KCRag Forum

Developer: Lux Living. STL developer who took over the Faultless project.
Architect: Hoeffer Wysocki

Scope: 192 apartments, 175 parking spaces, 6 floors

Points of Interest: Katz to become building entrance and roof will be the amenities deck. Curb cut on main removed. Below ground parking that is wrapped on the ground floor.

I quite like it

do it

Anyone who acquires this building thoughtful enough to keep and incorporate into something broader that helps the area is a biggy. And the 'something broader' doesn't suck. However, the original building should have some public/retail use, not entirely a private lobby.

earthling wrote: ↑Tue Dec 29, 2020 7:30 pm Anyone who acquires this building thoughtful enough to keep and incorporate into something broader that helps the area is a biggy. And the 'something broader' doesn't suck. However, the original building should have some public/retail use, not entirely a private lobby.

It appears that the “nub” at the intersection will be a public lobby. Rest along main looks like a retail space but it’s not called out. Current driveway will be converted to an outdoor patio.

I like this project.

Yes, please! Ram it down our throats.

Strong support from urbanist Twitter. I wonder what Historic KC will say. The former owner seems to think that this is a great way to save the historic building. I hope HistoricKC feels the same way.

normalthings wrote: ↑Tue Dec 29, 2020 8:47 pm I wonder what Historic KC will say.

I'm sure there will be words...

The design and fused approach is a pretty reasonable highly functional compromise but won't be surprising to hear from anal retentive historical purists demanding it restored to original state. Would've been great if the Westport Bank/Opus project could've been seamlessly merged together into something like this. Hopefully future Westport projects involving existing early/iconic buildings learn to incorporate the buildings instead of destroying them.

DaveKCMO wrote: ↑Tue Dec 29, 2020 9:36 pm

normalthings wrote: ↑Tue Dec 29, 2020 8:47 pm I wonder what Historic KC will say.

I'm sure there will be words...

I doubt they’ll be a major problem. These are the people that will be the rowdy crowd.

It’s just the same stucco boxes everyone complains about in other locations around the city. The only architectural quality is the existing building.

Also, nobody is going to ask about the number of affordable units in this project?

Also, the Westport bank was a historicist reconstruction from the late 1970’s that fully deserved its fate.

This looks like a fantastic project that preserves a much loved iconic landmark. As a child I remember Katz Drugstores that were a go-to in every neighborhood. I never personally visited this location but I’ve always admired it and felt is was a part of “my Kansas City”. This plan looks to preserve the look and incorporates the building into a new use-much like is done in many other historic re-use properties around the world.
With a planned streetcar stop near the site this can serve as an inviting grand entrance to Westport. Developments like this along the streetcar route and the encouraging signs that COVID may be under control in the next year bode well for our city.

chaglang wrote: ↑Tue Dec 29, 2020 10:22 pm It’s just the same stucco boxes everyone complains about in other locations around the city. The only architectural quality is the existing building.

Also, nobody is going to ask about the number of affordable units in this project?

Also, the Westport bank was a historicist reconstruction from the late 1970’s that fully deserved its fate.

no podium with groundfloor units. less than 1 parking space per unit.

no incentives request yet so no discussion on affordable units.

I think I’d like it more if it carried the architectural style of the original building better. I’m glad they are keeping the old building mostly intact but the new part looks a bit like a bolt on.

The discussion about affordable housing will be interesting here if they do in fact seek incentives, which I foresee happening.

Regarding facade materials, the plan document says 60% of the facade is brick, 30% is fiber cement panels, and 5% is metal panels. I think at the end of the day, if this is built in its current form, that it will look good and complement the existing Katz building well. I'd also like to point out that the materials/elevation pages point to the materials and it seems like some brick colors differ from the renderings. I expect this to look more red brick than gray. Surely these are just preliminary plans and will evolve as the process moves ahead.

It's great the glass display windows are restored along the entire frontage. It looks like the 1980,s addition to the rear is gone? Just need a monkey on the flagpole as a memorial to Katz notorious pet departments(a monkey did actually escape and climbed the flagpole, I recall the Raytown Katz having a terrarium full of lizard skeletons).

Looks like a great project.

It is a little odd that the patio on main is called an "amenity". That seems to imply that it is just for the residents. The rendering really looks like a restaurant patio and it has an entrance off the space facing Main Street that looks like it could be a separate retail area.

Here is a little clearer look at some of the renderings:

It's essentially a retread of the 51Main project, right?

Quick tangent re affordability: if the developer of the buildings at 28th and Forest had asked for zero incentives, they would have been pilloried regardless because of the location east-of-Troost. The near-total lack of discussion here or on Twitter about the number of affordable units in this west-of-Troost location is fascinating because it seems to point to an acceptance that affordability is only for certain parts of the city. Using the lack of an incentives ask by this developer as a rationale for not raising the issue feels like a dodge. It's hard for me to imagine that if affordable units were something people found important at this location that it wouldn't at least be discussed. The city's affordable housing policy isn't so effective that it shut up Twitter.

What's more likely here is that the preservationists will protest this, which is the common mode of development opposition in majority white parts of town. This is important because we are creating a situation whereby where the public raises questions about affordability tends to reinforce the existing socioeconomics and demographics of an area. This situation also points to a fundamental weakness in KCMO policy, where the places where developments are most in need of incentives (and thus will be required to have affordable units) also tend to be less affluent areas. In a city only recently removed from statistical hypersegregation, this seems like a bad thing.

Tl;dr: I know what the policy is, but it's crazy that nobody is demanding affordable units in this project.

chaglang wrote: ↑Wed Dec 30, 2020 5:41 pm It's essentially a retread of the 51Main project, right?

Quick tangent re affordability: if the developer of the buildings at 28th and Forest had asked for zero incentives, they would have been pilloried regardless because of the location east-of-Troost. The near-total lack of discussion here or on Twitter about the number of affordable units in this west-of-Troost location is fascinating because it seems to point to an acceptance that affordability is only for certain parts of the city. Using the lack of an incentives ask by this developer as a rationale for not raising the issue feels like a dodge. It's hard for me to imagine that if affordable units were something people found important at this location that it wouldn't at least be discussed. The city's affordable housing policy isn't so effective that it shut up Twitter.

I think it connects to an idea that’s not often voiced.

People expect west of Troost development is expensive and market rate makes sense
And east of Troost development should be cheap because existing homes are cheap and land is cheap

And in that logic, what you see makes sense.

Most people have no idea how much it costs to build something because the price of construction went up so fast the past few years. They just see the end leasing rate and get sticker shock.