KCRag Forum

Block Development broke ground on a 300,000 s.f. office complex in Lenexa.  One of the five story buildings will be the new regional HQ for Kiewit Power Inc. of Omaha, NE (not Olathe as the article reads).  Lenexa and Kansas gave a $600,000.00 incentive for green design standards.

http://www.globest.com/news/1188_1188/k ... 905-1.html

GuyInLenexa wrote: Lenexa and Kansas gave a $600,000.00 incentive for green design standards.

Does the greens design extend to transportation?  Transportation-related emissions are the biggest contributor to climate change in this region, so I'm skeptical of a "green" building that in a location without usable public transportation.  What bus routes serve this location?  How many residential units are within walking distance??

I agree that transit should be a consideration of being a green building or development.  I only hope that there will be future plans for some sort of transit on the Renner corridor.

ha ha... a green building you have to drive to!

dangerboy wrote: Does the greens design extend to transportation?  Transportation-related emissions are the biggest contributor to climate change in this region, so I'm skeptical of a "green" building that in a location without usable public transportation.  What bus routes serve this location?  How many residential units are within walking distance??

I work in a LEEDS certified "Green" building and the design criteria does take transportation into effect.  We provide special parking for motorcycles and a few electrical outlets for electric vehicles.  When we built in 2003 there weren't many electric vehicles, so it was not a big design criteria.  As the inventory of electric vehicles grows, that will undoubtedly become a bigger component of the LEEDs criteria.  I am pretty sure public transportation comes in as well - we built close by a bus stop so I think we got some credit for that.

The LEEDs certification also has stringent standards for parking lots, storm water runoff, etc.  You should check it out online.  The info is available and is not hard to understand.  Since we built in 2002-2003 the standards have developed further and are more stringent, but the economic case is even better than it was for us because of the rise of energy prices.

Is BNIM the architect?  I am getting sick of blind architects giving lip service to energy efficiency and recycled materials, but refusing to address public transit and planning and zoning, which would have the greatest effect of all on green building.  It is almost like selling a car with sand in the carbuerator - architects who talk about building science, energy efficiency, and sustainability and don't seriously consider site and integration into existing infrastructure, transit, and zoning are sheysters.  Any development in Lenexa, which is zoned and planned to work soley as a personal vehicle moving and storage community, cannot be considered green or sustainable.  It may save on energy costs to the building owner, but building on virgin land in the far flung reaches of the region is disingenuous - and makes me feel that architects who push green architecture and LEED buildings need to understand that the biggest flaw is the way our new cities are zoned - and until we revise these statutes and 50 years of planning doctrine, the American cityscape will continue to be a major energy devil.

To be considered sustainable, a project should not be a greenfield development accessible only by a highway.  Development on land such as this should be heavily taxed, on a federal level.

C'mon. You get 1 point for a bike rack. What more could you want? 

make it non-smoking and get another....

"LEEDS certified "Green" building and the design criteria does take transportation into effect.  We provide special parking for motorcycles and a few electrical outlets for electric vehicles.  When we built in 2003 there weren't many electric vehicles, so it was not a big design criteria.  As the inventory of electric vehicles grows, that will undoubtedly become a bigger component of the LEEDs criteria.  I am pretty sure public transportation comes in as well - we built close by a bus stop so I think we got some credit for that."



Come on that's like saying I live in a "Green" house because I have an AC outlet in the garage.   This area of Johnson County is the furthest thing from "Green".

"I am getting sick of blind architects giving lip service to energy efficiency and recycled materials, but refusing to address public transit and planning and zoning, which would have the greatest effect of all on green building.  It is almost like selling a car with sand in the carbuerator - architects who talk about building science, energy efficiency, and sustainability and don't seriously consider site and integration into existing infrastructure, transit, and zoning are sheysters.  Any development in Lenexa, which is zoned and planned to work soley as a personal vehicle moving and storage community, cannot be considered green or sustainable."

No offense meant here man but you're pointing your finger in the wrong direction.  The architects aren't picking the sites.  They do what the can do, within their project budget.  What are you supposed to do if you were commissioned for this building?  Say, "nah - can't do it - bus routes aren't close enough - come holler at me when you do a real urban revitalization." 

Every new development can't be LEED Platinum.  I mean c'mon, they're for doing something at least.  I know, personally, that Ken Block puts in a considerable amount of time researching new ways to green his developments.

By the way, do you make the same arguement for the Boulevard Brewery?  Hey guys, you're not within the 1/2 mile required of the residential and basic services you'd need for that LEED credit, so your project is a failure - why the hype?  Thanks for the vegetated roof, though you put lipstick on an environmental pig.

Dumb argument.

Also, please don't tell me that was a jab at BNIM - they've done more for sustainable design across the nation than most any firm in the Midwest.  Berkebile is a genious.

I love BNIM.  They have done wonderful things.  I have a few friends that work there, and I work in architecture in this town as well.  I understand that the way LEED credits work can be very limiting.   What bothers me is the way most architects treat buildings as singular objects, and not as a key component in a larger system.  Architects arn't the only ones who are guilty. Planners, city builders, developers, zoning ordinannces, etc, all are culpable.  I was frustrated last week because I keep hearing and participating in discussions about green architecture, environmental responsibility, etc, but most people limit themselves by going after LEED credits - I think architects, builders, and developers should be advocating for better, more integrated systems of buildings that work efficiently with each other and with a transporation system that is universal and clean.  Instead, you have office parks in Lenexa acquiring LEED silver status because they have a green roof or are using thermal heat pumps.  I love these energy solutions, but I think how cities work with buildings will be the biggest problem in the near future, and I'd like to see architects practice a little more environmental responsibilty when working with a client. 
  I really believe the federal government should heavily tax development on virgin land.  I know that goes against "what makes this country great", but how else can we curtail unsustainable land use and wasted infrastructure?

Also, I did not mean my earlier post as a dig against any firm or company in particular.  I was simply venting my frustration at the process - I'm not sure there is a realistic answer, but I think architects are responsible for advocacy for change. 

I hear you.  I'm a LEED AP, and much good as it has done, USGBC has certainly become a marketing tool, and that is not what we're looking for.  Perhaps, in addition to the prereq's, negative points in the scoring system would be an idea?  Thing is, with alot of the developers I work with, if they can't hit Certified, they pretty much say, "why screw with any of it then?"  The ones who are implementing something, anything, on uncertified buildings are certainly to be commended.

...and the free market is good because???

GuyInLenexa wrote:

Block Development broke ground on a 300,000 s.f. office complex in Lenexa.  One of the five story buildings will be the new regional HQ for Kiewit Power Inc. of Omaha, NE (not Olathe as the article reads).  Lenexa and Kansas gave a $600,000.00 incentive for green design standards.

http://www.globest.com/news/1188_1188/k ... 905-1.html

Where is this going to be?  Is this the deal at 95th and Renner?

https://www.bizjournals.com/kansascity/ ... iewit.html

Block Real Estate Services LLC’s plans to redevelop a former office building near Lenexa City Center won approval from the City Council on Tuesday night.

The City Council unanimously approved Block’s plans to transform the building near 95th Street and Renner Boulevard into a 319-apartment, mixed-use complex. Omaha-based engineering firm Kiewit Corp. previously occupied the building.

Block plans to construct a five-story, 353,744-square-foot building west of the former engineering building, which will include 239 apartments and an internal 484-space garage. Block will put a 37,569-square-foot amenity courtyard above the parking garage and a 6,734-square-foot clubhouse at the main entrance.