Both were taken on the first Saturday of January 1991. The top pic was taken from the western bank of the Cuyahoga River. The second pic was taken on Public Square of the holiday lights.

I took this in January 1993. It's the reflection of the Tower in the 55 Public Square Building.

That first shot, with the rising vapor clouds illuminated by city lights, is quite dramatic. Nice work.

this walk down memory lane has me all verklempt.

Oooo, Key Tower is under construction in that first shot - very cool!!

I remember the great displays they used to have of public square.  Today's displays just doesn't compare to what it used to be..

 

Great pictures by the way!

I love the first shot!  Very nice.

Great! Keep 'em coming!

That first photo is very margeret bourke-white... I love it.

I have always had a soft spot for the TT.  I think it is one of the most beautiful skyscrapers in the United States, right up there with the Chrysler Bldg. and reasonably tall too.  Why doesn't it get more respect outside of Cleveland?

I have always had a soft spot for the TT.  I think it is one of the most beautiful skyscrapers in the United States, right up there with the Chrysler Bldg. and reasonably tall too.  Why doesn't it get more respect outside of Cleveland?

 

Can you state why you think it doesn't?

Folks from around the world respecting it here:

 

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=154082

Though I haven't done this since the early 2000s, I used to go with my family to Tower City on New Years Eve every year.  Great times; very beautiful interior

I believe the height usually listed does not include the proud flag pole..which places the height somewhere near 773 if it was included? If the spire and antennas on other structures can be included in the overall height..why can't this flag post? I also believe there used to be an outdoor observation platform. I used to do some work up in the OB deck. And yes, it was an enormous undertaking at the time..still very grand when you look at the whole complex and how far down they needed to dig. Wasn't there a lot of hand digging?

May 1995.

June 1996.

Top photo: December 1994. Bottom pic: December 1998.

I believe the height usually listed does not include the proud flag pole..which places the height somewhere near 773 if it was included? If the spire and antennas on other structures can be included in the overall height..why can't this flag post? I also believe there used to be an outdoor observation platform. I used to do some work up in the OB deck. And yes, it was an enormous undertaking at the time..still very grand when you look at the whole complex and how far down they needed to dig. Wasn't there a lot of hand digging?

 

The flagpole is 70 feet, making the total height 778 feet. Generally - according to the Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat (the folks generally used for official height), spires/antennas are considered part of the building's design but flagpoles have a more decorative role. It's splitting hairs if you ask me, but oh well.

 

    I think Terminal Tower is classy. I liked it better in old photos when it was the only tall skycraper in Cleveland, though.

I believe the height usually listed does not include the proud flag pole..which places the height somewhere near 773 if it was included? If the spire and antennas on other structures can be included in the overall height..why can't this flag post? I also believe there used to be an outdoor observation platform. I used to do some work up in the OB deck. And yes, it was an enormous undertaking at the time..still very grand when you look at the whole complex and how far down they needed to dig. Wasn't there a lot of hand digging?

 

The flagpole is 70 feet, making the total height 778 feet. Generally - according to the Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat (the folks generally used for official height), spires/antennas are considered part of the building's design but flagpoles have a more decorative role. It's splitting hairs if you ask me, but oh well.

 

Interesting. You're right.. splitting hairs on that one... Another question...What about Empire State, when the antennas were added later..and not part of the original design. (when King Kong was up there, they didn't exist!) Do those get added to the total height? If so, why do they allow something like that--which was not part of the design? Just trying to see if we can squeeze a few more feet out of our tower!  :lol:

... The difficulty of the project is also unmatched due to the bedrock situation along the shores of central Lake Erie where there is more "stuff" piled above the bedrock than on the western ends of the lakes. ...

Yes. The tower stands on concrete caissons, some up to ten feet in diameter, sunk 200 feet through old lakebed sediment to reach bedrock. If I remember correctly, there are about 200 of those caissons. Again if I remember correctly, the cost of the building was in the neighborhood of $88 million, quite a stack of money in those days.

 

The architectural firm was Graham, Anderson, Probst, & White, successor to D.H. Burnham & Company. Even though Daniel Burnham was deceased by the time the tower was designed and built, he had a hand in earlier proposals and the building seems to me to show some strong carryover of his influence into the new firm. The same firm completed the designs for Chicago's Union Station begun by Burnham.

 

May I contribute some photos?

 

1978:

 

 

Airport-Windermere Rapid Station (now Red Line):

 

1979:

Shaker Rapid Station:

 

1988:

 

 

Lavish Christmas Displays:

 

 

2003:

I wonder how much it would cost today to build this building with pretty much very similar or same materials, less improvements on windows and mechanics. today? Also, are you saying that GAP&W was a spin-off  of D.B.?

 

Fabulous photos! Look how long the trains were under the tower!

... Also, are you saying that GAP&W was a spin-off  of D.B.? ...

 

The way I've seen it described is as a successor, not a spin-off, in that D.H. Burnham didn't continue to operate after GAP&W started up. I think that means it started up by assuming the assets, liabilities, and works-in-progress of D.H. Burnham & Co. after Burnham's death, but I don't really know the particulars. It seems likely that at least some of the founding principals of GAP&W were estwhile major players in D.H. Burnham & Co.