OFFICIAL - Loews Convention Hotel (formerly Hyatt)

Issues concerning Downtown as described by the Downtown Council. River to 31st Street, I-35 to Bruce R. Watkins.
shinatoo
One Park Place
One Park Place
Posts: 6120
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 3:20 pm

Re: OFFICIAL - Hyatt Regency Convention Hotel

Post by shinatoo » Tue Feb 21, 2017 7:35 pm

Honkey tube!
Quocunque Jeceris Stabit

KCTOGA
Strip mall
Strip mall
Posts: 120
Joined: Fri Mar 27, 2015 12:06 pm
Location: KCMO

Re: OFFICIAL - Hyatt Regency Convention Hotel

Post by KCTOGA » Tue Feb 21, 2017 10:02 pm

With most of the Conv. Hotels i've seen lately, I'm pretty stoked for this hotel.

User avatar
DaveKCMO
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 16781
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 6:22 pm
Location: Crossroads
Contact:

Re: OFFICIAL - Hyatt Regency Convention Hotel

Post by DaveKCMO » Tue Feb 21, 2017 10:23 pm

KCPowercat wrote:True but not sure this block would ever even get the cap ....I think it would start on Baltimore going east
yup. that's the most expensive block to cap because of the elevation change.

User avatar
DaveKCMO
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 16781
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 6:22 pm
Location: Crossroads
Contact:

Re: OFFICIAL - Hyatt Regency Convention Hotel

Post by DaveKCMO » Tue Feb 21, 2017 10:24 pm

KCLover wrote:
JBmidtown wrote:I disagree with the prevailing opinion that this looks like a hospital...

...no, it definitely looks more like an office tower in Corporate Woods.
While we are on the same page, the Sheraton in Overland Park looks better than this heap of crap.
isn't it also costing OP money?

pash
Bryant Building
Bryant Building
Posts: 3801
Joined: Sun Feb 20, 2011 2:47 am

Re: OFFICIAL - Hyatt Regency Convention Hotel

Post by pash » Tue Feb 21, 2017 10:52 pm

.
Last edited by pash on Thu Feb 23, 2017 9:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
KCPowercat
Power & Light
Power & Light
Posts: 28756
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2002 12:49 pm
Location: Quality Hill
Contact:

Re: OFFICIAL - Hyatt Regency Convention Hotel

Post by KCPowercat » Tue Feb 21, 2017 11:21 pm

That $35MM is written out of convention and tourism funds....which is raised from hotel, restaurant, and bar taxes...just to clarify.

I'm not sure it's a pile of shit and I think it will actually turn out nice but lot of questions about how many corners have been cut and how it was designed.

KCLover
Colonnade
Colonnade
Posts: 831
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 1:19 am
Location: NKC

kclover

Post by KCLover » Tue Feb 21, 2017 11:24 pm

DaveKCMO wrote:
KCLover wrote:
JBmidtown wrote:I disagree with the prevailing opinion that this looks like a hospital...

...no, it definitely looks more like an office tower in Corporate Woods.
While we are on the same page, the Sheraton in Overland Park looks better than this heap of crap.
isn't it also costing OP money?
So you're saying it's ok because OP is paying for it? (I'm not sure and don't really care what is happening in OP) but damnit I do care when downtown is out-blanding the land of bland.

I do recall that KCMO is fronting money, land, and incentives to these hotel developers as well.

earthling
Oak Tower
Oak Tower
Posts: 4643
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2011 2:27 pm

Re: OFFICIAL - Hyatt Regency Convention Hotel

Post by earthling » Tue Feb 21, 2017 11:37 pm

KCPowercat wrote:That $35MM is written out of convention and tourism funds....which is raised from hotel, restaurant, and bar taxes...just to clarify.

I'm not sure it's a pile of shit and I think it will actually turn out nice but lot of questions about how many corners have been cut and how it was designed.
The design is beyond disappointing but maybe not shit. Is even more disappointing this isn't a hotel/residential combo, which could decrease chances of project failing during down periods.

UrbanKC
Pad site
Pad site
Posts: 82
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 10:21 am

Re: OFFICIAL - Hyatt Regency Convention Hotel

Post by UrbanKC » Wed Feb 22, 2017 9:25 am

While we shouldn't lower our standards, look at what we've got Downtown right now. The Marriott, the Crowne Plaza, the Sheraton and the Westin. All are pretty darn ugly if you think about it. But over time, they've become part of KC and don't seem quite as ugly as they may have when built; or at least their ugliness/blandness faded into the back of our minds.

This thing is actually pretty nice compared to them.

User avatar
KC_JAYHAWK
Colonnade
Colonnade
Posts: 909
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2002 10:33 am
Location: Waldo

Re: OFFICIAL - Hyatt Regency Convention Hotel

Post by KC_JAYHAWK » Wed Feb 22, 2017 9:55 am

I think the original Hyatt, now Sheraton, looks much better and it was built in the early 80's. My biggest gripe is why shape it in an L and not just go vertical? Cheaper I guess, but I wouldn't think it would be that much cheaper. The original Hyatt I believe is 45 floors in Crown Center.

User avatar
KCPowercat
Power & Light
Power & Light
Posts: 28756
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2002 12:49 pm
Location: Quality Hill
Contact:

Re: OFFICIAL - Hyatt Regency Convention Hotel

Post by KCPowercat » Wed Feb 22, 2017 10:14 am

My biggest gripe is how it interacts with the surrounding blocks. Not really any excuse for it. The architect had an easy way to hide the necessary blank wall against 670 but instead put it across from the PAC and the surrounding ped experience will suffer.

flyingember
One Park Place
One Park Place
Posts: 6972
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 7:54 am

Re: OFFICIAL - Hyatt Regency Convention Hotel

Post by flyingember » Wed Feb 22, 2017 10:36 am

The reason to not go vertical is actually quite simple, mechanicals.

While an elevator can go higher easier, you need larger utility spaces the higher you go. So you end up with less room space on lower floors relative to the higher ones. Since it costs more to go higher this means a higher average per room construction cost.

So shorter means more rooms in the cheaper to build floors.

The street level experience is a legitimate issue.

UrbanKC
Pad site
Pad site
Posts: 82
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 10:21 am

Re: OFFICIAL - Hyatt Regency Convention Hotel

Post by UrbanKC » Wed Feb 22, 2017 10:50 am

flyingember wrote:The reason to not go vertical is actually quite simple, mechanicals.

While an elevator can go higher easier, you need larger utility spaces the higher you go. So you end up with less room space on lower floors relative to the higher ones. Since it costs more to go higher this means a higher average per room construction cost.

So shorter means more rooms in the cheaper to build floors.

The street level experience is a legitimate issue.
That, and the L-shape is also much better because hotels want to maximize views for each room. For a cheap, convention hotel like this, L-shape makes the most sense.

Remember guys, this isn't a Trump, W-Hotel, Four Seasons or some other grand hotel.
It's a cheap, convention hotel piloted by Hyatt.

UrbanKC
Pad site
Pad site
Posts: 82
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 10:21 am

Re: OFFICIAL - Hyatt Regency Convention Hotel

Post by UrbanKC » Wed Feb 22, 2017 10:56 am

KC_JAYHAWK wrote:I think the original Hyatt, now Sheraton, looks much better and it was built in the early 80's. My biggest gripe is why shape it in an L and not just go vertical? Cheaper I guess, but I wouldn't think it would be that much cheaper. The original Hyatt I believe is 45 floors in Crown Center.
Hmm... the only thing remotely interesting about the Sheraton is the revolving floor level on top (which doesn't work now right?).

Without that disc on top it looks like this:
Image

This looks far better than that:
Image

User avatar
KC_JAYHAWK
Colonnade
Colonnade
Posts: 909
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2002 10:33 am
Location: Waldo

Re: OFFICIAL - Hyatt Regency Convention Hotel

Post by KC_JAYHAWK » Wed Feb 22, 2017 11:05 am

Well the pic of the Sheraton you just posted is not the greatest, actually it is probably the worst pic you could find to try to make your point. And the new Hyatt still looks like Shawnee Mission Hospital.

UrbanKC
Pad site
Pad site
Posts: 82
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 10:21 am

Re: OFFICIAL - Hyatt Regency Convention Hotel

Post by UrbanKC » Wed Feb 22, 2017 11:11 am

KC_JAYHAWK wrote:Well the pic of the Sheraton you just posted is not the greatest, actually it is probably the worst pic you could find to try to make your point. And the new Hyatt still looks like Shawnee Mission Hospital.
and if that's your argument, then one shouldn't think these renderings represent what the real building will look like in the best (and worst) lighting conditions and weather.

I happen to think Shawnee Mission Medical Center looks nice...

User avatar
rxlexi
Valencia Place
Valencia Place
Posts: 1960
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 10:30 pm
Location: City Market

Re: OFFICIAL - Hyatt Regency Convention Hotel

Post by rxlexi » Wed Feb 22, 2017 11:52 am

I agree totally with KC Jayhawk re: the Sheraton (former Hyatt CC).

It's all about the proportions - it is tall, thin and more elegant than the squat convention hotel.

Like the difference between say an old high mileage corvette and a brand new CUV - the details and features are much nicer on the newer vehicle, but nonetheless one is obviously a sports car, and the other an egg-like transportation pod. Or something.

That being said, I really don't dislike the new Hyatt design as shown; despite the pedestrian concerns I quite like the orientation of lobby space toward the downtown skyline, and the incorporation of the bluff. A lot of glass, and it should be a nice addition to the city for years to come. Just nowhere as impressive as the initial renderings, which in fact featured proportions much more like the Sheraton.

miz.jordan17
Strip mall
Strip mall
Posts: 104
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2016 1:11 pm

Re: OFFICIAL - Hyatt Regency Convention Hotel

Post by miz.jordan17 » Wed Feb 22, 2017 12:17 pm

All of this comparing so far is so subjective. I guess it would be interesting to do a comparison to see which hotel provides the most bang (rooms, amenities, meeting spaces, retail, street activity in $ generated) for your buck. From a functional standpoint, I think this hotel is good. Am I super pumped about how it looks, not really. But, it doesn't look as bad as the one in Baltimore. I think it might do some good to get City Council to push for better street experiences for pedestrians. This area will become even more lively with a new UMKC campus, Copaken's Broadway development area, new Opus developments, etc. It's so important that it's at least walkable, including: bike racks, plants, benches, kiosks, lighting, large enough sidewalks. Is anyone planning on contacting a council person? If I lived in KC currently, I would.

User avatar
NorthOak
Strip mall
Strip mall
Posts: 212
Joined: Wed Aug 24, 2016 1:37 am

Re: OFFICIAL - Hyatt Regency Convention Hotel

Post by NorthOak » Wed Feb 22, 2017 12:42 pm

Critical_Mass wrote: Image
I like the new corner with the curve on the top.
I think it's going to be OK if the glass is quality.
aknowledgeableperson is currently on your ignore list.
You will no longer see any of her posts.

flyingember
One Park Place
One Park Place
Posts: 6972
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 7:54 am

Re: OFFICIAL - Hyatt Regency Convention Hotel

Post by flyingember » Wed Feb 22, 2017 12:42 pm

miz.jordan17 wrote:All of this comparing so far is so subjective. I guess it would be interesting to do a comparison to see which hotel provides the most bang (rooms, amenities, meeting spaces, retail, street activity in $ generated) for your buck.
There's not going to be one answer.

You're going to have one number for a tall luxury hotel, another for a massive room block convention hotel, another for budget conscious

And the location will change the equation.

There's also the purpose. This isn't a casino hotel where they will have VIP service. This isn't a cheap side of the road motel.

In this case they hope to be able to offer bulk rates to conventions and the city and hotel operator benefits more from offering a lower total convention cost than by having a tall expensive tower. So a less than ideal structure is the ideal. It's not a horrible mess, it's not a fancy new design. It will serve it's purpose well.

As has been covered elsewhere, materials will matter more than anything. The best design in a rendering done in cheap materials is a bad design.

Post Reply