Brick and Mortar of the North: Canada’s tallest, 1950 - Page 2

MolsonExport · #21 Posted **May 10, 2011, 1:40 PM**

^an all time beauty.

magatte · #22 Posted **Sep 27, 2011, 4:25 PM**

When it comes to churches in Montreal, you forgot the former cathedrale St-Jacques, that is now part of the main UQAM building. It tops out at 85 meters:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint-J...dral_(Montreal)
http://www.er.uqam.ca/nobel/r14310/A...ues/index.html

Rico Rommheim · #23 Posted **Nov 24, 2011, 8:19 PM**

^ Is it really 85m? Impressive. Glad they didnt tear down the spire.

Might as well bump this one, as it is one fine thread.

In addition to the omissions I posted last page, Montreal's University Tower also seems to have been forgotten.

http://www.nlptechnologies.ca/News/imgsdSBpuvDes.jpg

18 floors, Built 1932. First building In Montreal to have concrete frame instead of steel.

As can be seen, it is in dire need of a re-do.

Rico Rommheim · #24 Posted **Nov 24, 2011, 8:32 PM**

Strangely enough, when Montreal was the nation's largest city and had the HQ of the biggest railway companies, it lacked a chateau-esque Railway Hotel like Quebec, Toronto, Ottawa and vancouver.

But we did have the Le Chateau Appartments, Montreal, 15 Floors, 1928

The diagram marks it at 55m. But I think its good for a good 60m, It really does look taller.

http://www.musee-mccord.qc.ca/ObjView/02081005.jpg

ChiSoxRox · #25 Posted **Nov 25, 2011, 1:54 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rico Rommheim

^ Is it really 85m? Impressive. Glad they didnt tear down the spire.

Might as well bump this one, as it is one fine thread.

In addition to the omissions I posted last page, Montreal's University Tower also seems to have been forgotten.

http://www.nlptechnologies.ca/News/imgsdSBpuvDes.jpg

18 floors, Built 1932. First building In Montreal to have concrete frame instead of steel.

As can be seen, it is in dire need of a re-do.

Oi, this thread has seemed to have had more omissions than buildings gotten right. I think part of the problem is that this list gets down into the sub-80 m range where the diagrams get much less incomplete. I may truncate the front page list.

Rico Rommheim · #26 Posted **Nov 25, 2011, 2:40 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dralcoffin

Oi, this thread has seemed to have had more omissions than buildings gotten right. I think part of the problem is that this list gets down into the sub-80 m range where the diagrams get much less incomplete. I may truncate the front page list.

Don't sweat it. Researching pre-war canadian skyscraper remains an obscure hobby, I'm sure.