KCRag Forum

The great thing about this not being in Hyde Park is that we all get to not care what Hyde Park thinks.

Anthony_Hugo98 wrote: ↑Sat Jul 03, 2021 2:21 pm

CorneliusFB wrote: ↑Sat Jul 03, 2021 11:41 am The midtown business and residential community have united against this decision in a way I haven’t seen. Bunch has been catching hell from his constituents.

The residential community has seemed united AGAINST it in The adjacent area. At least the general Hyde Park neighborhood area has. What makes it seem like the majority want the project? I haven’t seen much

I have always imagined Historic KC and Westport Business Assc are overlapping circles.

normalthings wrote: ↑Tue Jul 06, 2021 9:03 am

Anthony_Hugo98 wrote: ↑Sat Jul 03, 2021 2:21 pm

CorneliusFB wrote: ↑Sat Jul 03, 2021 11:41 am The midtown business and residential community have united against this decision in a way I haven’t seen. Bunch has been catching hell from his constituents.

The residential community has seemed united AGAINST it in The adjacent area. At least the general Hyde Park neighborhood area has. What makes it seem like the majority want the project? I haven’t seen much

I have always imagined Historic KC and Westport Business Assc are overlapping circles.

Oh, yes, it's quite the Venn diagram. You would be forgiven for thinking that Westport is the only history in KC that matters!

I tried to buy this treasure a few years back but did not have as grandiose plans as Lux which seemingly looked interesting as long as the facade was preserved. Couldn't make a deal then and post this face-off I reached out again and was told posturing was occuring. Two items stuck out as verboten. first the name Lux when seeking current city incentives/hooks and secondly the over-reach in the ask. TBD on final outcome but my money says they are not really demo'ing the building.

ToDactivist wrote: ↑Tue Jul 06, 2021 3:20 pm and was told posturing was occuring.

Yeah, quite obvious a poker game.

secondly the over-reach in the ask.

Agree, though excessive incentives would be perfectly fine if it had broader public use element.

TBD on final outcome but my money says they are not really demo'ing the building.

Yeah unlikely to happen but Reedemer played a nasty card they didn't have to.

ToDactivist wrote: ↑Tue Jul 06, 2021 3:20 pmTwo items stuck out as verboten. first the name Lux when seeking current city incentives/

LOL if that is really how the City Council evaluates proposals. What other words must be avoided?

Even at full price and no subsidies, I bet a proposal from the hypothetical Nichols Restrictive Luxury company would get rejected every time.

How times have changed. In the 1980s, a subdivision in (then) south Leawood (135 and Nall?) officially had the term "upper bracket" in its name (see The Baffler magazine issue 2 for verification). I took the photograph of the sign that ran in the magazine, now long gone of course (both the sign and the old editorial board).

Had the proposal not generated controversy, I suspect Council would have voted for it even if the developer was named Market Rate Housing You Can't Afford.

This gets solved when an unnamed out-of-town developer (preferably Chinese) swoops in and proposes complete demolition of the Katz Building for a multi-use TOD including a plasma donation center; a new headquarters for the Kansas City Chapter of the Black Panthers; a half-way house for felons re-entering society; 5-stories for a tourist hostel; and 10-stories of affordable housing specifically limited to Muslim refugees. No parking included.

herrfrank wrote: ↑Tue Jul 06, 2021 6:48 pm

ToDactivist wrote: ↑Tue Jul 06, 2021 3:20 pmTwo items stuck out as verboten. first the name Lux when seeking current city incentives/

How times have changed. In the 1980s, a subdivision in (then) south Leawood (135 and Nall?) officially had the term "upper bracket" in its name (see The Baffler magazine issue 2 for verification). I took the photograph of the sign that ran in the magazine, now long gone of course (both the sign and the old editorial board).

Shoutout to The Baffler. "A Machine for Forgetting" is a classic. Cupcake Land lives.

Could use a quality hotel option around this area

The incentives would be more justified if perhaps the building made into an indoor neighborhood farmers/world market or something along those lines. ToDactivist proposed similar hotel/farmers market on Delaware but it could be residential in the lot too. Residential needed more but incentives for private use for nearly entire project is going to be a problem going forward.

There are some pretty cool indoor world markets I've seen that KC could use and would be great along streetcar line. Cleveland has/had a nice one. Most others have world stands with counters/seating surrounding permanent stands for eats and cold cases for specialty items, each spot per country/region. Might have some turnover for a while to determine what works but with streetcar line, could be both a neighborhood and streetcar tourist hotspot. Yet another modern foodie hall could work too but the above hybrid tends to draw broader demographic, better public integration and more lasting power.

If Lux wants to keep it private that's perfectly fine - without TIF. But living next to a world "public market" would be appealing to many and might be able to get more TIF than expected.

Thought they were doing something like this down the street with the armory?

Wasn't that was more straight foodie hall and not particularly worldly market. Still in works? I'm thinking more hybrid ethnic eats with mix of broader goods and maybe short term lease stalls for urban farmers thrown in to sell their wares from urban gardens. Midtown to E Side has growing Indian, Somalian, Ethiopian, Central American, population etc. A few Euro mix would be a good target. Have seen some a little more down to earth though than a modern foodie hall and the above pics, which might be better fit. There are a lot of different formats out there.

agreed earthling...footprint and location is conducive to a public market. a gaggle of these now in Denver and when well placed in high density areas (sic walkability) they can perform well for the merchants. Milk Market - Denver Central Market - Edgewater Public Market - Stapleton Market and a few I dont know their names. Great re-use if allowed some flexibility with Historic.

^Something lower key than those markets would be fine too. This is an example of broader public use that should justify TIF and more appropriate use for a building of local 'historic' value.

I like the market idea at the Katz. Could be a unique space if a develop opted to make it feel more Art Deco or streamlined moderne. Keep with the theme of the Katz building.

^Good idea on streamlined modern Art Deco motif.

Something along lines of Philly's Reading Terminal market but maybe more intune to the Katz original counters with modern take. More refined than this maybe but doesn't have to be highbrow either.

It would definitely to less damage to the original building than the rooftop deck scheme they had proposed. Cheaper to pull off too.

Yeah asking for TIF so they can retrofit a pool was pure TIF exploitation. At least for private use. If publicly accessible pool, great use of TIF.

If they add a public element as significant as a public market that is generally inclusive to MIdtown demographics, enough TIF to add private pool or deckspace on top just might pass. More reasonable tradeoff than last stance.

earthling wrote: ↑Thu Jul 08, 2021 11:44 am The incentives would be more justified if perhaps the building made into an indoor neighborhood farmers/world market or something along those lines.

It seems the outrage is pretty focused on the rent, not an overall "public benefit".