The engineering giant HNTB is in line to receive $1 million to study the feasibility of putting a deck over Interstate 670, the southern band of freeway ribbon around downtown. Like the loop itself, the contract takes HNTB full circle. Decades ago, HNTB worked closely with city and state officials to design the city's urban freeway system.
It's not a job to be proud of.
An ugly and dysfunctional relic, the loop is one of the city's great blunders. The racetrack-shaped freeway carved chasms between downtown and surrounding neighborhoods. And the ropes of interstate don't function all that well as traffic movers, either. Tight turns and frequent entry and exit points put white in drivers' knuckles.
Now, we learn, HNTB will get paid for a chance to undo some of its sins. A team of city and state officials has chosen HNTB to study ideas for replacing the aging bridges over I-670 with something more pleasing. Imagine Truman Road as a tree-lined boulevard, camouflaging a hideous trench of exhaust.
Three years ago, I sat in a conference room in the company's Quality Hill headquarters, where HNTB officials presented city and business leaders with ideas for making downtown more inviting. Company architect Todd Achelpohl showed a sketch of what an I-670 deck might look like. Dignitaries drooled ("The Concrete Bungle," January 27, 2005).
The city paid HNTB $100,000 for that analysis. It was only the beginning.
With the help of Sen. Kit Bond and U.S. Rep. Emanuel Cleaver II, city officials in 2005 secured $1,089,000 in federal highway money to study ways to improve the space above I-670. Something has to be done, after all. The bridges linking downtown with the Crossroads won't last another 15 years.
The city invited engineering companies to submit their qualifications to perform the feasibility study. A selection team — Councilman Terry Riley, various city department heads and a Missouri Department of Transportation official — narrowed a field of seven applicants to four: BNIM, HDR, Crawford Architects and HNTB.
One of the four, it turns out, really wanted to win.
The City Council approves million-dollar contracts all the time. But as Bob Langenkamp, No. 2 in the city's Planning and Development Department, was forced to explain last week, this contract-selection process took a weird turn. Appearing before the city's Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, Langenkamp divulged that the four finalists had been allowed to inspect one another's qualifications before they came in for interviews.
Under the often stern questioning of Councilman Russ Johnson, Langenkamp said "different firms" had raised questions about the other teams and their applications. He said the city's legal department determined that the applications (which didn't contain bid proposals) were not confidential documents. So all four contenders were invited to City Hall for a look at their competitors' paperwork.
Langenkamp didn't indicate which company had made the initial request for information about its competitors. After the meeting adjourned, I asked Langenkamp for the name. He declined to give it up.
Well, I can tell you it was HNTB.
HNTB's curiosity appears to have breached professional etiquette. E-mails I've seen indicate that one competitor for the job was horrified to learn that HNTB's request had been made and honored.
Larry Frevert, HDR's public-works director, insisted that it was "highly inappropriate" for competitors to view one another's qualification packages, according to an e-mail he apparently sent to co-workers. Frevert even refused the invitation to look at the other applications, according to the e-mails. (Frevert did not respond to my request for comment.)
Councilman Johnson sides with Frevert. While pulling the story out of Langenkamp, Johnson complained that city staff had changed the rules of the game. "I think it was improper, unethical and unfair," Johnson told me later.
Under Johnson's interrogation, Langenkamp said he couldn't remember a time when a prospective city contractor asked to see his competitors' applications. But he also made it sound as though the city was compelled by open-records laws to make the information available.
City Attorney Galen Beaufort told me something different, however. In an e-mail on November 1, Beaufort said responses to requests for qualifications "can be closed" until the city executes a contract.
Whoa. Can be? That's not the story Langenkamp told. He had made it sound as though the city had to open the documents because of the gosh-darned Sunshine Law.
So what gives? City officials aren't saying. I forwarded Beaufort's e-mail, with a request for explanation, to Langenkamp and City Manager Wayne Cauthen. They haven't responded.
Left to my own devices, I've come up with a theory.
Langenkamp is going out of his way to make HNTB's document request sound innocent.
When a reporter asked him if the company he wouldn't name had made a formal request, Langenkamp suggested that the whole matter was just a casual thing. "They just called us and contacted me, and we were talking about who were the members of the other teams. It's easier just to come in and look at them. So that was when we checked and found out, yeah, we have to let them come in."
But according to Beaufort, the city didn't have to let them come in.
I'm betting that HNTB got a glimpse of the other proposals before the other teams did. Only after another finalist got wind of it and complained, I think, was the decision made to open the documents to all the contestants.
Despite Johnson's complaints, the council committee approved HNTB's contract. It goes before the full council on November 8. (HNTB officials have not responded to my request for comment.)
It's bad enough that HNTB is in line to get paid to correct a mistake as colossal as the rock collar around downtown's neck. Someone, I suppose, could find inspiration in HNTB's ability to profit from its mistakes. You know, lemonade from lemons.
But asking for the competition's playbook in order to get a leg up in securing a $1 million contract? That's just weak.
Showing 1-18 of 18
I really don't care who aborted the downtown loop fetus in the beginning. But let's at least have enough dignity to cut the alphabet noose off the neck of downtown. It defies all common sense and safety with its blind merges and erratic lane change requirements. HNTB, by virture of its location as pit boss for the loop, should know better. How can their workers, headed onto 670 from their headquarters survive long enough to fix the problem?
Take the 12th street ramp, enter I-35S, and merge across three lanes to hit 670. Then on 670, merge one lane to the right (since that lane ends) and weave to and fro as traffic from Truman and Grand swerve over trying, vainly and desperately, to make it to the I-29/35N on ramp. Now, you've changed lanes three times, avoided two accidents, and you've travelled all of half a mile.
Once you leave the loop, admire the stacks of automobiles queued up for miles across the overpasses, and change lanes once again or you'll wind up on Brooklyn.
Oh yes, it's an execution gone bad.
I really don't care who aborted the downtown loop fetus in the beginning. But let's at least have enough dignity to cut the alphabet noose off the neck of downtown. It defies all common sense and safety with its blind merges and erratic lane change requirements. HNTB, by virture of its location as pit boss for the loop, should know better. How can their workers, headed onto 670 from their headquarters survive long enough to fix the problem? Take the 12th street ramp, enter I-35S, and merge across three lanes to hit 670. Then on 670, merge one lane to the right (since that lane ends) and weave to and fro as traffic from Truman and Grand swerve over trying, vainly and desperately, to make it to the I-29/35N on ramp. Now, you've changed lanes three times, avoided two accidents, and you've travelled all of half a mile. Once you leave the loop, admire the stacks of automobiles queued up for miles across the overpasses, and change lanes once again or you'll wind up on Brooklyn. Oh yes, it's an execution gone bad.
Good points, bad points, and missing (but not ugly) points. However, Martin has written better pieces and I�m disappointed with this.
The comment that HNTB made earlier �mistakes� is not valid. The City & MODOT make the decisions that involve how much money is spent and of course the city/state goes with cheapest option and almost always fail to take a long term view. This is not an HNTB issue. This is normal government at work. Sigh.
However, I also am stunned that the qualification packages were looked at by the competition. Whoever at the city made the classification that these were not part of the bid packages should be fired. This is industrial trade secret stuff and now we have a local valid vendor who could very well decide not to do business with the city again. As a taxpayer, and ignoring the normal govt. at work comment above, I would still want a few �competitive� bids on any project to at provide some assurance that my taxpayer money is well spent, sort of.
Last, decking over the trench and turning it into a tunnel. This is actually not a bad idea. New York and Chicago have various items of this nature. However, what�s missing is varioous options of what will actually go on top. Comments on a tree lined Truman, a nice thought, are not valid. Look at Allis Plaza. Some very small trees in big planters is pretty much all you can do when everythng underneath is cement. What would be interesting would be a suspended parking garage for the Arena and the other public facilities a couple blocks west. Just a deck or two of parking that runs four blocks would provide a couple thousand parking spaces actually owned by the city that could be allocated to weekday use of these facilities. Or, some could be used as the southern downtown loop for light rail. Or, the city/state could sell or rent air rights and have someone else pay for it instead of taxpayers. This idea simply needs a lot more work.
Good points, bad points, and missing (but not ugly) points. However, Martin has written better pieces and I’m disappointed with this. The comment that HNTB made earlier “mistakes” is not valid. The City & MODOT make the decisions that involve how much money is spent and of course the city/state goes with cheapest option and almost always fail to take a long term view. This is not an HNTB issue. This is normal government at work. Sigh. However, I also am stunned that the qualification packages were looked at by the competition. Whoever at the city made the classification that these were not part of the bid packages should be fired. This is industrial trade secret stuff and now we have a local valid vendor who could very well decide not to do business with the city again. As a taxpayer, and ignoring the normal govt. at work comment above, I would still want a few “competitive” bids on any project to at provide some assurance that my taxpayer money is well spent, sort of. Last, decking over the trench and turning it into a tunnel. This is actually not a bad idea. New York and Chicago have various items of this nature. However, what’s missing is varioous options of what will actually go on top. Comments on a tree lined Truman, a nice thought, are not valid. Look at Allis Plaza. Some very small trees in big planters is pretty much all you can do when everythng underneath is cement. What would be interesting would be a suspended parking garage for the Arena and the other public facilities a couple blocks west. Just a deck or two of parking that runs four blocks would provide a couple thousand parking spaces actually owned by the city that could be allocated to weekday use of these facilities. Or, some could be used as the southern downtown loop for light rail. Or, the city/state could sell or rent air rights and have someone else pay for it instead of taxpayers. This idea simply needs a lot more work.
'Fraid so. For the life of me, I can't see why the qualifications of a corporation seeking a million tax dollars should be kept secret. Can you help me out on that?
No.... troubling in regards to fair play. 1 million in tax dollars is not that much when you consider how many multi-million dollar proposals there are at any given time. The core issue of the article is what is troubling. Parties should not be given access to their competitors information or proposal. It is unethical and does not keep the playing field even. The other aspect of this issue is that the same company utilized for original design has been given 1 million dollars to fix its own mistakes. That is by far, the more troubling aspect.
Is there anything else in my previous/current comment you need clarification on?
'Fraid so. For the life of me, I can't see why the qualifications of a corporation seeking a million tax dollars should be kept secret. Can you help me out on that?
No.... troubling in regards to fair play. 1 million in tax dollars is not that much when you consider how many multi-million dollar proposals there are at any given time. The core issue of the article is what is troubling. Parties should not be given access to their competitors information or proposal. It is unethical and does not keep the playing field even. The other aspect of this issue is that the same company utilized for original design has been given 1 million dollars to fix its own mistakes. That is by far, the more troubling aspect. Is there anything else in my previous/current comment you need clarification on?
Troubling that corporations seeking a million of our tax dollars shouldn't be able to keep their qualifications a secret? Really??
Troubling that corporations seeking a million of our tax dollars shouldn't be able to keep their qualifications a secret? Really??
I believe this article has served its intended purpose. Mr. Martin laid out the facts, to the best of his knowledge. He made it explicitly clear that portions of the article must be assumed. Repeated requests for verification and more information from various parties went unfulfilled. While he may not have had "all the facts", the core issue itself is troubling and I for one am glad he was able bring the matter to light.
I believe this article has served its intended purpose. Mr. Martin laid out the facts, to the best of his knowledge. He made it explicitly clear that portions of the article must be assumed. Repeated requests for verification and more information from various parties went unfulfilled. While he may not have had "all the facts", the core issue itself is troubling and I for one am glad he was able bring the matter to light.
Butch -
You'd suspect wrong. I can't even think of anyone I know that works for HNTB off the top of my head. I'm just a blogger (gonemild.com) who thinks real journalists ought to do something more solid than guesswork.
But at least you didn't publish your speculation as fact, I'll give you that much!
Is this really happening again? Are we really reading David Martin's guesswork when he fails to get to the bottom of a story?
Back when the Wall Street Journal covered an aspect of the Minuteman story that Martin had missed, we were treated to Martin's speculation that the story was made up, even though Martin couldn't prove it. This time Martin was unable to find out who requested the opportunity to review applications, and we are treated to Martin's speculation again.
Where's the journalism here? We are assured twice that it was HNTB who requested the review, but nowhere does Martin explain what leads to that conclusion. Everyone who knows anything refuses comment.
Since speculation is part of the game in Martin's version of journalism, I suspect that someone told Martin off the record that it was HNTB. I suspect he failed to get anyone to go on record with it. I suspect he dislikes HNTB for historical grudges.
I suspect that David Martin was frustrated because he couldn't prove that HNTB had done something wrong. I suspect he was angry enough that he wrote a story calling the company names, but utterly failing to introduce proof.
I suspect other journalists would have stayed on the story and uncovered proof (he doesn't say whether he even filed a sunshine law request with the city, so I'll go ahead and "suspect" that he didn't - it's a good example of how guesswork can lead to unfairness).
Butch - You'd suspect wrong. I can't even think of anyone I know that works for HNTB off the top of my head. I'm just a blogger (gonemild.com) who thinks real journalists ought to do something more solid than guesswork. But at least you didn't publish your speculation as fact, I'll give you that much!
Is this really happening again? Are we really reading David Martin's guesswork when he fails to get to the bottom of a story? Back when the Wall Street Journal covered an aspect of the Minuteman story that Martin had missed, we were treated to Martin's speculation that the story was made up, even though Martin couldn't prove it. This time Martin was unable to find out who requested the opportunity to review applications, and we are treated to Martin's speculation again. Where's the journalism here? We are assured twice that it was HNTB who requested the review, but nowhere does Martin explain what leads to that conclusion. Everyone who knows anything refuses comment. Since speculation is part of the game in Martin's version of journalism, I suspect that someone told Martin off the record that it was HNTB. I suspect he failed to get anyone to go on record with it. I suspect he dislikes HNTB for historical grudges. I suspect that David Martin was frustrated because he couldn't prove that HNTB had done something wrong. I suspect he was angry enough that he wrote a story calling the company names, but utterly failing to introduce proof. I suspect other journalists would have stayed on the story and uncovered proof (he doesn't say whether he even filed a sunshine law request with the city, so I'll go ahead and "suspect" that he didn't - it's a good example of how guesswork can lead to unfairness).
like
dislike
