The price tag for a Tampa Bay Rays stadium at Hillsborough College could be at least $300 million higher than projected, according to a report obtained Monday by the Tampa Bay Times.
A preliminary analysis done by construction firm Skanska and commissioned by the Tampa Sports Authority found that the Rays’ proposed grid shell roof is “significantly heavier, more complex and more costly.” It also found that the proposed roof material is susceptible to being damaged by storm debris.
But that report may be already outdated, as correspondence following that March 6 report shows that the Rays changed roof design parameters. They now differ from what their firms gave to Skanska in January. Skanska warned that their analysis may be inapplicable and would have to be updated for an additional fee.
Rays CEO Ken Babby sent a letter to Sports Authority CEO Eric Hart Monday in response to the report. He said that the team has continued to update the design of the stadium in order to be ready for opening day 2029. He also said the team is “committed … to covering all cost overruns” and will soon produce a financing proposal.
“Your report will be a helpful reference in the upcoming stages of the design process as we continue in our mission to deliver a ballpark befitting the Tampa Bay community,” Babby wrote, adding that the Rays have given additional information to Skanska.
The Tampa Bay Times had previously submitted a public records request with the Sports Authority for the Skanska report and was told March 9 that there were no responsive records. The Sports Authority provided the report Monday after a follow-up inquiry.
Hart and Bobby Silvest, vice president of marketing and communications, did not respond to calls and text messages seeking comment.
The Sports Authority hired Skanska to perform an evaluation of the $2.3 billion stadium cost projection by the Rays.
Records show that on Jan. 29, Skanska proposed a fee of $49,000 to do its assessment of the proposed stadium at Hillsborough College’s Dale Mabry campus.
Four days after the report was issued March 6, two senior vice presidents at Skanska told Hart in a letter that they were informed by the Rays that “several foundational roof design parameters” had changed from what they were initially told Jan. 20.
“We want to note that receiving materially different design information at this stage creates inefficiencies and limits the applicability of the completed analysis,” wrote Curtis Elswick and Chuck Jablon.
They wrote that to ensure the Sports Authority “has an accurate roof design and cost evaluation aligned with the current design direction” Skanska could do a revised analysis for an additional fee.
Jablon, who lives in St. Pete Beach, referred a reporter to Skanska spokesperson for comment and to Hart.
Hillsborough County Deputy County Administrator Gregory Horwedel shared the Skanska report with commissioners in an email Monday. He said that the county “is not inclined” to take development risk, jeopardize its AAA credit rating or pay for items that do not provide a public benefit.
Skanska’s report said that the grid shell roof pitched by the Rays and construction firms Mortenson and Beck was found to be significantly heavier than stated. It would also require 63 temporary towers ranging from 135 to 245 feet in height, “which would materially increase cost, risk and schedule duration.”
The report said Mortenson and Beck suggested using a plastic polymer roof material. Skanska found that that kind of material is susceptible to puncture, tearing and catastrophic panel failure. Damage to that material “can lead to rapid depressurization” and water intrusion. Replacement of that material requires specific fabrication and installation resulting in long lead teams and higher lifecycle costs.
Skanska said its specialty engineering partner, Maffeis Engineering, suggested an alternative: A trussed arched roof that fully complies with Major League Baseball standards and height restrictions due to Tampa International Airport’s proximity.
“We believe the savings of this alternative could be in the range of $60 million under the stated budget,” read Skanska’s report, though the “stated budget” is not specified.
Tampa City Council chairperson Alan Clendenin, who also serves on the Tampa Sports Authority’s board, said the information used for the report is “not the current data.”
“This project was, I think, 20% baked,” Clendenin said in a phone call to the Tampa Bay Times Monday evening, explaining that there would be significant changes in engineering and design concepts.
“The Rays are responsible for the overages,” Clendenin said. “So of course, they’re going to do what they need to do to be able to get this thing as close to budget as they can, because every dollar they spend is coming out of their pocket, not the taxpayers’.”
Clendenin said Tampa is “in the final hours of negotiating.”
“I believe, based on the data that I’ve been privileged to see, everything is looking like it’s pointed in the right direction, that it’s a deal that we can reach,” he said. “But of course, until the last document slides across my desk and I see the last ‘I’ dotted, the last ’T’ crossed, I can’t say 100%.”
Times staff writer Nina Moske contributed to this report.
