Jump to content

      











PROPOSED
Hudson Place One
Uses: condo, commercial
Address: 777 Herald Street
Municipality: Victoria
Region: Downtown Victoria
Storeys: 25
Condo units: 176 (studio/bachelor, 1BR, 2BR, sub-penthouse, penthouse)
Sales status: in planning
Hudson Place One is a proposal to build a 25-storey mixed-use condominium tower with a commercial ground floor... (view full profile)
Learn more about Hudson Place One on Citified.ca
Photo

[Downtown Victoria] Hudson Place 1 | Condos; commercial | 29-storeys | Proposed


  • Please log in to reply
639 replies to this topic

#581 Jackerbie

Jackerbie
  • Member
  • 343 posts
  • LocationRichmond, BC

Posted 10 October 2017 - 10:29 AM

If this building ends up being 25 stories but with a perfectly flat top as some sort of twisted compromise then I might just check myself in to VV's rubber room.

 

Not perfectly flat, there might be an elevator tower for universal accessibility and also the rooftop mechanical bits  ;)



#582 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 16,041 posts

Posted 10 October 2017 - 10:54 AM

The aesthetic options for maintaining the same density on a 25-storey building are certainly going to be more limited than if the 29-storey plan were going forward.



#583 VibrantVictoria

VibrantVictoria
  • Administrator
  • 1,112 posts
  • LocationVictoria, BC

Posted 10 October 2017 - 10:55 AM

Here we go:

 

Height of what would have been Vancouver Island's tallest building scaled back



#584 aastra

aastra
  • Member
  • 12,794 posts

Posted 10 October 2017 - 10:58 AM

I'm not a fan of pinnacles and funny hats and such, FYI. I'm just noting that concerns re: architectural design shouldn't evaporate at level [insert today's magic number here]. Every building taller than four or five floors should have some sort of completion at the top, some stepping back and/or distinguishing of the highest levels, etc. The more prominent that a building is going to be, the more effort we should expect re: a refined appearance at the very top.

 

Sometimes I think Victoria's rules are intended to present highrise buildings in the most unflattering light. A self-confirming hang-up. "See? We told you it was going to look like ***."


  • Nparker and jonny like this

#585 AllseeingEye

AllseeingEye

    AllSeeingEye

  • Member
  • 2,949 posts
  • LocationGorge

Posted 10 October 2017 - 11:48 AM

Heh...as predicted after a conversation in the summer with a certain business birdie close to one of the more reasonable CoV councilors....

 

Absolutely no surprise but really you can't blame Townline as we all know any request to build an extra !FOUR! whole entire stories would've tied this proposal up for years in the very best Victoria tradition of s****** their pants over that most terrifying and horrible of possibilities <gasp>....*extra height*.

 

As long as the final product is a good looking building IMO the best we can do is move on and hope "25" sets some sort of a standard for perhaps a new normal in Ye Olde Faux Heritage Burgh by the Sea.....


  • Nparker, jonny and grantpalin like this

#586 Mattjvd

Mattjvd
  • Member
  • 214 posts

Posted 10 October 2017 - 11:59 AM

When (what year) do you think a 30+ floor building will be approved in the CoV?

#587 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 16,041 posts

Posted 10 October 2017 - 12:15 PM

When (what year) do you think a 30+ floor building will be approved in the CoV?

5,000 CE - give or take a millennia.


  • Mattjvd likes this

#588 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 37,722 posts

Posted 10 October 2017 - 12:31 PM

The updated renderings: 

 

Hudson-Place-One-October-10-rendering-a.jpg

 

Hudson-Place-One-October-10-rendering-b.jpg

 

Hudson-Place-One-October-10-rendering-c.jpg


Know it all.
Citified.ca is Victoria's most comprehensive research resource for new-build homes and commercial spaces.


#589 jonny

jonny
  • Member
  • 7,060 posts

Posted 10 October 2017 - 12:32 PM

Looks great. Can't wait!


  • DavidSchell likes this

#590 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 16,041 posts

Posted 10 October 2017 - 12:54 PM

So as suspected it's lost most of its slimness. Although it's definitely better than a hole in the ground, once again we get the inferior version of a proposal.  :whyme:



#591 aastra

aastra
  • Member
  • 12,794 posts

Posted 10 October 2017 - 12:55 PM

Something isn't jibing in those images.



#592 RFS

RFS
  • Member
  • 1,223 posts

Posted 10 October 2017 - 12:57 PM

1st and 3rd rendering look good. 2nd looks like it's already been there forever and no one will notice

#593 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 16,041 posts

Posted 10 October 2017 - 01:04 PM

From a distance it looks altogether too much like North Park Manor now.

north-park-manor_thumb.jpg



#594 Kapten Kapsell

Kapten Kapsell
  • Member
  • 1,311 posts

Posted 10 October 2017 - 01:11 PM

From a distance it looks altogether too much like North Park Manor now

It's still not a fatscraper though :banana:



#595 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 16,041 posts

Posted 10 October 2017 - 01:24 PM

It's still not a fatscraper though 

So that's the the benchmark now for excellent design in the CoV? It's good as long as it's "not a fatscraper"?  :confused:



#596 Kapten Kapsell

Kapten Kapsell
  • Member
  • 1,311 posts

Posted 10 October 2017 - 02:03 PM

So that's the the benchmark now for excellent design in the CoV? It's good as long as it's "not a fatscraper"? :confused:


I didn’t mention anything about benchmarks or design excellence; the non-fatscraper aspect of the redesign is simply an acknowledgement that it could be worse.

#597 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 16,041 posts

Posted 10 October 2017 - 02:20 PM

...the non-fatscraper aspect of the redesign is simply an acknowledgement that it could be worse.

That's still not setting the bar very high if we are willing to accept "it could be worse".

And I don't mean to suggest these attitudes are your personal opinions Kapten, I just think that as a community Victorians have to learn to aim higher and not be satisfied with "just OK".



#598 AllseeingEye

AllseeingEye

    AllSeeingEye

  • Member
  • 2,949 posts
  • LocationGorge

Posted 10 October 2017 - 02:40 PM

I must say in Mike's first rendering that is by far the best the Jack Davis building has ever looked. IMO that fugly little squirt represents all that is wrong with "modern" Victoria architecture: its the poster child for short, squat and fatscaper-like. Somewhat akin to the new developments destined for the View Towers area my hope is that once Townline is finished with the Hudson district the JD building will hopefully just sort of disappear from consciousness once its boxed in by the new tower....


  • Nparker likes this

#599 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 16,041 posts

Posted 10 October 2017 - 02:45 PM

My thoughts exactly AllSeeingEye



#600 Kapten Kapsell

Kapten Kapsell
  • Member
  • 1,311 posts

Posted 10 October 2017 - 02:57 PM

I must say in Mike's first rendering that is by far the best the Jack Davis building has ever looked. IMO that fugly little squirt represents all that is wrong with "modern" Victoria architecture: its the poster child for short, squat and fatscaper-like. Somewhat akin to the new developments destined for the View Towers area my hope is that once Townline is finished with the Hudson district the JD building will hopefully just sort of disappear from consciousness once its boxed in by the new tower....

It might also be boxed in by Gateway Green (if it's ever built).


  • AllseeingEye likes this

You're not quite at the end of this discussion topic!

Use the page links at the lower-left to go to the next page to read additional posts.
 



0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users