petitions were collected, turned in, and verified in plenty of time. Then council decided to spit in the face of 23,000 registered voters, regardless of technicalities. 23,000 signed petitions by registered voters is a mandate, and was ignored. Now you have a situation where there are 23,000 people, their friends, and their families VERY angry with council and the mayor for continuing to go ahead with this ill-fated concept. Let the people vote.
Peter J Dunlay October 02, 2012 at 04:48 PM
"A majority of citizens did not sign the petition and the required minimum number of signatures to add a referendum to the ballot was not reached before the set deadline." Really? And who was it that set this arbitrary deadline? Why, the very same people that are pushing this Project! Pardon the "disorganization" of the People. Foster and Council (with the exception of Newton) must go!
Peter J Dunlay October 02, 2012 at 04:51 PM
Glad to see you've got the whole picture now!
Peter J Dunlay October 02, 2012 at 05:13 PM
Has anyone noticed that images of the Pier have been removed from all the kiosks all over Town? These politicians are really sure of themselves!
Bizaboo October 02, 2012 at 05:46 PM
Dharma, you don't know what you're talking about and your writing skills are atrocious!
S. Ripley October 02, 2012 at 09:10 PM
This all started back in 2005, and now is pretty much a done deal. It may not be built yet, but the war was over long ago. Remember this next time big money goes looking for a project. That is the time to get involved, not years later when you wake up and realize it is getting spent on something you don’t like.
N.A.W. October 02, 2012 at 10:04 PM
The city voted for demolishing the pier in 2010. A refurbishment option was supposed to be an option for the entire process. In 2005, the TIF financing agreement was for a refurbishment. This administration changed that a few months after Foster came into office. The money was intended for a refurbishment, then it was changed to demolishing, and building new. The petition drive for a vote started in Nov. of 2010, after council voted, at the urging of the Mayor, to demolish the pier without a vote. The voters spoke in the form of the petition, and still it makes no difference to our leaders, with a couple exceptions. Whether they voted the referendum down on a legal technicality, or not, they still shut down 23,000 registered voters. Truly amazing.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something