Kickbacks planning an expansion

[thelakelander]

The long-rumored expansion of Kickbacks Gastropub on King Street is about to move a step closer. Owner Steve Flores said he is set to close July 1 on the building next door, a two-story residential duplex.

He plans to tear that building down. What he builds there is still dependent on how negotations with the city and Riverside Avondale Preservation work out. It could either be a separate restaurant or an addition to Kickbacks.

"If they allow us to do what we want," Flores said, "we'd have another 150-200 seats and a cellar undernearth with Belgian bar, a Belgian dining room and 1,000 square feet to cellar beer.

"That's what we want to do."

Read more at Jacksonville.com: http://jacksonville.com/amber-waves/2011-06-20/story/kickbacks-planning-expansion#ixzz1Pr8gRHnO

[JeffreyS]

+1000

[acme54321]

I'm glad they are expanding, but it would be nice if they bought the ugly building on the corner and tore it down instead.

[A-Finnius]

RAP is going to let Kickbacks destroy that Duplex?  They are generally in the business of restoration.

[thelakelander]

According to the property appraiser, that duplex was built in 1923.  Working with RAP on this one should be interesting.

[floridaforester]

As much as I'm normally against the demolition of any residential structure in a historic district, the 2 duplexes next door are holding that entire block from reaching its potential.  Talk about your rentals that have been run into the ground and your slum lords that simply refuse to put any money into maintaining the property.  I say let those slumlords cash and move elsewhere.  Just my 2 cents.

[ubben]

Can't Kickbacks buy the two buildings, kick out the sketchy tenants and rehab them so they are cool, useful and historic? Isn't tearing down historic components of the neighborhood what we are fighting against? They could, at the very least, preserve the facades. Sorry, I don't want King Street in our unique historic district to look like another bland, characterless strip in Orlando.

What does RAP say about this?

[Brian Siebenschuh]

As much as I love the old houses in this neighborhood, I feel like we all have to face facts when it comes to buildings like that duplex next to KB.  Nobody in their right mind is going to rehab a duplex that sits between an insanely busy bar / restaurant that serves until 3AM and a sketchy convenience store.  It's the only residence on that block.  We can either tear it down now or let it sit and rot for another decade until it gets condemned.

[Miss Fixit]

Normally it would be hard for me to imagine that RAP would support the demolition of a 90 year old building in the historic district.  However, I just checked this one out on google maps.  Looks like it's been significantly altered over the years and has lost a lot of its character.  Not sure, but I think it may even have a little Southern Brick and Stone where part of the front porch was closed in!

[MusicMan]

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NON O NO NO NO NO.......................................

This expansion will never work. THERE IS NOT ENOUGH PARKING.


ok That was a joke. Kickbacks thrives even though they have 5 parking spaces. The excuse for every lame place in Jax is we dont have enough parking  ( Read: The Landing).  Kickbacks makes their customers Happy so they come back even if they have to park 2 blocks (or more) away.

Go Kickbacks!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[MusicMan]

Quote " According to tthe property appraiser the building was built in 1923."

That was also the last year it had any meaningful maintenance.

[Kickbackssteve]

Our landlord also owns the duplex next door to us (that we are purchasing) and I think she's actually done an pretty good job, particularly in the last few years, of keeping the property maintained and rented to some fairly decent tenants under EXTREMELY difficult circumstances.  She has also made many improvements to the property and has made every effort to attempt to "polish a turd". Not a lot of landlords would have made any improvements to a property in this situation. She's also been an excellent landlord to us.  Most people affectionately refer to the two multi family houses on King St. as "the crack houses" but I feel that in recent years, it only applies to the structure closest to the gas station.

Anywho, we've had some preliminary discussions/meetings with RAP and the city and over the course of the rest of 2011 we will continue to work with both entities to determine what we can and can't do and what we should and shouldn't do with the property adjoining our restaurant.   

The purchase of the duplex next door and the building we currently occupy is very important to us and our continued existence. Older generations refer to our building as the Giuseppe's Pizza building. More recent generations refer to it as Ezele's BBQ building. It is our hope that future generations will refer to it as the Kickbacks Gastropub building.

To accomplish this, we must grow.  As I've said before, we have become victims of our own success.  I can't watch our customers suffer any more and I can't stand to see new customers every day think we're incompetent because we don't have the infrastructure to do what we do the right way.  I think we can be better, way better, and I think in this unique set of circumstances, getting better means getting bigger.  We have the best customers and employees in the city and they deserve more.

[Kickbackssteve]

@ Brian, not only are they the only residences in the block, you have to go pretty far south on King St to find the next residence.

@ Miss Fixit, I believe that the alterations that you speak of over the years (especially to the front porch) to the duplex are what make the property a "non contributing structure" (despite it's age).

[JeffreyS]

Thanks for the info Steve.  You are one of my favorite lunch spots.

[Miss Fixit]

@ Brian, not only are they the only residences in the block, you have to go pretty far south on King St to find the next residence.

@ Miss Fixit, I believe that the alterations that you speak of over the years (especially to the front porch) to the duplex are what make the property a "non contributing structure" (despite it's age).

Steve, you're exactly right - if an historic building is significantly altered it can become a non-contributing structure and therefore will not be protected by certain preservation laws.   I've only looked closely at this one on Google - so I might have a different impression in person - but it seems you could make a good argument that this building is non-contributing.