The Great Canadian Skyline Thread!

[Martin Mtl]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

Obviously he was referring to differences other than size.

I'm not sure what he was referring to then. Economy ? Montreal was richer and bigger also. What else? Architecture and urban form? Montreal was also superior in every way, except the height of its tallest building. Even now, Cleveland still has higher tallest. It only demonstrates that Mtl has a height limit in its urban zoning. Industrial importance? Finance? Again, Montreal over Cleveland by a long shot. What else?

And for the sake of argument, it is debatable that Cleveland's buildings back then were more impressive than the Canadian's equivalent. Cleveland's jewell, the Terminal Tower, is indeed very tall, but not that big actually (a little under 600 000 s.f.) compare to the Sun Life building (one million s.f.), even though the later is not as tall. They were both build at the same time. Cleveland's other historic high rises are all shorter and less impressive than Montreal's other buildings of the same period (The Royal Bank building, the Bell Building, Aldred building). And then, there's the whole St.James financial district in Old Montreal, which doesn't have any equivalent in Cleveland. So what are we talking about then ?

[Nouvellecosse]

For gods sake there's no need to assume it was some form of evaluation or ranking. Saying something is different doesn't necessitate the assumption that it's better or worse.

I suspect that he was simply referring to the urban planning and architectural styles, including the fact that Cleveland as well as several other midwestern cities seemed to embrace the city beautiful movement which placed an emphasis on formality, splendour, and monumentalism. Adherence to these design principles resulted in cities becoming very different beasts than those whose forms were more organic, spontaneous, and impressive more for their rich texture and details than for their formality.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_Beautiful_movement

[Chadillaccc]

http://news.buzzbuzzhome.com/2014/10/calgary-future-skyline.html

[kool maudit]

"Midwestern Gigantism" is a thing, and places like Cleveland's Public Square, St. Louis' Midtown/Forest Park Area and Detroit's New Center display the combination of extreme wealth concentration, relative "newness", and City Beautiful-inspired urban planning that was the focus of those cities in the first few decades of the twentieth.

Toronto's proposed College Park tower and Vimy circle plan contained a lot of this, as did Montreal's never-realized Windsor Station replacement. But the great Midwestern cities were just galloping out along their arterials around that time, and it was America, too: America gambles more, builds on spec, finds it easier to imagine grandiose futures.

Early-20th Montreal was a careful old Eastern city whose greatest projects were infrastructural, not architectural. They would shove trains through mountains without a second thought but skyscrapers were a bit much for the Square Mile types. It was always a height-averse city by law and culture.

[Martin Mtl]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

For gods sake there's no need to assume it was some form of evaluation or ranking. Saying something is different doesn't necessitate the assumption that it's better or worse.

His first impulse was indeed to compare and to evaluate as to which one had the most impressive office buildings back then (Cleveland versus other cdn cities). I challenged his affirmation. Isn't this a discussion forum?

[Beedok]

Originally Posted by TorontoDrew

Almost every midsized and up American city has at least one better pre war tower then every Canadian city. For some unfortunate reason Canadian cities didn't jump on that band wagon. I wish they had.

Skyscrapers were an American thing and we were part of the British Empire so we turned to London for inspiration more than Chicago or New York (though the balance shifted a bit as you went to the prairies, especially Winnipeg).

Originally Posted by ssiguy

Cleveland may not be growing like so many other US cities but it has something that few American cities offer.........character.

To some. My one professor who works and lives in either Cincinnati or Cleveland always talks about how the US cities are soulless and depressing. So clearly it's a matter of personal taste.

[Mrs Sauga]

Originally Posted by TorontoDrew

Almost every midsized and up American city has at least one better pre war tower then every Canadian city. For some unfortunate reason Canadian cities didn't jump on that band wagon. I wish they had.

The US cities were bigger and richer weren't they? Even today, American cities have a taller office skyscraper. Compare Chicago to Toronto, Boston/Philly to Montreal, San Fran to Vancouver, etc.

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by Martin Mtl

His first impulse was indeed to compare and to evaluate as to which one had the most impressive office buildings back then (Cleveland versus other cdn cities). I challenged his affirmation. Isn't this a discussion forum?

No, comparing a specific category of architecture isn't the same as comparing the overall cities and doesn't require defensiveness.

[Martin Mtl]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

No, comparing a specific category of architecture isn't the same as comparing the overall cities and doesn't require defensiveness.

I think you are attributing me a defensive, hostile attitude that I did not have or shown. I was very much in disagreement with the comments he made ("The big pre-war office tower in Cleveland is arguably more impressive than any similar tower in any city in Canada:" / "I'm not a fan of the style from an architectural, social, or city-building perspective, but these buildings are undeniably large and imposing. The existence of something like that also demonstrates that Cleveland was a bit of a different animal compared to Montreal".), and I tried to comment on that. To me, you're the one who sounded defensive and drama queen with all that "For God's sake" burst that came out from nowhere. It's not like I made a personal attack or that my comment was agressive and personal. Chill out. This is the Cdn forum. This is what we do here all the time.

Also saying "The existence of something like that also demonstrates that Cleveland was a bit of a different animal compared to Montreal" is exactly the same as comparing the overall cities. And that "something like that" is clearly in reference to the buildings, not the "city beautiful movement" that you came up with. And speaking of that movement, it's not like Montreal ignored it.

And that concludes my first and last "fight" on this forum for 2015. Not bad.

Content removed

[Martin Mtl]

DSC_0880 on Laliberte Jycelin on flickr

[Monolith]

Downtown Vancity #vancouver #canada by boomroom media, on Flickr Uploaded on December 5, 2015


Downtown Vancity #vancouver #canada by boomroom media, on Flickr Uploaded on December 5, 2015

[Hali87]

Originally Posted by Martin Mtl

Also saying "The existence of something like that also demonstrates that Cleveland was a bit of a different animal compared to Montreal" is exactly the same as comparing the overall cities. And that "something like that" is clearly in reference to the buildings, not the "city beautiful movement" that you came up with. And speaking of that movement, it's not like Montreal ignored it.

I guess what I thought he meant was:

"Terminal Tower, or a building very much like it, would look quite out of place in most Canadian cities, including Montreal. I wonder what it is that made this style of - not just architecture - but development popular in American cities but not Canadian ones?"

To which it's hard to answer using numbers and stats, which I think is what annoyed Nouvelleecosse (because people on here frequently try to prove subjective points using statistics, which doesn't really work).


I think it goes beyond the City Beautiful movement or made-in-American vs. made-in-UK architecture - it's hard to imagine the justification for such a baroque building in Canada. Canada always seemed like too much of a form-follows-function (even pre-modern) kind of place for it to ever occur to (whoever built Terminal Tower, for example) to build something as over-the-top fancy as Terminal Tower. Early American skyscrapers tend to remind me of gothic churches, while the Canadian ones remind me more banks and government. There's a certain "cleanness" to the Canadian ones that I prefer, but the American ones are undeniably very cool in their own right.

[hipster duck]

Originally Posted by Hali87

I think it goes beyond the City Beautiful movement or made-in-American vs. made-in-UK architecture - it's hard to imagine the justification for such a baroque building in Canada. Canada always seemed like too much of a form-follows-function (even pre-modern) kind of place for it to ever occur to (whoever built Terminal Tower, for example) to build something as over-the-top fancy as Terminal Tower. Early American skyscrapers tend to remind me of gothic churches, while the Canadian ones remind me more banks and government. There's a certain "cleanness" to the Canadian ones that I prefer, but the American ones are undeniably very cool in their own right.

The Terminal Tower is even over-the-top by American standards. It's not just that it was the tallest building outside of New York, it was that the building was a sprawling complex. It was an office tower, but it was also the main railroad station of Cleveland and also a retail space and hotel. It cost $179 million in 1930 dollars - which was a fantastic sum of money those days (The Hoover Dam cost $49M in comparison). It was, in many ways, the forerunner of the modern multi-use masterplanned complex - even moreso than Rockefeller Center.

I'm not sure what possessed the owners to build such an extravagant building. Private capital hadn't built anything like it before, and certainly not in Cleveland. I think one of the reasons I mentioned that it looks Stalinesque is because only an authoritarian centrally-planned regime would consider building something so audacious.

[Nouvellecosse]

I think I'm more annoyed than anything by how silly it seems to misinterpret (and overact to) something so apparent. I mean, how can someone not look at buildings like Sun Life and Terminal tower and not conclude that the architectural and urbanist philosophies are very different. One is very square (well rectangle) and meant to be fundamentally practical with its adornment being basically superficial, and the other was built with it's very size and proportions designed as much for its aesthetic effect as much as any practical function. And the fact that it overlooked the Mall playing the role of a monument in a similar way the Washington Monument overlooks the national malls, shows this is a totally different beast than Canadian cities. It isn't something to think of as good or bad, it just is.

[mistercorporate]

More great photos from JasonZed:

[caltrane74]

There is so much space for a lot more towers.

[Martin Mtl]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

I think I'm more annoyed than anything by how silly it seems to misinterpret (and overact to) something so apparent. I mean, how can someone not look at buildings like Sun Life and Terminal tower and not conclude that the architectural and urbanist philosophies are very different. One is very square (well rectangle) and meant to be fundamentally practical with its adornment being basically superficial, and the other was built with it's very size and proportions designed as much for its aesthetic effect as much as any practical function. And the fact that it overlooked the Mall playing the role of a monument in a similar way the Washington Monument overlooks the national malls, shows this is a totally different beast than Canadian cities. It isn't something to think of as good or bad, it just is.

I did overact. I said that to myself even as I was looking for those statistics to make a point that may not have been necessary to make. You do stuff like that sometimes on this kind of discussion forum, because it's part of the fun. You made your point. I disagree. Next!

[MonkeyRonin]

Couple more good ones from Jasonzed: (taken from the Yonge & Eglinton area)

[1ajs]