Apple has parted ways with two of the contractors overseeing the main construction of its new “Spaceship” campus. The Silicon Valley Business Journal reports that DPR Construction Inc.and Skanska USA, the two companies that won a joint bid on the new Apple campus, are no longer going to be part of the team. Rising costs and repeated delays are reportedly to blame.
In a leaked internal email, Skanska USA chief Richard Cavallaro wrote that Apple and the construction company were “unable to come to an agreement during negotiations for the revised scope of work,” adding that the team “will transition completely off the project in the next several weeks.”
It’s unknown who will take over the construction project once Skanska bows out. However, two anonymous industry sources told the Journal that an Atlanta-based firm called Holder Construction may take over the project from here. Holder worked on a data center for Apple in the past, so the report isn’t out of the question. Regardless of which company takes over, Apple’s ambitious campus is likely to face yet another costly delay.
Steve Jobs pitched the project to the Cupertino City Council in 2011, just a short time before his death. Jobs’ vision for the Spaceship campus included 40-foot floor-to-ceiling curved windows and a self-sustainable design, which would only use the power grid in rare times of emergency. The new building was intended to house almost 12,000 employees. The ambitious construction project seemed more like yet another impossible Apple design feat than a functional office space, but the futuristic office space project was approved.
However, since its conception, the campus construction project has been plagued by delays and rising costs. The original move-in date for the new Apple Spaceship campus was 2015. In 2013, amid delays and rising costs, that date was pushed back to 2016. Now that a rare mid-stream shift in construction crews has taken place, estimates place the actual move-in date somewhere in 2017. Apple is reportedly hoping an occupation in late 2016 is still possible. Additionally, the project is estimated to reach costs of $5 billion, placing it about $2 billion over budget.
