# Why do train stations have tall ceilings?



## Faraz (Feb 28, 2007)

While they are very impressive, what is the practicality of making them so tall?


----------



## Guest_Amtrak OBS Employee_* (Feb 28, 2007)

Well that's an easy one. Most of the train stations in this country were built at a time when the train was king! So cities and smaller communities put their pride and joy into the architecture of the local train station! After all if you think about it, the train station is where you came into town or left town in most instances during those days. So why not make a good impression of your local train station as is shown in the architecture of our older train stations! That's my thoughts! Any of you others? OBS...


----------



## TransAtlantic (Feb 28, 2007)

There are/were practical considerations, though, as well; for example, in the grand old stations (let's also not forget L.A., Kansas City, and the old St. Louis depot), did you ever notice where they put the clocks and train/track status boards? Just as in European stations, you can always look up, see above everyone's head, and still know where and when you need to be! And of course, with tall ceilings comes (usually) deeper incursion of natural light. I had to think about all these things in architecture school...


----------



## rmgreenesq (Feb 28, 2007)

Even the train station at Worcester, Massachusetts is rather impressive.












Shame it only sees two Amtrak trains a day.

Rick


----------



## GG-1 on borrowed machine (Feb 28, 2007)

rmgreenesq said:


> Even the train station at Worcester, Massachusetts is rather impressive.
> Shame it only sees two Amtrak trains a day.


The Bigger shame is how few see it. Mahalo for the pictures.

Aloha


----------



## The Metropolitan (Feb 28, 2007)

Another thing to consider is that most older stations were built in the times before AC, so the high ceilings do allow the hotter air to rise to ceiling level as well as give a less claustrophobic feel.

I'm sure this was not *THE* reason for the high ceilings, but it does likely factor in.


----------



## George Harris (Feb 28, 2007)

The Metropolitan said:


> Another thing to consider is that most older stations were built in the times before AC, so the high ceilings do allow the hotter air to rise to ceiling level as well as give a less claustrophobic feel.
> I'm sure this was not *THE* reason for the high ceilings, but it does likely factor in.


Actually, at least in southern climates, the hot air rising is THE reason. When you have high windows that are open and low windows that are open, the heating of the air in the building, whether by sun on the roof or by human bodies inside results in a natural flow of air in the lower windows and out the upper windows. So, in addition to letting the hot air rise and exit, it produces a natural breeze which makes it feel cooler than the actual temperature even when there is no natural wind outside. This is also the reason for transoms in old buildings. Having an openable window above the door allowed the breeze still flow through the building even when you wanted the door closed for privacy or security reasons.

There are a lot of techniques to provide natural ventialtion and cooling, but a lot of that is gone from recent texts on building designs. If you get books from the 50's and earlier, you can find a lot of good solid information on this subject.

George


----------



## sechs (Mar 1, 2007)

In the larger stations, I think that those high ceilings are to give a real sense of grandeur.

If you walk in the "front" entrance GCT, the ceilings are initially low. When you step into the grand hall, bam, the ceiling is so high, that they put the sky there. Impressive if you experience it like that.


----------



## gswager (Mar 1, 2007)

Other reason (but probably pretty lame) is the heat and exhaust from the steam locomotives.

I agree that it is pretty grandeur. Everytime I walk into the high ceiling, I always get an awe of it.


----------



## rmgreenesq (Mar 1, 2007)

GG-1 on borrowed machine said:


> The Bigger shame is how few see it. Mahalo for the pictures.
> Aloha


The station can get busy. Worcester is the terminus of the Framingham/Worcester MBTA commuter train. That service brings ten trains a day to Worcester. I'd get on the train at Worcester if the T didn't put a train station in my hometown of Grafton.

My lament was more that the only place I can go on Amtrak from Worcester is Albany and points east. The arrival time in Albany is not conducive to a connection to NY Penn. If I want to go south, I must go to Route 128, which has all the flair of a cardboard box.

One other interesting point, train stations seem to be unique among transportation buildings for impressive architecture. How many airports have blown you away for impressive architecture? Not many. The only one that jumps to my mind is the old TWA terminal at Kennedy, and it comes to mind for how funky it is.

Rick


----------



## PRR 60 (Mar 1, 2007)

While there may be some ancillary ventilation attributes to soaring ceilings, the primary driver was to express power and wealth. So not only do you get the high ceilings, but you get Gothic columns, Roman arches, sculptures, marble, you name it. The stations were the public symbol of companies that were among the wealthiest of their time, and who often competed with each other in the same city. The Pennsylvania RR and New York Central in New York played one-upsmanship with Grand Central and Penn. In Philadelphia you had Reading Terminal and the PRR Broad Street Station. The stations that remain today are a living connection to a special era in the architectural design of public buildings.



rmgreenesq said:


> One other interesting point, train stations seem to be unique among transportation buildings for impressive architecture. How many airports have blown you away for impressive architecture? Not many. The only one that jumps to my mind is the old TWA terminal at Kennedy, and it comes to mind for how funky it is.
> Rick


While I agree with you in general, there are some exceptions. Neglecting some of the more flamboyant international airports like Dubai, Denver International is a remarkable structure that rivals any rail terminal. The main terminal structure, designed by Fentress Bradburn Architects Ltd., is one I always enjoy visiting and walking around. The design is intended to mimic the distant peaks of the Front Range, and when seen from a distance, it does.

And, maybe an odd choice, is O'Hare Terminal One (United). This structure, designed by architect Helmut Jahn and opened in 1987 (20 years already?), was intended to break the mold of the cookie-cutter, utilitarian design of airport terminals. It was meant to be a memorable gateway to the city with exposed steel arches and glass everywhere. The architects turned a simple connector tunnel between Terminals B and C into an event with a neon sculpture hanging from the ceiling and funky computer music. Back when my kids were kids, were would always head down to the connector, and walk end to end and back even if we did not have to, just for the fun of going through the light and music show.

One goal of architecture is to make the people in the space comfortable and instill a desire to return. Just like Grand Central and LA Union Station, at Denver and O'Hare T-1 that goal was achieved.


----------



## Bill Haithcoat (Mar 1, 2007)

TransAtlantic said:


> There are/were practical considerations, though, as well; for example, in the grand old stations (let's also not forget L.A., Kansas City, and the old St. Louis depot), did you ever notice where they put the clocks and train/track status boards? Just as in European stations, you can always look up, see above everyone's head, and still know where and when you need to be! And of course, with tall ceilings comes (usually) deeper incursion of natural light. I had to think about all these things in architecture school...



And to the train status boards, consider this.......back then.......before compact electronic bulletiin boards, the great big bulletin boards had to show ALL OF THE TRAINS ALL DAY LONG on some huge backdrop.

Need at least some tall space for that. Think of the great stations such as Grand Central, Penn, Chicago Union etc all the trains all day long. There had to be a stationary board to show ALL of them, not just the ones in the next hour or so as is done now.

But for all the various practical reaons I do think showcasing was a big part of it, and some time through the years have actually read that to be the case. Think of what the train stations meant during WW 11, for example. It was the community gathering place, just as big airportrs are now(uh,security clearances allowing).


----------



## jamesontheroad (Mar 1, 2007)

Train stations generally have high ceilings because of a simple architectural limitation: in order to span the wide spaces of ticket halls or multiple tracks, architects had to employ arches or curved spans to create spaces that were free of supporting columns. These meant that the roof was lifted up, and created the impressive indoor spaces that we are familiar with. The grandeur of competing railway lines was suited to these big train sheds, although what is always interesting is how these huge volumes could be tied into the buildings that connected the train shed to the street.






Saint Pancras station in London (between Euston station and King's Cross station) is one of my favourites: built to accomodate a hotel, it's a fantastic celebration of Gothic architecture that neatly closes the big train shed and creates an impressive facade onto the busy Euston Road. The whole station is being refurbished and extended for the imminent arrival of the new Channel Tunnel rail link, and the station building is finally being converted into a boutique hotel. It has some magnificent interiors, but was left derelict for a long time because it was exceptionally difficult to adapt it to include the number of staircases and bathrooms required for a modern hotel (and modern fire safety legislation).






I've never been there myself, but Budapest's Nyugati (corrected from first edit) station in Hungary has a big old train steel and glass train shed that simply ends right at the street... or rather, the end facade of the terminus is glazed, but there is no building that attempts to 'plug' the end of the train shed. I remember seeing it cited as an example by Herman Hertzeberger in one of his excellent text books for students of architecture.

*j* :blink:


----------



## Bill Haithcoat (Mar 1, 2007)

As to the the bulletin boards I mentioned,of course they were more wide than tall, otherwise nobody could read them that far up.

Also keep in mind that today we only have Amtrak. Back then we had over 100 private railroads providing both passenger and freight service. Thus, several companies in the same buidings. Thus, each needing various kinds of offices, headquarters and such not needed today with one national cperation.

That doesn't directly contribute to the station being so tall, but it does provide, in addition to the great reasons noted above by many posters, help explain why they needed so much more room than they need today.


----------



## MrFSS (Mar 1, 2007)

This is the Amtrak station that is closest to where I live.


----------



## haolerider (Mar 1, 2007)

MrFSS said:


> This is the Amtrak station that is closest to where I live.


Do you get the feeling of spaciousness when you enter that building?

Is it Ashland or Fulton, KY?


----------



## rmgreenesq (Mar 1, 2007)

MrFSS said:


> This is the Amtrak station that is closest to where I live.



AmShack baby yeah! (sing along!) I got me a car! It seats about 72, so c'mon and bring your dining car money!

PRR 60. I havn't had the privledge of visiting Denver Int'l, and my last trip through the tunnel at ORD was at a full gallop as not to miss my connection.

I agree that train stations were built as an expression of power and wealth of their owners. The difference between the time when rail was king and today is the presence of public finance. The big, beautiful train stations were built by the railroad that owned the station. Since its not feasable for every airline to own its own airport (although some act like they own the airport they use as a hub) airports are akin to the "Union Station". Since no airline wants to pay for a building that will be used by its competitors, local and regional governments tend to build airports, and the style of the building reflects its owners.

Rick


----------



## MrFSS (Mar 1, 2007)

haolerider said:


> MrFSS said:
> 
> 
> > This is the Amtrak station that is closest to where I live.
> ...


South Portsmouth, KY The one in Maysville is about as far from me, too, but I thought this was a neat one to use for the topic.


----------



## Railbender (Mar 1, 2007)

I work in a church and we often have this architecture discussion. Ours is a beautiful gothic structure built, surprisingly, in 1929, as the stock market was crashing. A professor at a local college likes to say the following to his students when they tour our facility...

"Not so long ago, most people lived in small and modest homes and built grand public spaces. Now many Americans live in gigantic homes and build bland, vanilla public spaces." That really made me think... For the most part, what's true of churches is true of post offices, train stations, libraries, etc.

Chicago really reminds me of this... 4th Presbyterian, Central Union Station, the Washington library...they inspire awe. In churches you have the instant realization of how small you are and, hopefully, you gain the understanding of how awesome and boundless God is. We are reminded by these spaces that the world doesn't revolve around us. No idividual is the center of the universe.

On a recent trip to Chicago with my 11 and 15 year old sons I pointed out to them the legacy of architecture that was provided for us there... And we all wondered what legacy we are leaving in most of our public (and private) spaces being constructed today...

Wow, is it okay to think that deeply here? Sorry...


----------



## MrFSS (Mar 1, 2007)

Railbender said:


> I work in a church and we often have this architecture discussion. Ours is a beautiful Gothic structure built, surprisingly, in 1929, as the stock market was crashing. A professor at a local college likes to say the following to his students when they tour our facility...
> "Not so long ago, most people lived in small and modest homes and built grand public spaces. Now many Americans live in gigantic homes and build bland, vanilla public spaces." That really made me think... For the most part, what's true of churches is true of post offices, train stations, libraries, etc.
> 
> Chicago really reminds me of this... 4th Presbyterian, Central Union Station, the Washington library...they inspire awe. In churches you have the instant realization of how small you are and, hopefully, you gain the understanding of how awesome and boundless God is. We are reminded by these spaces that the world doesn't revolve around us. No individual is the center of the universe.
> ...


Being a "Senior Citizen", I appreciated your thoughts and comments.


----------



## denmarks (Mar 3, 2007)

This is the station at Chico, CA which seems to be the standard for stations that were not terminals. There is not much inside other than bathrooms and a few seats. They don't even have a ticket office. Most of the space to the right is museum.


----------



## Irving (Mar 4, 2007)

:huh: I agree that the reason for arched high ceilings are 1) To span a large area and 2) ventalation of steam and compustions gases.

Think of the result of low ceilings such as in the current Pennsylvaina station in NY CIty under the current Madison Square Arena.

During NE Corridor power failures when emergency diesel engines are employed to haul trains (Amtrak, NJ Transit and Long Island RR (MTA) trains in and out of Pennsylvania Station (NY City), the air quality becomes so bad that the station has to be evacuated.

When Penn Station was originally built at that site it too had a high class roof.

Let you in on a Grand Central Station Secret. When the building was renovated in the late 60's or early 70's the ceiling was cleaned and the dirt was analized. The major component was tabbaco smoke particles!

There is a small uncleaned patch left for comparison. Also the star constellations are reversed as seen from earth - a mistake by the painter. Tours of Grand Central are availible from the public relations department of the Metro North (MTA) RR. Don't tell them I told you these secrets, there are more.


----------



## gswager (Mar 4, 2007)

Irving said:


> Let you in on a Grand Central Station Secret. When the building was renovated in the late 60's or early 70's the ceiling was cleaned and the dirt was analized. The major component was tabbaco smoke particles!There is a small uncleaned patch left for comparison. Also the star constellations are reversed as seen from earth - a mistake by the painter. Tours of Grand Central are availible from the public relations department of the Metro North (MTA) RR. Don't tell them I told you these secrets, there are more.


Same thing in LA Union Station. When you come in the main front entrance into the station. One or two ceiling overhead were cleaned. Yup, a huge difference between "black" and tan colors.


----------

