Advertisement

Eurostar Architecture: Comparing High-Speed Rail Stations in Europe

  • Fabian WennerEmail author
Chapter
  • 11 Downloads

Abstract

The spread of high-speed rail (HSR) in Europe since the 1980s has reinvigorated the role of railway stations as both spaces of public encounter and transport nodes. In reaction to the re-emerging task to design new passenger railway stations, several European railway companies have been attempting to underline this role by drawing on iconic architecture, sometimes assigning the task to star architects. This chapter explores the geographical distribution and motivations behind this strategy and presents the findings of a quantitative, comparative research across 73 railway stations in 10 European countries that have been newly built or replaced as part of HSR development. Architects’ ‘star status’ and the public and professional recognition of their station buildings were measured using a novel approach of architecture and tourism database analysis. The chapter concludes that star architecture for HSR stations is not always utilised in proportion to the importance of a station as a transport node. It is most often applied in urban sub-centres and at airport stations, less so in city centre locations. Public recognition of stations is not significantly linked to the ‘stardom’ of the architect, while professional recognition is. The most popular HSR stations remain refurbished, traditional inner-city stations.

Keywords

Star architecture High-speed rail Railway stations Station architecture 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Data collection for this study was substantially and kindly supported by students from TUM’s Urbanism and Architecture programmes as well as guest researchers. These were Cemal Akçiçek, Lubna Al Sammak, Khoi Anh Dang, Lukas Ferstl, Lucie Heinz, Lucas Schneider Zimmer and Isabella Traeger.

References

  1. Ahlfeldt GM, Feddersen A (2018) From periphery to core: measuring agglomeration effects using high-speed rail. J Econ Geogr 18:355–390.  https://doi.org/10.1093/jeg/lbx005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alaily-Mattar N, Dreher J, Thierstein A (2018) Repositioning cities through star architecture: how does it work? J Urban Design 23:169–192.  https://doi.org/10.1080/13574809.2017.1408401CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Banister, D, Hall P (1993) The second railway age. Built Environ 19 (3-4):157–162Google Scholar
  4. Berger T, Enflo K (2017) Locomotives of local growth: the short- and long-term impact of railroads in Sweden. J Urban Econ 98:124–138.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jue.2015.09.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bertolini L (1999) Spatial development patterns and public transport: the application of an analytical model in the Netherlands. Plan Pract Res 14:199–210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bertolini L, Spit T (1998) Cities on Rails. The redevelopment of railway station areas. E & FN Spon, LondonGoogle Scholar
  7. Chen CL, Hall P (2015) High-speed trains and spatial-economic impacts: a British-French comparison on two scales: intra- and inter-regional. In: Hickman R, Givoni M, Bonilla D, Banister D (eds) Handbook on transport and development. Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, pp 301–317CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Del Porto D, Lucarelli O (2017) Tav di Afragola, Gentiloni: “Qui garantiamosicurezza e sviluppo”. La Repubblica 6 June 2017Google Scholar
  9. Dürr H (1996) Bahn frei für eine neue Stadt. In: Gerkan MV (ed) Renaissance der Bahnhöfe: Die Stadt im 21. Jh. Vieweg, Braunschweig, Wiesbaden, pp 13–15Google Scholar
  10. European Council (1996) Council Directive 96/48/EC of 23 July 1996 on the interoperability of the trans-European high-speed rail system. Directive 96/48/EC. L 235, 17/09/1996 P. 0006 - 0024. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:31996L0048:en:HTML. Accessed 12 Aug 2016
  11. Garmendia M, Ribalaygua C, Ureña JM (2012) High speed rail: implication for cities. Cities (29):26–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gerkan MV (1996) Renaissance der Bahnhöfe als Nukleus des Städtebaus. In: Gerkan MV (ed) Renaissance der Bahnhöfe: Die Stadt im 21. Jh. Vieweg, Braunschweig, Wiesbaden, pp 17–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hansen W (1959) How accessibility shapes land use. J AM Inst Plann 25(2):73–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hempel AG (1996) Großer Bahnhof. In: Gerkan MV (ed) Renaissance der Bahnhöfe: Die Stadt im 21. Jh. Vieweg, Braunschweig, Wiesbaden, pp 222–223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Herzog M, Leis M (2010) Der Bahnhof: Kathedrale, Erlebniswelt, Sozialstation und Konsumparadies. In: Herzog M, Leis M, Girtler R (eds) Der Bahnhof Basilika der Mobilität – Erlebniswelt der Moderne. W. Kohlhammer, Stuttgart, pp 7–16Google Scholar
  16. Hoffmann-Axthelm D (1996) Stadtunterfahrung: Zu einer modischen Wendung im Verhaltnis von Stadt und Bahn. In: Gerkan MV (ed) Renaissance der Bahnhöfe: Die Stadt im 21. Jh. Vieweg, Braunschweig, Wiesbaden, pp 225–232Google Scholar
  17. Jencks C (1995) Von High-Tech zu Organi-Tech, Arch+, pp 66–73Google Scholar
  18. Morka A (2012) Brief Encounters and Lasting Impressions: Contemporary Train Station Architecture. In: Fraser B, Spalding S (eds) Trains, culture, and mobility: riding the rails. Lexington Books, Plymouth, pp 171–204Google Scholar
  19. Plaza B, Tironi M, Haarich SN (2009) Bilbao’s art scene and the “Guggenheim effect” revisited. Eur Plan Stud 17(11):1711–1729CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Ponzini D (2013) Branded megaprojects and fading urban structures in contemporary cities. In: Del Cerro Santamaria G (ed) Urban megaprojects: a worldwide view. Emerald, New York, pp 107–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ponzini D, Manfredini F (2017) New methods for studying transnational architecture and urbanism: a primer. Territorio (80):97–110Google Scholar
  22. Ponzini D, Nastasi M (2016) Starchitecture: scenes, actors and spectacles in contemporary cities. Monacelli, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  23. Schütz E (1997) Stadtentwicklung durch Hochgeschwindigkeitsverkehr: Konzeptionelle und methodische Ansätze zum Umgang mit den Raumwirkungen des schienengebundenen Personen-Hochgeschwindigkeitsverkehrs als Beitrag zur Lösung von Problemen der Stadtentwicklung. Dissertation, Technische Universität KaiserslauternGoogle Scholar
  24. Schwarz U (1996) “Motion and Emotion”: Bahnhöfe als Traumhäuser der Moderne. In: Gerkan MV (ed) Renaissance der Bahnhöfe: Die Stadt im 21. Jh. Vieweg, Braunschweig, Wiesbaden, pp 287–291Google Scholar
  25. Terpstra I, Lijesen MG (2015) The impact of high speed rail on airport competition. Tijdschr Econ Soc Geogr 106:263–275.  https://doi.org/10.1111/tesg.12103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Thierstein A, Wulfhorst G, Bentlage M, Klug S, Gilliard L, Ji C, Kinigadner J, Steiner H, Sterzer L, Wenner F, Zhao J (2016) WAM Wohnen Arbeiten Mobilität. Veränderungsdynamiken und Entwicklungsoptionen für die Metropolregion München. Lehrstuhl für Raumentwicklung und Fachgebiet für Siedlungsstruktur und Verkehrsplanung der Technischen Universität MünchenGoogle Scholar
  27. Trip JJ (2008) What makes a city: Urban quality in Euralille, Amsterdam South Axis and Rotterdam Central. In: Bruinsma F, Pels E, Priemus H, Rietveld P, van Wee B (eds) Railway development: impacts on urban dynamics. Physica, Heidelberg, pp 79–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. TripAdvisor (2018) About TripAdvisor. https://tripadvisor.mediaroom.com/us-about-us. Accessed 17 December 2018
  29. UIC (2018) High speed rail. Fast track to sustainable mobility. https://uic.org/IMG/pdf/uic_high_speed_2018_ph08_web.pdf. Accessed 25 Mar 2019
  30. Van Uffelen C (2010) Stations. Architecture in focus. Braun, SalensteinGoogle Scholar
  31. Vickerman R (1997) High-speed rail in Europe: experience and issues for future development. Ann Reg Sci 31:21–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Zhao J, Bentlage M, Thierstein A (2017) Residence, workplace and commute: interrelated spatial choices of knowledge workers in the metropolitan region of Munich. J Transp Geogr 62:197–212CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Technische Universität München, Chair of Urban DevelopmentMunichGermany

Personalised recommendations