KCRag Forum

A historical note. The architect of this 1934 Katz store was Clarence Kivett ( born Kivovitch -- Ike and Mike Katz were his uncles -- Ashkenazim ). He won this job over more established architects, and by going "all in" on the 1930s streamlined Deco look, he established his name as willing to do designs more radical than the establishment. Yes, Kansas City had an establishment architecture community and a counterculture architecture community that were at odds for much of the 20th century.

A partner, Ralph Myers, joined him later. They had significant commissions, especially in the 1960s. The Alameda Plaza Hotel (now Intercontinental), Mid-Continent International Airport (the current airport under replacement), and important parts of the Truman Sports Complex.

I love the idea and I'm really happy to see the old building saved! I do wish the new addition was a little more in the streamline style. I see they tried to pick up an a few elements from the original building. Hopefully it can be tweaked a bit and improved. Only element I really do not like is the glass tower right adjacent the clock tower. It seems to compete with it. It's way to close to it and would detract from that important historic feature. Can we just chop off that part?

Put a Trader Joe's in the corner space!

I was hoping to see something a bit more like Sunset Tower in LA. Build the tall building at the corner of Baltimore and Westport Rd. Connect it to Katz with a lower, 3-story mixed use section.

I'd love to see a place like Brit's Pub on that corner. What could be better than lawn bowling and beer in the city?

Im sure one of these drone pictures will show up somewhere soon. Overall, I think this project will be a big boost.

I really love this idea, I hope they add more retail though, it’s really obvious with the drone shot that if this is done well it can finally bridge east and west Westport. Especially now with the opus project. Also everyone brace for old Hyde park committee to oppose anything over 8 stories, or getting rid of parking

Riverite wrote: ↑Thu Dec 31, 2020 8:52 am I really love this idea, I hope they add more retail though, it’s really obvious with the drone shot that if this is done well it can finally bridge east and west Westport. Especially now with the opus project. Also everyone brace for old Hyde park committee to oppose anything over 8 stories, or getting rid of parking

Yeah this project alone could be the catalyst for the bridge.

Great project, but i disagree with people saying the new building contrast to much with the old. I'm of the belief that it doesn't contrast enough. If you are going to marry a new building to the old make sure everyone will know which is which. For example the Block addition at the Nelson or the new bowl in Soldier Field. They are of two diffrent times and should reflect that.

Also the facade brick in the redering on the original building is a diffrent color that the current building. Is the current facade painted? If it's the original color I would hate to see them change that.

Riverite wrote: ↑Thu Dec 31, 2020 8:52 amAlso everyone brace for old Hyde park committee to oppose anything over 8 stories, or getting rid of parking

I'm sure there will be some opposition/gripes from neighborhood folks. I did see a post on a Hyde Park neighborhood Facebook page yesterday. The same handful of people who complain about everything had the exact same complaints about this. However, the positive comments and sentiments of support easily outnumbered the negative - probably by 4 to 1.

shinatoo wrote: ↑Thu Dec 31, 2020 9:51 amAlso the facade brick in the redering on the original building is a diffrent color that the current building. Is the current facade painted? If it's the original color I would hate to see them change that

I can't imagine they would paint the brick - it is probably just an inaccurate color in the rendering. I assume the building (or at least the clock tower) has some sort of historic designation, but even if it didn't, painting the brick would definitely be a good way to rile up opposition.

As it currently stands, the developer isn't leaning towards a tax abatement. They are leaning towards State and Federal HTCs for the Katz Building.

Comments on CityScene KC's post are all over the place. Some love it. Others complain that there's the lack of affordable apartments (and the City can't really leverage a request for affordable units if a tax abatement isn't applied for). Then you have the few saying it ruins the historic character of the Katz and Westport.

Historic KC seems to be happy with it based on a Facebook post, but it's hard to tell. One comment, posted by Alana Smith says,

As proposed, the complex plans DO NOT follow the guidelines and restrictions in the WESTPORT PLAN--a plan which the city approved. So there will probably be a fight if the city does not follow through~

What does that even mean? Because looking at the Westport Plan, they have sites along Main Street listed up to 10-stories (Katz is 7). It also has provisions for ground floor commercial space (which this has) and hidden parking. So I don't see how Alana Smith can bitch about it and threaten a fight when the plan seems to be followed here + extra points for preserving the Katz. Some other points this project follows in the Westport Plan...

• MATERIALS: Building materials should consist primarily of brick and stone, particularly on the front facade and any facades visible from the public right-of-way. Secondary materials may be expanded to include stucco, wood, or glass. (Katz is 60% brick. 30% fiber cement panels and 5% metal).

• ENTRYWAYS: Entrance shall be directly accessible from the sidewalk. Human-scale entry features shall be clearly emphasized on front facades. Additional elements: outside seating, patios, decorative plantings, signage, bike racks, fencing, art. (Katz plan includes retail space along Main, an outdoor patio under the driveway on Main, and the apartment entrance at Main and Westport).

The project also falls within the MCO (Main Corridor Overlay) District, which promotes quality design and development of greater scale within its boundaries, oriented towards Main Street. Reviewing the Main Corridor Overlay District plan, no provisions are being broken with the plans either.

The thing about it ruining the historic character of the Katz Drug building can be countered with the argument that the developers are free to demolish the entire building if they choose, and build something completely new, very modern, and completely out of character with the neighborhood. Being on the historic register doesn't protect a building from being demolished if the owner chooses to do so.

The other argument I could make is that the streamlined deco style of the Katz Drug didn't fit in with the historic nature of Westport when it was built either.

The thing about these "plans" is that the City Council can always approve a project that seeks a waiver, or asks to deviate from them. Plans are not laws. The Council has a long history of ignoring "Plans," even ones the that the City itself commissioned.

Midtownkid wrote: ↑Wed Dec 30, 2020 9:32 pm I love the idea and I'm really happy to see the old building saved! I do wish the new addition was a little more in the streamline style. I see they tried to pick up an a few elements from the original building. Hopefully it can be tweaked a bit and improved. Only element I really do not like is the glass tower right adjacent the clock tower. It seems to compete with it. It's way to close to it and would detract from that important historic feature. Can we just chop off that part?

Put a Trader Joe's in the corner space!

I was hoping to see something a bit more like Sunset Tower in LA. Build the tall building at the corner of Baltimore and Westport Rd. Connect it to Katz with a lower, 3-story mixed use section.

I love the fact that it is being saved but would rather see it become something that is open to the public rather than just an apartment complex amenity center. I've always fantasized about operating a restaurant/bar or brewpub in the Katz building and thought it would be a great spot for that especially with the expansion of the streetcar.

Interesting engineering would be involved putting a pool on the roof of the historic building. Plenty of clearance though, before the addition was put on the back there was a basement level with hardware and home goods, and there was also a mezzanine towards the rear of the main floor.

Wouldn't think the pool would be a very big/expensive challenge relative to any other rooftop pool. OTOH it might just be 'rendering candy' with no real intention to do it. Would hope they choose mixed materials for new building that contrasts the original building well, rather than trying to match it.

I believe the pool will be put onto a new roof. Like they're going to remove the existing roof and build a new one to support the weight of a pool. Not to mention the current roof is partially sloped.

I doubt anything but the walls will survive the renovation. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I can’t imagine anything too interesting is left in there.

I really like this project. Location is great and overall design is nicer could it be tweaked a little? Sure, but overall very nice. I like how this has the potential to develop that area so as to create more residential vibrance in Westport from West side to East. Really could help spark the development of blocks between Broadway & Main and create a neighborhood feel. That’s starting to happen now and hopefully soon some of the other run down & neglected properties will get fresh new renovations and or new developments

Architect just posted what appears to be this older rendering.

Chris Stritzel wrote: ↑Thu Dec 31, 2020 9:57 pm Historic KC seems to be happy with it based on a Facebook post, but it's hard to tell. One comment, posted by Alana Smith says,

As proposed, the complex plans DO NOT follow the guidelines and restrictions in the WESTPORT PLAN--a plan which the city approved. So there will probably be a fight if the city does not follow through~

What does that even mean? Because looking at the Westport Plan, they have sites along Main Street listed up to 10-stories (Katz is 7). It also has provisions for ground floor commercial space (which this has) and hidden parking. So I don't see how Alana Smith can bitch about it and threaten a fight when the plan seems to be followed here + extra points for preserving the Katz. Some other points this project follows in the Westport Plan...

• MATERIALS: Building materials should consist primarily of brick and stone, particularly on the front facade and any facades visible from the public right-of-way. Secondary materials may be expanded to include stucco, wood, or glass. (Katz is 60% brick. 30% fiber cement panels and 5% metal).

• ENTRYWAYS: Entrance shall be directly accessible from the sidewalk. Human-scale entry features shall be clearly emphasized on front facades. Additional elements: outside seating, patios, decorative plantings, signage, bike racks, fencing, art. (Katz plan includes retail space along Main, an outdoor patio under the driveway on Main, and the apartment entrance at Main and Westport).

The project also falls within the MCO (Main Corridor Overlay) District, which promotes quality design and development of greater scale within its boundaries, oriented towards Main Street. Reviewing the Main Corridor Overlay District plan, no provisions are being broken with the plans either.

If the Westport Plan is only a plan and not a zoning overlay, it's worthless in terms of enforcement. And if the project is being rezoned to a UR, that redesignation creates a loophole that would get the project out of following zoning overlays.

HKC has given feedback suggesting the part of new structure abutting the clock tower be pulled back and also has suggestions on materials and design to be more sympathetic with the old Katz.

^Those don't seem necessary but at least HKC doesn't appear to be up for a fight.

Wonder what 'sympathetic' means. Better to contrast original building with new design than try to match it. Trying to match usually turns out not matching and then looks like shit. Contrasting in compatible context to original is typically better way to go. And current proposal seems pretty much in line to me, depending on final materials. Darker leaning materials would help the original building standout.