labor & engenho l&e

Labor & Engenho

L&E ISSN2176-8846

�

History,architecture,andheritageintherailwaystationofAlmería(1892-2017)

DomingoCuéllarPhDHistorian.GrupoRENFE.Madrid[CommunityofMadrid]Spain.<[email protected]>

AuroraMartínez-CorralPhDArchitect.Part-timeUniversityProfessor.UniversitatPolitècnicadeValència(UPV).Valencia[ValencianCommunity]Spain.<[email protected]>

AbstractMost of the life cycle of the railway infrastructures is singularly long-lived. Thus, in the case of thereferencebuildings,as isoftenthewaywiththetravellersbuildings, theirusefarexceedthecentury. Inaddition,manyofthesestationswereborninthe19thcenturywithasymbolicrepresentationloadwithwhich theyhavenot stillparted.This is the reasonwhymanyanalyses referred to railwayheritageareemotionally charged. In our study of the case, the railway station of Almería, 125 years after itsconstruction, the building remainswithout use since in 2000was replaced by the attached intermodalstation,whichhasledatpresenttoanintensedebateonhispreservationandreuse.Itisabuildingthat,despitepossessingsingularitiesandarchitecturalrelevanciesofgreatinterest,theprocessofpatrimonialprotectionisun^inishedbeingaclearthreattotheintegrityofthebuilding. Asitisexhibitedinthetext,despitethemodestyoftherailwaycompanythatbuiltit,thebuildingstandsoutonmostoftheprincipalstationsofSpain.Wedoabriefmanagerialnoteofthecompanythatentrusteditsconstructionandlaterwestudycloselythearchitecturalprogramofthebuilding,thedifferentinterventionscarriedoutandthecurrentsituationoftheheritageprotection.

KeywordsRailwayArchitecture.Eclecticism.ArchitecturalRestoration.HeritageProtection,Almería(Spain).

©Labor&Engenho,Campinas[SP]Brasil,v.12,n.3,p.306-330,jul./set.2018.DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.20396/labore.v12i3.8652840

306

Labor & Engenho

L&E ISSN2176-8846

1.Introduction

In the researchesmadeon thearchitectureof the railwaystationsbuiltduring thenineteenthcentury, two ideas have symbolized the function exercised from that moment by these newbuildingsinthemaincities:ontheonehand,theywereconstitutedasthenewentrancedoorsanddeparturetothecityand,also,theybecamethenewcathedralsofthecontemporaryworld(Meeks,1995).

Whentheyhadalreadybeendemolished,orintheprocessofbeing,mostoftheurbanwallsandthe cycle of construction of the great religious temples had ended, the Industrial Revolutionbroughtanunprecedentedurbanchangeinwhichtherailwaynotonlyalteredtheformofcitiesbutalsotheircontent,redistributingspacesandchanging,inmanycases,thehierarchyofsomeoverothers (Sobrino,2008).

Fromthatmomentthecitieshadanewcentralelementthatshouldlookassigni^icantasitwasthe medieval cathedral with the same strategic role of the medieval gates of regulating themovement of people and goods. Hence the singular role played by the architecture of thesebuildings which were built out of catalog to highlight their uniqueness with respect to thestandardizationoftherestofbuildingsoftherailwaylinetowhichitbelonged.Realizingalsothecircumstancethatmanyofthesestationsweretheendoftheselines,reinforcingitsadministrativeandeconomichierarchyontheurbanenvironment(AguilarCivera,1988,pp.183-205).

Graphic1.CurrentsituationofthetravellersbuildingofthehistoricalSpanishrailwaystationsaccordingtotheperiodofconstructionoverlappedtothebroadandnarrowtrackkilometersbuiltineachperiod.

Source:ownelaboration.

Thisprocessisvirtuallyuniversalandfoundonlysomevariations,fromsomeplacestoothers,basedonthechronologyoftherailwayconstructionandtheparticularconditionsofeachcountry.IntheSpanishcase,thereareobvioussimilaritieswithotherneighbourcountries,butourrailwaycyclehasa temporaryoffsetof ten to twentyyearsandourvolumeofactivity,due to the lowereconomicdevelopmentand the scarcepopulation, alsohas conditioned the importanceof theserailwaybuildings.

In thisway, fromthestudiesalreadycarriedouton theconstructionof therailwaystations inSpain andtheperiodizationofthedevelopmentoftheSpanishrailsystem , it is foundaclear1 2

Amongthemostrelevant,wepointtoLópezGarcía,1986;AguilarCivera,1988;GonzálezFraile,1997;Martínez-1

Corral,2017.

Comín,MartínAceña,MuñozRubio,&VidalOlivares,1998;Cordero&Menéndez,1978;Cuéllar,2017.2


307

5 7

6

18

10

3

10

11

4

2

2

2

1

5449.0

8527.0

3567.0

-2041.0

-4000.0

-2000.0

.0

2000.0

4000.0

6000.0

8000.0

10000.0

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

1848-1870 1871-1904 1905-1936 1941-1985

Felled Inuse Reuse Whitoutuse kmbuilt

Labor & Engenho

L&E ISSN2176-8846

correlation between the development of the network and the construction of the deînitivetravellersbuildingsofthemainstations(Graphic1) .3

Wehavetobearinmind,however,thatduringtheconstructionoftheîrstlines,manytemporarybuildingsandpierswereerectedtolightentheconstructiondeadlinesandcosts.Thismeantthatsomestations thatwerealready inserviceduring the îrst railway impulsehadnotbuilt theirdeînitivestationuntilafewyearslater.From1870,however,thedeînitivestationswerealreadylifted,andchangesonlyoccurredwhenextensionsornewprojectsderivedfromtheneedsoftheservicewerenecessary .4

ThedatashowninGraphic1offeran imageofstability inuseofmostof theSpanishstations.Thus, of the81buildings studied,41 remain in railwayuse (51%),21havebeendestined forotheruses(26%),12havebeendemolished(15%)andonly7areindisuse(9%).Unfortunately,Almería railwaystation (Illustration1) isoneof these fewcases indisuse. It isnot, therefore,usually the idle situation of this type of buildings, at least in large cities. The lack of use isindicatedasoneofthegreatthreatsofindustrialheritageandevenmoresowhenitisprolongedintime.(Cano,2007).

Figure1.ViewofmainfacadeofAlmeríaRailwaystation.Source:SpanishRailwayFoundation,2006;Picture:JoséMorón.

Regarding the rest of the Spanish stations studied without deîned use, León and ZaragozaPortillo,havearrivedatthissituationinveryrecentdates,aftertheconstructionofthenewhigh-speed lines.For instance, theoldTutela-Bilbaorailwaystation inMirandadeEbrohasalreadybeenrehabilitatedforculturaluse,butisstillpendingoperation;thebuildingofNarcisoClaveríainAlgodor(Illustration2) is inaserioussituationaftertheclosureof theToledo line in2005;and, înally, the gigantic building of the international station of Canfranc (Illustration 3),underusedduring the years inwhich the linewas in service to Pau (France) and barely usedsincetheclosureofthisinternationallinein1970,isactuallyawhiteelephantobjectofadebateasintenseascomplex.

Weincludedinthisgroupofmainstations,provincemaincitiesorthosethathadaspecialprojectintheir3

construction,giventheimportanceofthelocality,bothinthecaseofwideandnarrowtrackrailways.Intotal,wehaveidentiîed81buildingsthatwerebuiltbetween1856(Tarragona)and1972(ZaragozaPortillo).

Someexamplesoftravellersbuildingsbuiltduringthissecondrailwayimpulse:Santiago(1873),Gijón(1874),4

Salamanca(1877),Portbou(1878),Madrid-Delicias(1880),Alicante-Benalúa(1887),Jaén(1890),Soria(1892)orAlmería(1895).


308

Labor & Engenho

L&E ISSN2176-8846

Figure2.ViewofAlgodor(Toledo)Railwaystation.Source:Martínez-Corral,2018.

Figure3.ViewofCanfranc(Huesca)Railwaystation.Source:Martínez-Corral,2017.

Thistexthas,therefore,asmaingoaltheintegralstudyofthetravellersbuildingoftheAlmeríarailwaystation,fromitsbusinessorigins,theconstructionandoperationofthepassengerbuilding,the renovations carried out, and, finally, to the current situation about the heritage protection.Althoughtherearepreviousworks thathighlighted thearchitectural interestof thebuilding,webelievethatitisnowimportanttomakeanintegralcontributionthatcovers,fromdifferentviews,thestoryfromitsconstructiontothecurrentsituation.Ourobjectiveisthedialoguebetweenthecontributionsofeconomichistory,architectureand industrialarchaeologytobuildadiscoursethatcontributestothepreservationandproperuseofthebuilding.

Themainsourcesofresearchhavebeenoriginalîlesonthepreservedbuildingandthelitera-tureuptonowonthiscasewhichcontextualizesthesetofexistingliteratureonrailwaystations,especiallyinEurope.Equally,weworkedontheground,ontheoutsideofthebuilding—itwasnotpossible tovisit indoors -andanalyzeddifferenthistorical imagesof thebuildingsince itsconstructionuntilnowtoobservedetailsandundocumentedmodiîcations.

After this introduction, the structure of the article comprises a îrst section with a generalreference to the historical framework of the railway in Almería. A second one containing adetailed studyof thearchitectural featuresof thebuildingexploring some formaland stylisticissues not studied before. The next chapters include themain renovations carried out in thebuildinguntiltodayandtheattemptscarriedoutbytheAdministrationforthebuildingheritageprotection,stillunînished,endingwithsomeconclusionsonitspatrimonialstatusanduse.


309

Labor & Engenho

L&E ISSN2176-8846

2.ThehistoricalframeworkoftherailwayinAlmería

The Linares-Almería railway line was one of the last of the Spanish network to be built. Inparticular,thecompletionofthesectionfromGuadixtoAlmeríatookplacein1895andthelinkwiththegenerallineinBaeza-empalmewasheldinMarchof1899.AtthattimeonlythemaincitiesoftheSpanishprovincesSoriaandTerueldidnotstillhaverailwayservice(Illustration4).

ThedelayinthearrivaloftherailwaytoAlmeríawasattributedtothelackofinterestofforeigninvestors, the main financiers of railway construction in Spain during the 19th century, alsobecauseitwasaperipheralrailwaylinepassingthroughterritorieswithaverycomplexorographyandevenwithscarcedemography.Thepublicationofthe1870lawmadetheconstructionofthistypeofrailwaymoreviablesinceitgrantedaguaranteedsubsidythatcouldsupposeanincentivefor these lines.Evenso, theconcessionwasdelayed fora fewyearsandonly theappearanceofmininginterestsgavethede^initiveimpulsetotheconstructionofthelineinthelastdecadeofthe19thcentury(Cuéllar&SánchezPicón,1999).

Thisdelayput intheheadoftheprojectasingularbusinessmanwhowasthepromoterofthebuildingandtheownerofthecompanyuntilhisdeath.ThismanwasIvoBoschPuig(1852-1915),who began as a stockbroker in Barcelona and, only with 25 years, settled in Paris developinginvestmentbusinesswiththemajorfinancialhousesofthetime.HisreturntoSpain(maintainingthoughformanyyearsitsChampsElyseesHotel)happenedin1881whenhegotinvolvedinthebusinessmanagementoftheMadridGeneralBankandintheLinarestoAlmeríarailwayline,whichhadbeenseveralyearswithoutanyoneinterestedinitsconstruction(Cuéllar,2011).

Figure4.MapoftheSpanishrailwaylines(1918).Source:HistoricalRailwayArchive,documentMAP-01-02.

Thebusiness formsofBosch tookspecial careof their imagewith the intentionof impressingtheirpartnersandcustomers,beingpoliticalrelationshipsatthehighestleveltheaxisofhisstra-tegy.ThisisreminiscentofthewaysofanotherSpanishrailwayentrepreneur,JosédeSalamanca(1811-1883),whohadstarredintheglareanddeclineoftherailwayinSpainduringthedecadesfrom1850to1870(Broder,2012).


310

Labor & Engenho

L&E ISSN2176-8846

TheSpanishSouthernrailwaycompanywasmadeintheimageofthestrongpersonalityofitsmainshareholder, Mr. Bosch, who made that almost all the actions undertaken by the company hadsomethingofexaggeratedpursuinggoalsandachievementshardlyexpectedsuchamodestcompany.

Thus, among other concerned issues, we can remember that this railway company had someengineersandlawyerswhoachievedgreatpopularityinthefollowingyearssuchasJoséMoreno,EarlofFontao(laterdirectorgeneralofNorthrailwaycompanyandRENFE),LuisOlanda(laterdirectorofexploitation inMZA),or JuanCervantes(laterdirectorof the legalservice inMZA) inadditiontohavingalonglistofpoliticianswhogaverenowntothecompanyasLaureanoFiguerola,GeneralValerianoWeyler,AntonioGarcíaAlixor JoséCárdenas, allministers in theRestorationperiod (Cuéllar, 2003).. Moreover, Spanish southern company was in 1912 the company thatcarried out the start-up of the îrst electriîed railway line in Spain, a îrst-class technologicalmilestoneforwhichitwassupportedbytheSwisscompanyBrown-Boveri(Cuéllar,2003).

Itwasthenlogical,thatthecompanyconceivedassomethingspecialtheproposaloftheconstruc-tionofthetravellersbuildingsinceitshouldberepresentativeofthecategory,identity,andpowerofthecompany.Therefore,resourceswerenotsparedintheconstruction,hiringoneofthemostimportant companies in Europe in the railway sector, the French company Fives-Lille. This, byspecialorderofBosch,conceivedabuildingof"greatarchitecturalcharacter".Thedefinitivepro-jectwassenttoitsapprovalbytheGeneralDirectionofPublicWorksinMadridin1892 .5

Theconstructionofthebuilding,aswehavesaid,wascarriedoutbythecompanyFives-Lille,buttheauthorshipof theproject isattributedto theFrencharchitectLaurentFarge ,as it is inan6

inscriptiononthemainfacadenexttotheentrancetothewesttowerofthebuilding.Inaddition,differentreferencesofotherauthors,informationinsertedinthepressofthetimetogetherwiththe participation of this architect in the universal exhibition of Paris in 1889 and theobservationsonhisarchitecturalstyle,makebelievethattheidentiîcationoftheauthorshipisthe correct one despite the plans are not signed by him, but by the owners of the companyresponsiblefortheconstructionofthelineasusual(CuadrosTrujillo,2015).

It is also important tohighlight that thenew travellersbuildingwas locatedoutskirts, aswastypical in the railway implementation in most of the Spanish cities. Only in few cases, itpenetratedthehistoriccitylookingtoavoidexpensiveworksandfacilitatingthedevelopmentofthe nineteenth-century city expansions . This also happened in the city of Almería, but this7

external position required an urban intervention that consisted in the design by the localarchitectTrinidadCuartaraofapromenade,called"Paseodelaestación",whichconnectedthehistoriccitywiththeexpansionareasthatbegantodeveloparoundtherailwaystationinthoseyears .8

3.Architecturalanalysisofthebuilding

3.1.Regardingtypology

ThetypologyoftheAlmeríastationispeculiarsinceitdoesnotadoptthetypicalsolutionsusedin other Spanish stations, most of which, especially passing stations, used the type of onebuildingononesideofthetracks(“I”shapedstations)orthe"U"shapedspeciallyforterminalstationstypicalinthebigcities(Navascués&AguilarCivera,1980,p.162).NordoesitadoptthetypologydevisedbyBrunelconsistingoftwosidebysidebuildingsononesideofthetrackssothatanytraveler,eitherforarrivalsordepartures,hadtocrossthetracks.Thisrequiredatrackcrossingthatwasuseful inthe fewcaseswherethistypologywasused,beingonlyeffective in

HistoricalRailwayArchive(onwards,AHF),A-121-01,TravellersbuildingofAlmeríarailwaystation.Therailwayline5

fromLinarestoAlmería(1892).

FargeorFargé,accordingSobrino,2008,p.877,wasresidentinSpaininthoseyears.6

AbroadanalysisofthisissueisinSantosyGanges,2007.AboutthespeciîccaseofAlmería,seeSantosyGanges,7

2008,pp.734-735.

Seeinformationonthisinitiativein“LaCrónicaMeridional”,26-01-1898.8


311

Labor & Engenho

L&E ISSN2176-8846

casesofreducedrailwaytrafîc.Itwasatypologyspeciallydesignedforthosepopulationswherethe locationof thestation is tangential to it, leavingtheentireurbannucleusonlyononeside(Meeks,1995,pp.30-31).

Similarly, it does not follow the approach of L. Reynaud where the îrst-class stations werematerializedwitha singlebuildingon thehead, thesecondclasswith twobuildings (arrivals-departures)onbothsidesofthetracksorthethirdclass,withtwo"L"shapedbuildings,oneontheheadandoneononesideofthetrack.

Thus, the typology of Almería station would be a combination of both solutions being a "U"shaped timidly expressed,with smallwings oriented towards urban space on one side of thetrack.Althoughthestationwas terminal therailway linewascontinuedto thenearbyAlmeríaportandprobably,thatisthereasonofthepeculiarbuildingshape.

3.2.Regardingfunctionality

Asregardsfunctionality,thebuildinghastwo^loorsexceptforthehallwhichisdevelopedonamonumentalscale.Themonumentalitymaybeduetotworeasons:ononehand,theintentionaleffectofmonumentality,bettercalledpseudomonumentalism,asarepresentationof thecom-panypowerre^lectedeveninthemainfacadewiththegiantorderofthepilasters^lankingthecentral body of the building. On the other hand, the intention of showing a sincere languageaccording to theproperties of thenewmaterial (steel) that allowsbig lights andheights and,consequently, toachievemonumentalitywithout intending it.That is therealmonumentalism,theonewhich isachieved inanunconsciouslyway (Sostres,1951,pp.24-27). In summary, inAlmería railwaystation it ispossible thatbothare intended: the intendedeffectofmonumen-tality,butalsothedesiretoshowthecapabilitiesofnewmaterialasasymboloftechnologyandconstructivemodernity.

Itisnoteworthythatthistravellersbuildinggivesgreatprominencetothedeparturehallwhich,inadditiontooccupythemostprominentpositionintheplant,isprojectedwithtwicethespaceasthearrivals locatedonthe leftwingoftheground^loor.Thus,regardingthefunctionalityofthe stationprojectedoriginally, on the ground ^loor, in addition to the aforementionedplaces,thereisaluggagecounterinthedepartureslobbyandtheticketofîcefallingtoit.Ontherightwing,arearrangedwithoutpublicaccess,theofîcesofemployees,chiefofstation,commissionerandthestaircasetoaccessthehouseslocatedonthetop^loor.Thepublictelegraph, locatedinthiswing,isaccessedfromtheoutsidebythemainfacade.Basically,thedistributionofthiswingisbasedonofîcesconnectedtoeachotherwithouttheexistenceofacorridorsincetheyhaveindependentaccessfromoneofthetwofacades.

Theleftwing,however,isentirelypublicaccess.Itisenteredfromthedepartureshallbymeansofacorridorthat leadsto thewaitingroomsof1st,2ndand3rdclass,consecutively.All thesespaces have direct access from the main platform and from the main facade. Regarding thisseparationbyclasses,itwasalreadyestablishedinEustonstation(1835-1839)andwasadoptedinthestationsofîrstcategoryorspecialcategory(Meeks,1995,p.32).

Inthissense,therefore,thestationofAlmeríaisequatedtoafirst-classstationasitappearsinthesiteplanoftheoriginalproject,eventhoughAlmeríadidnothavetheconsiderationofarelevantsettlementorrailwaycore .Thisfactispeculiarbecausecitiesofasimilarnumberofinhabitants9

andrailwaytrafficdonothavetraveller’sbuildingsasrepresentativeastheonethatconcernsus.

Finally,thearrivalsbaggageserviceisintheextremepartofthiswingalsowithaccessfrombothfacadesinconnexionwithastaircasetoaccesstotheupper^loor(Figure5).

Ontheupper^loor,withtheaccessesthroughthestaircaseslocatedsymmetricallyatbothendsofthebuilding,islocatedtheofîceareaontheleftwingand,ontherightwing,twodwellingsforstationstaff.Thesimplestone,projectedforanemployee,consistsoftoilet,room,diningroom,

ThisratingofthestationsaccordingtotherelevanceofthepopulationseeinEchenique,1864,p.67.9


312

Labor & Engenho

L&E ISSN2176-8846

andkitchen.Theother,muchbigger,intendedforthestationmanager,hascentralcorridorandroomsfallingtothemain,lateralandrearfacades.Thishouseiscomposedofadayareanexttothelobbywithtoilet,kitchen,diningroomandlivingroomand,nightareainthefurthestpartoftheentrancewiththreebedroomsandawomen´scloakroom.Inbothhouses,allroomsconnecttoeachotheraswellasthroughthecorridor.

3.3.Regardingcomposition

Themainfacadepresentstheclassicaltripartitecompositiontypicalatrailwaystationsbasedonmirrorsymmetry.Theaxisofsymmetryisemphasizedwithtwokeyelements:theclockandthenameofthecity.Italsopresentsthetripartiteschemeinthearrangementofthethreebodiesthatform the building: one central, two lateral and two ends,with dimensions respectively of 16m,12m,and7.5m.Furthermore, eachof the threebodies isdimensioned inahierarchicalmanner,givinggreaterdimensiontothemostrelevantinthecomposition.

Thecentralbodyrepresentsthetripartiteschemebymetalpostsandwiththepresenceofthethreemain entrances to the building. It also emphasizes the central body, and themain access,changingthescale:humanscaleforthelateralandextremebodieswithcleardistinctionofthetwolevels and "giant order" for the central body. This change of scale is illustrative of the insidedistribution,withtwofloorsintheentirebuildingexceptforthecentralbody—coincidingwiththelobby—whichisprojectedatdoubleheightasreflectedbythefacades.Insummary,theclassicresourceof,bymeansofthefacadecomposition,showingthemaindistributionofthebuilding.

Analysing the composition, it is discovered the use of golden proportions in the central andextremebodiesofthebuilding. .Thedifferentgeometricrelationsdiscoveredareshowninthe10

^igureadded(Illustration6).Forinstance,thecentralbodyisinscribedinacirclewhosecenteristheclock,alsoemphasizinginthisway,theimportanceofthiselement.

Thenumberofgold,goldensectionorgoldenratioor,calledintheRenaissanceas"Divineproportion"was10

consideredtobethewaytocreateaharmonicwork.Itisrelatedtoexistingformsinnatureconsideredpleasingtotheeye.Itisstillinuse.


313

Figure5.Distributionofusesontheground^loorofAlmeríastationaccordingtotheoriginalprojectof1892.Source:ownelaborationbasedonAHF,A-121-01.

Labor & Engenho

L&E ISSN2176-8846

Figure6.StudyofproportionsandrelationshipbetweenmassiveandhollowinthetravellersbuildingofAlmeríarailwaystation(1892).Source:ownelaborationbasedonAHF,A-121-01.

Anothercompositionalresourcetoemphasizethecentralbodyisthelayout,sizeandnumberofholes:2+4+3+4+2,ontheground^loor;and2+4+1+4+2ontheupper.Evennumbersforlateral andextremebodiesandoddnumbers to the centralbody.Also, the sizeof theholes isdifferentbetween those in the lateral andextremebodieswith respect to thoseof the centralbody of larger size. With regard to the extreme bodies, they are arranged slightly advancedcreatingthe“U”shapedescribedpreviouslyand,despitethefactthatthecompositionalreadingof the facades is unitary, the symmetry is strictly broken with the two holes (door-window)arrangedatbothendsofthebuilding.

Themassive-hollowrelationshipinthelateralandendbodiesisbalancedhighlightingwithitthegreatcentralhollow.Thisbalancedproportionandgooddistributionofthehollowsisalreadyaresourcetoachievemonumentalitywithouthavingtoresorttosuperhumandimensions(Sostres,1951,pp.24-27).Thesamebalanceisperceivedbetweenthehorizontalityofthelateralandendbodiesandtheverticalityofthecentralbody.

Thecompositionalschemedescribedisrepeatedontherearandonthelateralfacades.Thelattershowtheexistenceofacentralpartwithhollowsinthetwofloorsandtwolateralpartsdelimitedbystonecorner cushionswithhollows toppedbyRomanarches only on the ground floor. Themostnotabledifferencesareestablishedbytheaspectsrelatedtomaterialityordecorationlaterdiscussed.


314

Figure8.ViewoflateralfacadeofAlmeríaRailwaystation.Source:MoralesMedina,1987.

Figura7.Elevationofthelateralfacade.OriginalprojectofAlmeríaRailwaystation.Source:OriginalprojectAlmeríaRailwaystation.AHF,A-121-01.

Labor & Engenho

L&E ISSN2176-8846

Thevolumetryofthedepartureslobbyre^lectstheideaofmonumentalitypreviouslyexplained.Sincethestationdoesnothavethetypicalmetalroofcoveringthespaceofplatformsandtracks,areminiscentspaceofitisprojectedwiththepeculiaritythatthisspaceisthemainhallnormallytreatedwithanothermaterialityconsideredsuperior.

Thus,theaforementionedlobbyhasanapproximateheightof17mandtheplantare10mofbayfor15mof light.Thisconceptionof thetraveller’s lobbymadewithmetalroof insightdidnotexistinanyotherSpanishstationwhichisalsoanothersingularityoftheAlmeríabuilding.Wewillseeitagain,^ifteenyearslater,intheextensionoftheBarcelona-Vilanovastation,builtbythearchitectDemetrioRibesin1910.

3.4.Stylisticandornamentalaspects

Themixture of styles is shown in the classicism used as the basis of the composition, at thedisposal of Roman arches, triangular pediment, baseboards, stone corner cushions, baluster,stone entablatures with its variant of triglyphs and metopes, combined with Moorish stylein^luencessuchasthebrickworkandthecross-shapedhandrails.Itisalsofoundgothicpseudopinnaclesandbeaux-arts style cresting.On theotherhand, theanalysisof theoriginalprojectre^lectsthattheoriginalroofbalusterwasneoclassicalstyle,however,theonethatexiststoday,andwhichisnowintheprocessofrehabilitation,wasdoneinMoorishstyle.Later,inthesectiondedicated to materiality, a hypothesis about this is exposed based on the materials thatcompoundthisbaluster.

Figure9.Ornamentaldetailofthesteelpinnacles.Source:OriginalprojectAlmeríaRailwaystation.AHF,A-121-01.


315

Labor & Engenho

L&E ISSN2176-8846

Itiscurioustheclassicistdecorationintroducedinthenovelglasspartofthecentralbody.Itcanberealizedthecontradictionbetweenthemodernmaterialandconstructivetechnologyandthetraditional decoration. It also highlights the novel insinuation of themetallic structure left inview in themain facade with the columns of giant order ^lanking the central body, althoughtopped by pseudo-Corinthian capitals (Illustration 9). This suggestion can be interpreted asbeingofgreatmodernity for thetimesincethemetallicstructure, leavingevenseentherivetsand reinforcement plates,was generally reserved for the imposing roof covering the space ofplatformsandroadsconsideringthatitwasnotîneenoughtobeshowninthelobbyandmuchlessonthemainfacade.

Itisconvenienttopointoutthatthiswasaperiodwherearchitectureisirremediablylinkedtothe styles and traditions of the past. In addition, the large metallic roofs were designed byengineerswhousuallyleftthemhiddenrespecttotheurbanspace.Inthissense,theauthoroftheprojectmovedawayfromtheapocalypticdiscourseofRadaandDelgadothatadvocatedthatthearchitectureofironcouldnotconstituteanownstyleandindustrywasgoingtokilltheart,tosidewithDaly'sorRuskin´stheorieswhoadvocatedastyleandlanguageappropriatetothenewmaterialsandtechnologies(Sostres,1951,pp.24-27).

Therestofthedecorationisintroducedinseveralways:eitherformingpartofthebrickworkbycombining natural brickswith green or yellow glazing bricks, orwith the inclusion of glazedlistels înishing off all the arches; well superimposed on the brick wall using vegetal theme,rosettesorthe"A"ofAlmería,whichdoesnotappearintheoriginalproject;or,înally, inreliefforming part of the limestone friezes, the capitals or the balustrade pinnacles. Ornamentallocksmith details appear exclusively on the metallic pediment and on the three main accessdoorstothestation.

In the rear facade, the decoration is reduced to the metallic central body -of identicalcharacteristicstothatofthemainfacade,exceptfortheabsenceofthenameofthecityandtheclock,thebalustradeandthemetalrailings.It isnecessarytoemphasizethatthesignwiththenameof the city originallyprojectedover themain facade, neverwasplaced.The edgeof theholesissimplymadewithbrickthreadwithoutfurtherdecorationandneithertheentablaturenorthearchesaredecorated.

Specialmentionshouldbemadeofthelateralfacadesandthearchitect'sdelicacyindecoratingthem as the main facade considering them as an urban facade. In this case, they present adecorationslightlydifferentfromthatofthemainfacade,butwiththesamedecorativeprofusionandcombiningthesameelements.Thus,thedecorationofthebrickwallsisobserved,includingpieces of alternating green and yellow glazed ceramics andwith the inclusion of rectangularpiecesinredglazedceramicswrappedin^loralthemeddecoration.

3.5.Constructionandmateriality

3.5.1.Dissertationontheuseofbrickintherailwaystation

Steel-brickcombinationthatthestationofAlmeríapresentshasitsorigininFrance.Inthe19thcentury,wallsmadebybrickworkleftinviewonthefacade,amaterialwithalongconstructivetradition,hadbecomeunpopular.So, intherepresentativebuildingsbuilt inthatperiod, itwasusedintheinteriorlayercoatedbystonecladding.However,towardsthemiddleofthecentury,thesetwomaterialsreturnedtoprominencewiththeconstructionofLesHalles(coveredmarkets)ofParisbyVíctorBaltardcommissionedbyHaussmann .11

Fromthatmoment,JeanCharlesAlphand,Haussmann'susualcollaborator,builtnumerousbuil-dings popularizing this combination that was brought to Spain with the construction of theAlmeríastationbeinganoveltyintheconstructionofrailwaystations.However,othercontem-poraneousandmorerelevantstations,suchasValladolidCampoGrande(1895),SevillaPlazade

SeeBenévolo,2007,pp.122-123.In1971beganitsdemolitionforthelocationofacommuterstation,Châtelet-Les11

Halles,andalargeshoppingcenter,ForumdesHalles.


316

Labor & Engenho

L&E ISSN2176-8846

Armas(1901)orValenciaAlameda(1902)didnotbringanynoveltytothearchitectureof therailwaystations.

Also,theuseofterracotta wasexperiencingarevivalinthoseyearsusedforthedecorationof12

facadesanditwasalsobroughttotheAlmeríastationbothinthepilastersthat^lankthemainbodyandontheparapetsoftheîrst-^loorbalconiesandground^loorwindows(Figure10),as,înally,inthedecorationoftheroofpinnacles(Campbell,2003,pp.222-223).

Figure10.Terracottadecorations.Source:MoralesMedina,1987.

Regardingtheuseofbrick,itisconsideredrelevanttomakeabriefhistoricalcontextualizationofitsuseinSpainsinceitisthebasisofthehypothesisthatweholdaboutthematerialnatureoftheoriginalroofbalustrade.

ThebrickbegantobeindustrializedinSpaininthemid-nineteenthcentury,althoughitshouldbespeciîedthatitwassolidbrick.ThevisualanalysisofpiecesfromtheAlmeríastationshowsthattheywerealreadyindustrializedpiecesduetotheuniformityinsizesandthehomogeneityincolour,sincethetraditional,handcraftedconstruction,favoureddifferencesbothinsizesandincoloration(Campbell,2003,pp.202-208).

TheoriginofthelightenedbrickdatestothepatentsofCalebHitchin1828thatmanufacturedinhis factory inWare (England). The so-called hitch bricks, brickswith holes in the broad face,werepresentedattheGreatExhibitionof1851inLondon .Thesewereperforatedbrickswith13

threeperforations, like thoseexisting in the roof railing foundwhen the rehabilitationprojectwasfacedin1987(Figure11) .14

In 1900 therewere a lot of solid and hollow brick patents in Europe andmuchmore in theUnitedStates.Butwhile theUnitedStates advancedbyadopting thenew techniques,EnglandandnorthernEuroperemainedîrmlyanchoredinthetraditionofsolidbrickusingevenmanualmouldingtechniquesuntilthe20thcentury(Campbell,2003,pp.218-219).

Ahard,îredclay,reddish-brownincolourwhenunglazed,usedforarchitecturalfacingandornaments,tileunits12

andpottery.

Theîrstofaseriesofinternationalexhibitionsthattookplaceduringthesecondhalfofthe19thcenturyandthe13

îrstthirdofthe20th.ThisonefromLondonwascalledGreatExhibitionoftheWorksofIndustryofallNations.

It is necessary to distinguish between perforated bricks, with cavities on the broad face, and hole bricks, with14

perforationsintheshorterface.


317

Labor & Engenho

L&E ISSN2176-8846

ThecaseofSpain isevenworse in termsofdelay.Ac-cording to Reverté, in Spain, until 1936 therewas noimport of hollow,hourdisorperforatedbricks, due tobeingconstructioninnovationsnotyetacceptedinourcountry where the brick industry was still manufac-turing the uneconomic solid brick (Marcos y Bausá,Ricardo,1879,pp.49-57).Corroboratingthisinforma-tion, RicardoMarcos in hisManual del albañil descri-bes thebrickmanufacturingprocess inMadrid, refer-ringonlytotheuseofbrickracksand,therefore,tothemanufactureofsolidbrick.Ontheotherhand,FlorencioGerinhisTratadodeconstrucciónalreadyincludesthedescriptionofhollowbrick likeanoriginalproductofthe pottery tradition destinated for lightening of cons-tructionsortoavoiddampness(GeryLóbez,1898,p.27).

Wemustemphasize that thedistinctionbetweenper-foratedandhollowbrickwasaftertheconstructionofthe Almería station and until then, the constructiontreatiesdescribeddonotmentiontheperforatedbric-ks.Therefore,when the1987rehabilitationprojectdes-cribes the roof handrail referring to the existence ofperforated brick in its composition, it is impossiblethatitwastheoriginalhandrail.

Itisconvenienttoaddthattheconstructivechangetowardstheuseoftheholloworperforatedbrickinwallscomesfromtherevolutionsupposedbytheindependenceofthestructuralsystemwith the closure one and that took place at the beginning of the 20th century, also after theconstructionofthestation,wherethefacadestillheldboththeload-bearingandtheenclosurerequirements.

3.5.2.Thematerialityoftheproject

With regard to the foundations and structure, in theoriginal project of 1892, the foundationswerelocatedat6.70mofaveragedepthandconsistedofacolumnofpoorconcreteof3.50mheightcoveredbyanotherlayerofhydrauliclimeconcrete"fromthefactoryofLeTeil"(France)1mthick,whichsupportedthemasonrywallsthatmeasure2.70mheightuptothegroundlevelhavinganapproximatethicknessof0,50m.

Therestof theperimeterwallsare load-bearingwallswitha thicknessof0.50mandareappa-rentlycomposed,afteranalysisoftheproject,ofthreelayers:interiorlayer,internalfilledchamberandexteriorlayerbasedonbrickface.Thebaseboardsandcornicesaremadeoflimestoneoftwovarieties: hard for pilasters and baseboards and soft for cornices and entablature. The internalpartitions,alsoloadingwalls,haveathicknessof35cm.

Thus, the structural configuration presents the typical arrangement of the structures designedbasedonload-bearingwallscomposedoforthogonalcellsthatcombinemainwallswithtiewalls.

Ontheotherhand,thecross-sectionallowsseeingthecompositionoftheslabs,whichhaveanapproximatethicknessof35cmandarecomposedofmetallicbeamsI-shapewith80cmspann-inglight,composedofhollowceramicpieces.Themaximumspanlengthis6meters.

Themainmetaltrussesthatformthestructureofthecentralbodyaretriangularporchesbasedon lattice beams composed of triangular "L"-shaped steel pro^ileswith stiffeners in the jointsrunningmonolithically from the foundation to the ridge. This type of structure is also uniquesince,ontheonehand,itshowsasimilarstructuraltypology,albeitonamoremodestscale,tothat of theGalerie desMachines designedbyDutert andContamin in1889, reserved for largespacesandthusprovidinggrandeurtothelobbyofthestation.


318

Figure11.Viewoftheroofbalustradein1987.Source:MoralesMedina,1987.

Labor & Engenho

L&E ISSN2176-8846

Ontheotherhand,aswepointedoutinprevioussections,itisthefirstcaseofaSpanishstationwherethepassengerlobbyopenlyshowsthelargemetallicstructurereservedforthetrainspace.WewillhavetowaitfortheextensionoftheBarcelona-Nordstationin1910tofindasimilarcase,althoughnoteandthisaddsmorevaluetotheAlmeríastation,thenotabledifferencesbetweenthesizeofthecities,AlmeríaandBarcelona,andbetweenthecompaniesthatbuiltthem:thepowerfulNorthofthePéréiresBrothersandtheambitiousSouthofBosch,respectively.

The variant of the structurehas rigid joints in both the base and the ridge. It consists of twoporticosleftinviewonbothfacadesandathirdintermediateportico.Inthetransversedirection,beams in lattice typePratt of 50 cm thickness are arranged.The tyingbeamsaredisposedofevery 2.50m, alternatingwith themainporticos. The joints are projected riveted and, înally,highlightstheîneornamentalworkdoneinthemainmetaltrusses.

Inregardstothefacades,theircompositionismadeof:baseboardsandcornerreinforcementsaremadeof"hard"limestone(elementsnotdecorated),theexteriorlayermadeoffacebrickwithFlemishbrickwork,widelyused inSpanishMudejararchitecture, combiningnaturalpieceswithyellow or green glazed ones. The result is an interestingmaterial contrast between these neo-MudejarwallsandthegreatcurtainwallofsteelandglassinthecentralbodydoneinaFrenchway.

Agreatvarietyisobservedintheexecutionofbrickarchivolts.Intheheadwalls,theyareexecu-ted with thicknesses of 1.5 pieces, alternating the joints and decorated with glazed ceramicmoulding.Inthemainfacade,thesameschemeisrepeated,exceptinthethreemaindoorsofthecentralbodywherethebrickprotagonismisgiventotheîneworkoflocksmithing.

Therearfacadeisexecutedinasimplerway.Inthiscase,boththearchesoftheground^loorandthoseoftheupper^loor,aremadewitharchivoltsofapieceofthicknessalternatingjoints.Inthethreemaindoors,whatisexecutedinthemainfacadeisrepeated.

Thedouble-sidedroofofthecentralbodyisînishedwithzincsheet,anda^latroofisdisposedonthelateralbodiesînishedinceramictile.Ontheotherhand,theinteriornon-structuralparti-tions are executed on brick walls on U-shaped proîles anchored to the slab and, înally, theinteriorcoveringsareplasteredwhile theexterior,onlyon therear facade, isplasteredwithabushhammeredînish.

Regardingtheoriginalrailing,followingourhypothesis,itwasexecutedinneoclassicalstyleasitisdeducedfromtheanalysisoftheelevationsandsectionscontainedintheoriginalproject.Hypo-thetically,afteranalyzingthecarvedmouldingsfoundinentablaturesorcornices,itcanbeassumedthatitwasbuiltwiththesamesoftlimestoneusedinotherpartsofthefacade.Ontheotherhand,intheroofpinnacles,thecoatofarmsofthemaintownsoftherailwaylinewasrepresented .15

Anotheroptionwithrespecttotheoriginalmaterialityoftheroofrailingthatwouldalsoadmitthemouldingoftheneoclassicalstylerepresentedintheoriginalprojectfoundoutaftertheanalysisofoldphotography,isthatallthepieces,ofneoclassicalstyle,werefinishedwithterracottafollowingthesamepatternastherestofrailingsandparapetsthatappearonthemainfacadeandonthelateralones.Thismaterialitywouldfitwiththepinnaclesonesfinishedinterracottaandwherethesoftnessofthematerialallowsmoreeasilytherepresentationindetailofthecoatofarmsofthemaincitiesofthelinedescribedpreviously.Inanycase,thereisnoreferencetoahandrailexecutedinMoorishstyleintheoriginalprojectorintheoldestphotographs.

Perhapstheoriginalbalustradedisappearedinthebombingof1937,duetotheSpanishCivilWar,andcouldbereconstructedbefore1971withperforatedbrickandinMoorishstyle,sinceitcanbeseeninsomeofthecinematographicscenesofthefilm"Agáchatemaldito"bySergioLeone,shot

Inalphabeticalorder:Baeza,Granada,Guadix,Linares,andÚbeda.InthecaseofLinares,aminingcity, itwasthe15

endofthelineandinthecaseofGuadix,itwasanimportantintermediatepoint.ThementionofGranadawasduetotheambitionofthecompany,whichwouldendupbuildingabranchtoitin1904and,înally,thementionofBaezaandÚbedaissinceintheoriginalprojectofFivesLilleof1892itincludedthepassagethroughthesetwocities,whichinthesubsequentreformswerediscarded,toshortenthelayoutandmaketheexploitationproîtable.SeeCuéllar,2003,pp.200-201.


319

Labor & Engenho

L&E ISSN2176-8846

that year in Almería station. This handrail is referred to in the 1987 renovation projectwhoseliteraldescriptionisthatitwasexecutedwithperforatedceramicbrickandglazedelements.Thisinformation is key to determine that the original railingwas not restored because, aswe haveexplained previously, at the time of construction of the station, there was no perforated bricktechnology in Spain. Therefore, the handrail that describes the remodelling project was builtbetween1936and1971althoughwedonothavesourcesthatconfirmitconvincingly.

Withregardtothepavements,ontheground^loortherearethreetypes:cementpavementforthedepartureandarrivalhallsandfortheleft-wingstaircaseaccess;marblepavement,inwhiteandgreycheckerboard,fortheof^icesoftheheadofthestation,policestationandwaitingroomof2ndand3rdclassand,^inally,ceramic^looringfortherestoftheroomsontheground^loor.

Thelayoutofthecementpavementisintheperimeterstrip,piecesarrangedonthebias,decora-tivefriezeandcentralareawithpiecesarrangedsquarely.Inthemarbleflooring,thedesignarran-gesthepiecesonthebiasforthecentralareaandthesquareonesfortheperimetertripalternatingthe first designdescribed. The ceramic flooring alsohas a perimeter strip, although it doesnotdetailthelayoutofthepieces.InSpain,theuseofceramicpolychromepavementsbecamepopularsince1851andlater,thehydraulicmosaicwasadded,obtainedbypressingcementmortar,beco-mingthemostcommonpavementintheSpanishconstructionoftheturnofthecentury.Thistypeofcementpavementistheonefoundinthearrivals,anddepartureslobbiesandinthestairsofthestation. Note the successful selection of pavements regarding their functionality, reserving thehardestonesforthebusiestareasbutwithoutneglectingtheaestheticfunction.

Cementpavementswerewhatisknownashydraulictile.FamousinAndalusiasincethebeginningof the twentieth century are the factories of the Torres López and López Luque brothers. Thistechnique is of Frenchorigin andhad a great impact on the flooringdesign since theUniversalExhibitionofParisin1867.Thegreattechnicalbreakthroughlayinthenoneedtocookthepiecesthatwereexecutedbypressingandsubsequentsettingandhardeningofthecement.Themotifsusedtobegeometricorvegetalandtheexistenceoffriezewasusual(CastilloMartínez,2016,p.30).

Exhaustivemodulationinthelayoutofthepavementsdetailingthedimensionsofthepieces,thecornerpiecesandthespecialones,whichrequiredacarefulreplanning.

Fortheupperfloor,thegraphicsoftheoriginalprojectsuggestthattherewasceramicflooringand,althoughitdoesnotdetailthemodulationandtypeofpieces,itdoesmarkthoseroomsthatmusthaveasingleordoubleborder,asisthecaseofthelivingroom,diningroomandmainroomofthehouseintendedforthestationmanager.Thepartoftheoffices,ontheleftwing,onlyhasaperi-meterstripinallrooms.So,throughthedesignandthematerialityofthepavements,thecategoryofthespacealsowasshown.Unfortunately,asitappearsinthe1987modernizationproject,mostofthese^loorswerecovered.

Withregardtointeriorcarpentry,theproject details show three types oftheinteriordoor:one-stepdoor,opa-quesimple;double-leafdoors, com-posedofsolidwoodenpanelledbase-boardandglasstopand,finally,biggerandfinerdesigndoors,reservedforpublic attention rooms. Their over-doorisformedbywoodenprofilesfra-med with terracotta panels decora-tedwithgeometricmotifsofArabicreminiscences.Thearrangementinthewallsofthefirsttwotypesofdoorisat the same level of the wall whilethe third typeofdoor isarrangedathirdsetbackbyexecutingsomefla-reinthewallinamoresophisticatedsolution.


320Figure12.Rearfacadecanopy.Source:MoralesMedina,1987.

Labor & Engenho

L&E ISSN2176-8846

Therearealsowoodenpanelledbaseboardsandcofferedceilinginthemostimportantrooms.Aswasmentionedforthepavements,theworkofthewoodalsoallowsdifferentiatingthecategoryoftheroom.Accordingtotheremodellingprojectof1987,thewoodusedinalltheinteriorcarpentrywashigh-qualitypine.AveryabundanttypeofwoodinSpain.

Theexteriorcarpentryisalsocon^iguredinwoodbasedonpanelledbaseboardsandglasstopinthedoorsandconventionaldesignforthewindows.Onlythethreemaindoorsmentionedbeforeareprojectedin^inelydecoratediron.

Regarding the exterior canopies, the one located on the rear facade is designed by longitudinaltrusseswithcross-shapeddiagonalsandtransversePratttypetrussesincantileverofvariablesec-tion.Bothwithscarcedecorationwithreinforcingandrivetsleftinviewexpressingthenatureofthematerial.TheintradosofthecoverboardismadewithV-shapewoodenelements(Figure12).

However,themarqueethatisarrangedonthemainfacadeoverthethreemaindoorsiscomposedof I-shapedprofiles, also simplydecoratedbut the coverboard ismadeof reinforcedglass.Thegutterstocollectrainwaterwerecamouflagedinthepartoftheencounterwiththefacadesotheslopewenttowardsthefacade.

Intheoriginalprojectaredelicatelydrawnthedetailsofallthemetallicdecorationofthefacade,themouldingsandreinforcementsof"hardstone",theinteriorwoodenpartitionsandthepanelledbaseboards,thecofferedceilings(Figure13),thedifferenttypesofbrickintheexteriorwalls,thepipes,thepartitions,thefoundationanchoringplates,etc.Therefore,itisaprojectthatcontainsahigh level of detail and information and that constitutes an important element as documentaryheritagetobepreserved.Accordingtotheremodellingprojectof1987,theprescriptionscontainedinitwerefaithfullyfollowed.

Regarding thepolychromy, theco-loursusedinthefacadearethety-picalreddishoftheunglazedbrickscombinedwiththegreenoryellowoftheglazedpieces.Also,themoul-dings that frame the arches or thevegetaldecorationaremadeingla-zed green ceramics but combinedwithreddishcoloursintherosettesorgeometricsdecorativepieces.

3.5.3.Addedvalues.Constructivesincerity

ThetravellersbuildingoftheAlmeríastation,inadditiontotherichnessdescribedinproportionsaswellasinstyleandmateriality,presents,fromthepointofviewofconstruction,theaddedvalueofdidacticallyexpressingaspectsrelatedtothenatureofthedifferentmaterialsanditsstructuralbehaviour.

Thus,intheconstructionofthearches,thearchitectisconcernedwithexecutingthemainpieces,keyandspringer, inamoreresistantmaterial, “hard” limestone,whichallowsthegeometrythatthepiecerequireswithoutcutsor joints.Also, theimpost,anotherkeyelement, inthemainandlateral facades, isexecuted inthesamenaturalstone.Regardingthewindows jambs inthemainfacade,exceptforthoseofthecentralbodytowhichwewillreferlater,thesubtletyofreinforce-mentisintroducedbyglazedceramicpieces,whichserveasdecoration,butfundamentallypreser-ve these weaker points much better against deterioration because the glaze provides greaterresistancetothesurfaceofthepieces.


321

Figure13.Detailoftheindoorcofferedceilings.Source:MoralesMedina,1987.

Labor & Engenho

L&E ISSN2176-8846

Intherearfacade,allthisissimpliîed,buttheschemeisstillrecreatedwiththearrangementofkeysandspringers inhard limestoneand, in this case,as the facade isnotexecutedwith facebricks,abrickstripsimulatingtheimpostandthearchivoltsgivesreinforcementtobothjambsandcurvedlintelsofthehollows.Thatistosay,alsointhisfacade,thearchitectisconcernedinshowingtheconstructivelykeyparts.

Theuseofcornerreinforcementsbystonepaddingisawidelyusedresourcethat, inthiscase,obeys to compositional reasons to preserve the classic schemebut at the same time, protectstheseweakpoints.

The entablature is executed in the whole perimeter composed by a great cornice ^lown forprotection of the facades. The decorated friezes are reserved only for the main and lateralfacades,showingthereadingthattheelement,corniceplusentablature,iscompletelynecessaryfollowingtheclassicalcompositioncriteria-thecornice^lownalonewouldserveasprotectiontothewalls-butthedecorationisaccessory.

Specialmentiondeserves the centralbody.Here thearchitectbreaks in a subtlewaywith theclassic style and insinuates very novel questions for the time, such as the replacement of thedecoratedstonethatwedetailedpreviously,bysimpleimposts, jambsandironarcheswithoutany decoration even inside the lobby despite being the most noble part of the building andusuallycoveredwithmaterialsconsiderednobleinthattimesuchasmarbles,naturalstone,înewoods, etc. but never steel without any decoration. So, the main access presents the newmaterialasit is, initsnature,alsoremovingthestructuralroletothebrickandstonewiththedetailofremovingthestoneplinth in thisarea.Somethingsimilarhappenswiththetwo largecolumns that ^lank the central body, although here the material is decorated. In this case,althoughwiththemaskofclassiccompositionanddecorationbecauseitisshowntotheurbanspace, the decomposition of the solid, stone pilaster in two metal pilasters with rivets seenseemsto implythatthepropertiesof thenewmaterialallownewstructuresmuchlighterandthatthesebuildingsshouldshow.

Inasubtleway,itis,inshort,showingthecityalargemetalcolumnwithoutdecorationleavingunionsrivetsseenimplyingwithitagreatmodernitythatisnotpossibletocontemplateinanyother of the large stations built in Spain until that moment. Therefore, showing the metallicstructure and the glazed front only had been built the stations of: Málaga Andaluces (1865),wherethemetallicbody is independentof themasonryones;MadridDelicias(1880),whereamoreclassicsolution isshownshowingtheuprightsof theglass frontas if theywere foundrycolumns;andMadridAtocha (1892),where thearches thatmakeup the trussare shown,butwidelydecorated.

4.Renovationscarriedout

Therailwayoperationisanactivityincontinuousevolutionthatsubjectsitsfacilitiestoconstanttransformations,beingnecessarynumerousreformsthatdonotkeepthebuildingsintheiroriginalstate. In fact, most of the railway stations in the world continue to operate with their originalbuildings butwith the necessary changes ormodifications. Perhaps the Spanish case is uniquesincemanynewrailwaystationshavebeenbuiltassociatedwiththearrivalandexpansionofhigh-speedrail.But inmanyEuropeancities, forexample, thehistoricbuildingsof theGareduNord,LyonorEstinParis,orSantPancras,LondonBridgeorKingCrossstation,continuetobeusedformodern rail service.Of course, its architecture and serviceshavebeen adapted to the reality ofcurrentuse.

Itisthuseasytounderstandthatanyrailwaystationisconservedinthesamestateinwhichitwasbuilt,althoughtheintensityofthechangesisvariable.InthecaseofAlmeríastation,worksandmodiîcations have been constant from themoment of its construction, but almost all ofthem of little importance reasonwhy, in general lines, the integrity of the building has beenmaintained from its origin. Both in regard to the complementary facilities that make up theentirerailwaystation,understood in itsbroadestsense,as in thecaseof thehistoricbuilding,objectofstudy,havebeenpreservedinasimilarstatetotheoriginal.


322

Labor & Engenho

L&E ISSN2176-8846

4.1.RenovationsoftheYirsthalfofthe20thcentury

Thefirstmajorreformofwhichwehaveevidenceoccurredin1914,althoughinthepreviousyearareformprojectwaspresented.Thisprojectwasinitiallyrejectedbythe4thTechnicalandAdminis-trative Division of Railways,whichwas the Spanish public organism in charge of supervising theinterventionsthatweremadeintheservicesandfacilitiesoftherailwaycompanies.The1913projectwassignedbytheengineerEnriquePaniagua,employeeofthecompany,who,insummary,proposedtransformingsomeoftheofficesintohousingforthestaff,relocatingsomeservicesoftheoperationin other annexed buildings. The attempt was rejected by the chief engineer of the division, JoséMolero Levenfeld, who ordered paralyzed the works urgently because they were converting thestationinto"ahouseofneighboursforsavingafewpesetas ."16

Then,thecompanywasforcedtoredotheprojectinthiscasecarriedoutbytheengineerJoséIribarren, although themodiîcations on theprevious onewereminimal.However, the ofîcialreportindicatesthattherailway'sdivisionrequestswereattended. 17

Thedeepeconomiccrisisofthecompanymadethereformswereminimal.Thus,inwhatisknownuntiltoday,aftertheeconomicagreementsregisteredwiththeAndalucesRailwayCompany,whichabsorbed the South Company provisionally in 1916 and deînitively in 1929, the new ownerdecided to face an important reform thatwould allowoffering servicesmore in linewith thetimes(Cuéllar,2003,pp.221-222).

Thenewreformprojectwaspresentedin1930 ,andwasplannedtomeetthegrowingtrafîc18

demand.Theworkstobecarriedoutweredividedbetweenworkssubjecttotheexploitationser-viceandworksdestinedtotheserviceofmaterialandtraction.Thefirstincludedtheextensionofroads, the reform of the travellers building, the construction of freight docks, the expansion ofplatforms, the closing walls, the paving of warehouses, the new seawage collector, and theadaptationofthefourthbedroomfortrainsgangs.

With regard to theworks planned for thematerial and traction service, the construction of aboilermaking and assemblyworkshop, aworkshop for car repair, a ferry bridgepit, îre pits,newpremises for theworkshopandashed for thehydraulic jackwerecarriedout.Thesetofworkswasexpectedtobecompletedwithin20monthsand itscostwas1.8millionpesetasatthetime.TheengineerwhodesignedtheprojectwasAntonioRiveraandwasapprovedbythechiefengineerofthe4thTechnicalandAdministrativeDivisionofRailways,JoséMolero,whowehavealreadyseeninvolvedinthepreviousworks.

Asnotedabove,asmallpartoftheprojectwasintendedforthepartialreformofthepassengerbuilding:

“Thebuildinginwhichthedifferentunitsareinstalledisofmodernconstruction,itis inagood stateofpreservationand themodification that isprojectedconsistsonlyinprovidingitwithacanteen-caféforthecomfortofthetravellerswhowillbeabletofindinittheindispensabletomeetthesmallrefreshmentneeds” .19

Finally,thestrongeconomiccrisisoftheAndalusiancompany(Cuéllar,2015),thatwouldleadtoitsseizurebytheState inMay1936meantthatnoneof theseworksbeganinthisperiod.Thecompany alleged that the lack of credit made impossible to start with the approved projectworksfortheAlmeríastation(AndalucesRailwayCompanyreport,1933,p.47).

AHF,A-107-10,ModiîcationsofthepassengerbuildingoftheAlmeríastation.LinefromLinarestoAlmería,1913.16

“Peseta”:originalnameoftheofîcialSpanishcurrencyusedthenanduntiltheentryoftheeuro.

AHF,A-142-15,Almeríastation,1914.17

AdministrationGeneralArchive(AGA),(4)102,24/08622,ProjectofrenovationsandimprovementsintheAlmería18

station.AndalucesRailwayCompany,1930.

AGA,(4)102,24/08622,ProjectofrenovationsandimprovementsintheAlmeríastation.AndalucesRailway19

Company,1930.


323

Labor & Engenho

L&E ISSN2176-8846

Asitisknown,theCivilWarhadagreatimpactinthecityofAlmería,beingbombedseveraltimes,since it remained in theRepublicanzoneuntil theendof the conflict.Among theseattackswasespeciallyvirulenttheoneproducedonMay31,1937,bytheGermanfleet,causingseriousdamagetothepassengerbuildingoftherailwaystation.Itisassumedthatthiswasthemomentwhenthemostimportantdamagesoccurintheupperpartofthebuildingdestroyingtheoriginalbalustrade,aswellassomepinnacleswiththeircorrespondingcoatsofarms,previouslydetailed.

4.2.Renovationsofthesecondhalfofthe20thcentury

Thissuggeststhat,despitenothavingbeenabletolocateotherreformprojectsuntil1987,andsince the1930proposalwaspending, between the1940s and the1960s, other reformworkshad tobecarriedoutdetermining thedistributionandusesof thebuilding found in the1987reformprojectsuchas,forexample,theinstallationofacanteeninsidethebuilding.

The1987reformprojectwasthemostimportantonecarriedoutinthetravellersbuildingoftheAlmeríarailwaystation,beingpartofthe“ModernizationandStationEquipmentPlan”launchedbyRENFE in the80s.Theaforementionedproject is titled "Modernizationof the railway stationofAlmería.Restorationand remodellingof the travellersbuildingand constructionof canteenandroundabout",wassignedbythearchitectAntonioMoralesMedinainOctober1987andwassuper-visedby theHeadofBuildingof thePlanofStationsofRENFE. It is interesting tonote that theaforementionedprojectdoesincludeahistoricalreviewofthebuildingbutdoesnotmentiontheinitiationof theproceduretodeclarethebuildingasanelementof theSpanishculturalheritagethathadtakenplacebarelytwoyearsbefore,asweexplainlater.

Thisprojectwasexecutedbetween1988and1991andhadasobjectivesthetreatmentoftheexistingpathologiesinthebuilding,theinteriorreorganizationofthespacesinrelationtotheexistinguses,therecoveryofthewaitingroominthespacethatwasoccupiedbytheaforementionedcanteen,and,finally, the partial arrangement of the exterior space with the demolition of the toilets and theconstructioninitsplaceofthenewcanteensurroundedbyagardenarea(MoralesMedina,1987).

Regardingtherestorationandpartialremodellingofthetravellersbuilding,theproject'sreportdescribesthecurrentstateoftheroofbalustradestatingthatitisnottheoriginalone .Strictly20

speaking,thehandrailfoundatthetimeofdraftingtheproject,consistingofcolumnsandakindoflatticemadeofperforatedbricks,shouldnotbecalledabaluster,butahandrailsinceitisnotcomposedofmouldedelements.Aboutthepinnacles,theprojecthighlightsthedisappearanceofsomewithoutbeingabletoidentifywhichones.

Italsodescribes thecurrentstateofcornices,entablatures,pilasters,andbaseboardsdistinguis-hingbetweensoftandhardlimestone.Asexpected,itindicatesalowerdeteriorationinthehardlimestoneanditsuseinkeyelementsforgoodpreservationofthebuilding:suchasbaseboard(toavoid humidity by capillarity towards the brick walls), corner cushions or key of the arches.Regardingthestateofthewallsanddecorationsindicatesthattheyareingoodcondition.

Theelementsoftheironstructureonlypresentsuper^icialdamageandthecastirondecorationssomelossofmouldings.Regardingtheaccessdoors,theprojectstatesthattheyarewellpreserved.TheI-shapesteelprofilesoftheslabspresentsomeoxidationandcorrosionalthoughonlythefirstfloor is inspectedbutnottheroofonewhichisexpectedtobemoredeteriorated. Inanycase, itdoesnotrefertoageneralizedbadstate.Theprojectproposes,atleastforthefirst-floorslab,themechanicalcleaningofoxidesinanexhaustiveway,aswellasthereinforcementwithathinlayerofreinforcedconcrete.Ontheroofslab,itisunknownifanytypeofreinforcementwascarriedout.

Regarding carpentry andwood elements, the project describes a good condition of themainelementsforbeingpineofgoodqualityanddeteriorationinsecondaryelementsespeciallythoseon the ground ^loor. The project also highlights unfortunate actions carried out in these car-pentry elements, in the replacement of downspouts, in themodi^ication of interior partitions

Theuseofthewordbalustradeorbalusterreferstothefactthatitwouldbeconstitutedbyelements,usuallyof20

stoneorwood,mouldedorturned.


324

Labor & Engenho

L&E ISSN2176-8846

andintheexecutionoffalseceilingsandintermediateslabscoveringthecofferedceilingandthepolychromefoundrypillarsthatexistedintheoldwaitingroom.Thepavementshavealsobeenreplacedanditisonlypossibletoobserveinthethensecretary´sofîce,checkerboardbasedonpieces of white and greymarble, although very deteriorated. The roof pavement is based onceramictileandisingoodcondition.

Thus, themostrelevantconclusionreachedbythearchitect inchargeoftherehabilitation,Mr.Morales, about the state of the building is the possibility of almost complete recovery of theoriginalelements,aswellasitsreliabledocumentation.Inthisway,theactionstobecarriedoutin the passenger building focus on the strict correction of pathologies and replacement ofmissingelements,thedemolitionofforeignelementsandthereorganizationofspacesandusesoftheground^loorwithcriteriatorecoverthoseoriginalusesasfaraspossible.

It is justiîed at that time that, inevitably, new facilities must be incorporated to update thebuildingthatcannotbeanalyzedduetothelackofdocumentation,butitisworthnotingthatthestartingpointof theproject isboththeanalysisof theoriginalprojectaswellasthehistoricalcontextregardingthecompanyandtheconstructionofstationsinthatperiod.Weconsiderthatthispreviousstudyoftheexistingdocumentationaswellasthepreviousanalysisofthebuildingshouldbe exhaustive, and it is fundamental for the identiîcationof original elements and theadoption of good performance criteria. In short, it is about understanding the logic of theexistingbuildingwithouttryingtosuperimposeanydifferentdiscourse(Solà-Morales,2001).

The restoration of the damaged elements of natural stone is projected by sewing and sealingexisting cracks. The replacement of cornices and entablatures is made by taking mouldsobtained from thoseparts not deterioratedof the aforementioned elements, îlledwith epoxymortarandcarvedwhereveritisrequired.

Thereplacementofmissingelementsisbasedonthecriterionof"copyoftheoriginal".Itwouldbethecaseofthemissingpinnaclesexecutedbyfillingmouldswithepoxyresinidenticaltothepre-existingones,thestoneelements,theceramicdecorationsorthedecorativemetallicelements.Itisprescribedintheprojectthatelementsthatdiffergreatlyfromtheoriginalwillnotbeaccepted.

Ontheotherhand,itisunknownifthenewfacilitiesthattheprojectcontemplateshavemaintai-ned theoriginalartisticcharacterof theelements throughwhich theyrunoronwhich theyarelocatedfollowingthebasicpreceptsoftheAthensCharter(1931).Forinstance,therestitutionofthedownspouts to theiroriginal locationby the interiorof thepilastersbasedondownpipesofcastironofidenticalsectiontotheoriginalandwiththesameanchoringsystemwouldfollowthebasicpreceptdescribed.IftherewerePVCorfibercementdownspoutsleftinviewonthefacadeastheywereatthetimeofthe1987intervention,thecharacterandperceptionofthebuildingwouldhavebeensignificantlyaltered.Hence,theimportanceofpreviousdocumentationandanalysisasaguaranteeoftheauthenticity'ssafeguard.

However,beyond thebadstate found, the lackof justiîcation for thecompletereplacementofpavementsismissedaswellasthecriteriafollowedtomakethesubstitutionwithmaterialsanddispositioncompletelyexternal to theoriginal.Thesamehappenswithpartof thecoatingsorpartitionsandcarpentryarranged.Itisnotamatterofimitating,butnotofplacingcompletelydissonantelements.

Afewmonthsaftercompletingthisreform,amosaicwithrailwayallegoriesmadebythe localartistLuisCañadas(1928-2013)wasincorporatedintothemainlobby(Illustration14).Itrepre-sentsrailwayallegoriesandelementsoftheAlmeríalandscapesuchastherailwayviaductovertheAndaraxriverinSantaFe-AlhamaorthetypicalterracesoftheMediterraneanwhite-washedhouses .21

Finally,sincethislastintervention,andafterthealmostcompleteclosureofthebuildinginMay2000,noactionshavebeencarriedoutinthebuilding,beyondsmallmaintenanceinterventions.

AboutthismosaicandtheworkofLuisCañadas,seeDuránDíaz,2013.21


325

Labor & Engenho

L&E ISSN2176-8846

Figure14.Viewofthelobby.DetailofLuisCañadasmosaic.Source:MoralesMedina,1987.

5.Heritagesituationandbuildingprotection

Regarding thepatrimonialprotectionof thebuilding,wemustpointout that theprocedureofdeclarationofhistoric-artisticmonumentwasstartedbyresolutionofApril1st,1985oftheFineArtsAdministrativeOf^iceofthe“JuntadeAndalucía”,andsincethat,accordingtotheprovisionsofthelegislation,alltheworksthatweretobecarriedoutinthebuildinghadtohavethepriorapprovaloftheaforementionedstateorganism .22

We emphasize that, in this procedure, registered in the database of Andalusian monuments,therearenumerouserrorsthathavenotbeencorrectedsinceitsregistrationin1985.Ontheonehand,itisregisteredthenameofthemonumentas"RenfeStation",whenitwouldbemoreap-propriate thedenominationof "Railway stationofAlmería". In addition, the authorshipof themosaicisassignedtoFranciscoCañadas,andnotLuis,asitwouldbecorrect,withoutincludingthedateofitsinstallationeither.Finally,referringtotheroofrailingrebuiltaftertheCivilWar,itisdescribedasabrickbalustrade,when,aswehaveexplainedpreviously,itshouldbereferredtoasabrickrailing .23

Ontheotherhand,asacontinuationoftheprocedureandbyresolutionofJune15,2005,oftheFine Arts and Cultural Assets of the SpanishMinistry of Culture Administrative Of^ice, it wasagreedtoopenaperiodofpublicinformationforthedeclarationofthestationasamonument.Itis important to indicate that, since the application of the 2003 Rail Sector law, the stationbelongstotheSpanishRailwayInfrastructureAdministrator(ADIF) .24

Despite this, thecasestarted33yearsago,hasnotcontinueduntil thedeclarationasamonu-mentof thehistoricbuildingof the railwaystationofAlmeríaaswouldhavebeen logical and

BOJA,35,17-04-1985.22

https://www.iaph.es/patrimonio-inmueble-andalucia/23

Previously,thestationwasassignedtotheNationalNetworkofSpanishRailways.24

SeeORDENFOM/2909/2006,ofSeptember19.


326

Labor & Engenho

L&E ISSN2176-8846

desirable.But,becausetherehasnotbeenanycomplaintaboutthedelayintheprocedure,thecaseremainsopenpendingresolution.

ThissituationmustbesolvedimmediatelyasitiscontrarytotheLawand,theownerofthepropertymustprotectitasauniqueelementoftheSpanishindustrialheritage,aswehavediscussedintheprecedingpagesbeingapplicableinfutureactions,therecommendationsoftheNationalIndustrialHeritagePlan(2011):Inventory,Study,MasterPlan,andProject.Inthisway,thebasicobjectivesofprotectionandreusewillbecoveredtoguaranteethesurvivalofthehistoricbuilding.

Inthistypeofinterventions,theNiznhyTagilCharterfortheIndustrialHeritage,approvedin2003by TICCIH (International Committee for the Conservation of Industrial Heritage) defends thevalues of industrial heritage as a unique testimony of contemporary society and highlights theimportance of cataloguing, registration and research of the monuments as well as their legalprotection,recommendingthefollowingninepreceptsabouttheirmaintenanceandpreservation:

1. Preservationofthefunctionalintegrity.2. Evaluationofthepossibleuses.3. Preservationinsitu.4. Newusersareonlyacceptableiftheoriginalpatternsofcirculationandactivityare

respected,aswellasenablinganareawheretheprevioususeisrepresented.5. Maintainingtheuseofthebuildingasafundamentalpriority.6. Interventionsmustbereversibleandhaveminimalimpact.7. Avoidreconstructions.8. Registerdisappearedindustrialprocessesorindangerofdisappearing.9. Promotetheconservationofdocumentaryrecords.

The indications of the international organization are clear and should be respected by all theactors.Itistruethatthecriteriatobetakenonthedegreeofarchitecturalinterventionsarepartof an old and well-known debate among specialists in the preservation of historical andindustrial heritage, but from the advice of TICCIH, our recipe is very simple: documentation,minimalinterventions,andstableuse.Thissimplerecommendationguaranteesthemaintenanceoftheessenceofthemonumentanditsviability(GonzálezMoreno-Navarro,1999).

6.Conclusions:debateonthefutureofthebuilding

SincetheinaugurationoftheAlmeríaintermodalstationinMay2000,thehistoricbuildinghasbeenleftwithminimalandprivaterailwayuse,sinceonlythecirculationmanager'sofficeisinside.Noonesincethenhasbeenabletopassthroughtheimposinglobbylosingpeopleinadditiontotheuse,theenjoymentofthemonument.

Since2000,thebuildinghasremainedclosedand,exceptveryfewoccasionsforapublicevent,itremainsinthatwaytoday.Itsclosure,itsinactivity,hascausedalogicaldeteriorationthatmakesadvisablemajorrenovationssinceitsmaintenancehasbeenminimalforthreedecades.

Inthiscontext,thewidedebategeneratedintheAlmeríasocietyasaresultofthedelayintheconstructionofthescheduledhigh-speedlinebetweenMurciaandAlmería,andtheproblemsofexploitation of the conventional network, bothwith the long-distance servicewithMadrid aswith the regional service with Granada and Seville, has also placed the focus on the historicbuildingbeingnowtheobjectofvindicationasasymbolofthenecessaryinterventionofpublicadministrationsintheimprovementoftherailwayinAlmería.

Regardingthearchitecturalinterventionscarriedoutinthetravellersbuildingofthestation,weconcludethattheyhavebeenunfortunate.Ifitcanbedemonstrated,thereplacementoftheroofbalustradewiththebrickrailingchangingtheconcept,harmonyoroverallimageofthebuilding,wouldbethemost^lagrantinterventionsufferedoutsidethebuilding.Fromtheinterior,wehavealreadydescribedsubstantialchangesofpavementsorcoatingsamongothers,thathavealteredthecon^igurationandtheperceptionofthebuildingforever.Inshort,actionscarriedoutwithoutan exhaustive prior analysis, without discussion or shared criteria and of course without


327

Labor & Engenho

L&E ISSN2176-8846

understanding the logic of the building as mentioned above, and without thinking about theheritageconsideration.Anyinterventioncanbeabletokeepboththeidentityofthebuildingandtheenvironment .25

These interventionsare in the lineofactionof thoseyearswhere theconceptofheritagewasrestrictedtosomeecclesiasticalornoblebuildingandwheretheconceptofindustrialheritagewasnotevenimagined.Themostseriousthingisthatdespitethepassageoftimeandtheadvancesandtheoriesofheritageconservation,nothinghasbeenachieved.Theinitiationoftheprocedurefor themonumentdeclarationwasachieved,butneitherwas completednormaterialized in thebuilding.However,thenextinterventionsmayinvolvearadicaltrendchangeandanenhancementofthebuildingasauniqueelementintheSpanishheritagewhosearchitecturalandmaterialvaluesareindisputable.

Thefutureuseofthehistoricbuildingisnotanewdebate,atall.Whentheissuewasdiscussedin 2000 after the opening of the newnearby intermodal station,many proposalswere raisedfromdifferent forums (StateAdministrations, citizen groups, etc).We can summarize that thetwobasicideasraisedwere:^irstly,toreturnthebuildingtoitshistoricalrailwayuseforwhichithas been designed and for which it is still necessary; and secondly, to assign a cultural andrecreationalusethatapproximatesthebuildingtothecityallowingatthesametimetobeobjectofanintervention,for,eitherundermunicipalorsharedmanagement,togiveanewfunctiontothemonument,guaranteeingitsintegrityandprotectionasahistoricalbuilding.

Whateverthedecisiontaken,thedeclarationofthemonumentshouldbesolvedandthenadetai-led inventoryof thestateof thebuildingshouldbecarriedoutaswellasacompletestudyof itcollectingall theexistinginformation,amasterplanoftheusesandactionsinthemonumenttofinally,beforemakinganyproject inthebuilding,beclearaboutthecriteriatofollowinthewaythatthetravellersbuildingofAlmeríarailwaystationcanremainformanyyearsasareferenceforthecity.

7.References

AguilarCivera,I.(1988).Laestacióndeferrocarril,puertadelaciudad.(Vols.1–2).Valencia:UniversitatdeValència.

Benévolo, L. (2007).Historia de la arquitectura moderna (8a edición, revisada y ampliada). Barcelona:EditorialGustavoGiliSL.

Broder,A.(2012).Losferrocarrilesespañoles(1854-1913):elgrannegociodelosfranceses(1aed).Madrid:FundacióndelosFerrocarrilesEspañoles.

Campbell,J.W.P.(2003).Brick:aworldhistory.London:Thames&Hudson.

Cano,J.M.(2007).LaFábricadelamemoria.LareutilizacióndelPatrimonioArqueológicoIndustrialcomomedidadeconservación.Antiqvitas,pp.265-272.

Castillo Martínez, A. (2016). Los catálogos industriales y constructivos: identi^icación demaquinaria ytipologíasenelpatrimonio industrial.En ICongreso InternacionaldePatrimonio Industrial yde laObraPública:NuevasestrategiasenlagestióndelPatrimonioIndustrial,2016,pp.23-34.

Comín, F., Martín Aceña, P., Muñoz Rubio, M., & Vidal Olivares, J. (1998). 150 años de historia de losferrocarrilesespañoles.Madrid:Anaya.

Cordero,R.,Menéndez,F.(1978).Elsistemaferroviarioespañol.EnLosferrocarrilesenEspaña,1844-1943,Vol.I.ElEstadoylosferrocarriles,p.458.Madrid:ServiciodeEstudiosdelBancodeEspaña.

Ferrari,2011p.9.Theauthorestablishedaprocedureforthepreservationoftherailwayheritage.25


328

Labor & Engenho

L&E ISSN2176-8846

CuadrosTrujillo,F.(2015).LaurentFargeyeleclecticismofrancésenlaestacióndeferrocarrildeAlmería.PH,no4,1-23.

Cuéllar,D.(2003).Transportesydesarrolloenelsuresteandaluz(1850-1950):historiaeconómica,empresarialyterritorial.Madrid:FundacióndelosFerrocarrilesEspañoles.

Cuéllar,D.(2011).IvoBoschyPuig(1852-1915).EnGrandesempresariosandaluces(AntonioParejo,dir.)(pp.349-355).Madrid:LIDEditorial.

Cuéllar,D.(2015).LaCompañíadelosFerrocarrilesAndalucesenlasdécadasde1920y1930.Revistadehistoriaindustrial,(60),137-171.

Cuéllar,D.(2017).ElferrocarrilenEspaña,siglosXIXyXX:unavisiónenellargoplazo.WorkingPapersinEconomic History from Universidad Autónoma de Madrid (Spain), Department of Economic Analysis(EconomicTheoryandEconomicHistory).

Cuéllar,D.,SánchezPicón,A.(1999).Elimpactoeconómicodeunferrocarrilperiférico.LaCompañíadelosCaminosdeHierrodelSurdeEspaña(1889-1929),pp.619-643.Madrid:FundacióndelosFerrocarrilesEspañoles.

Cuéllar, D., Sánchez Picón, A., Bouneau, C. (2012).Catenaria: la electricicación ferroviaria en perspectivahistórica(1aed).Madrid:FundacióndelosFerrocarrilesEspañoles.

Durán Díaz, M. D. (2013). Siguiendo los pasos de Luis Cañadas en Almería. Recorrido por sus obras enInstituciones.Almería:InstitutodeEstudiosAlmerienses.

Echenique,F.(1864).Brevereseñadeloscaminosdehierro.Zaragoza:Imp.ylit.deAgustínPeiró.

Ferrari, M. (2011). Patrimonio ferroviario y desarrollo sostenible en el noroeste argentino. Líneas deintervención.LaboreEngenho,5(3),pp.1-19.

GeryLóbez,F.(1898).Tratadodeconstruccióncivil.(Vols.1–2).Badajoz:Establecimientotipográîco«LaMinervaExtremeña».

González Fraile, E. (1997). Las arquitecturas del ferrocarril: estación de Valladolid. Universidad deValladolid,Valladolid.

GonzálezMoreno-Navarro,A.(1999).Larestauraciónobjetiva(métodoSCCMderestauraciónmonumental).Barcelona:DiputaciódeBarcelona.

LópezGarcía,M.(1986).MZA:historiadesusestaciones.Madrid:Turner.

MarcosyBausá,Ricardo.(1879).ManualdelAlbañil(3aedición).Madrid.

Martínez-Corral,A.(2017).EstacióndeferrocarrilesdelaCompañíadelosCaminosdeHierrodelNorteenValencia. Génesis, de la idea al proyecto, de los materiales a la construcción. Madrid: Fundación de losFerrocarrilesEspañoles.

Meeks,C.L.V.(1995).TheRailroadStation.AnArchitecturalHistory.(1aedición,1956).NewYork:DoverPublications,Inc.

MoralesMedina,A. (1987).Proyectobásicoydeejecucióndemodernizaciónde laestacióndeAlmería.Restauración y remodelación del ediîcio de viajeros; construcción de cantina y glorieta. Jefatura deediîcación.GerenciadelplandeEstaciones.RENFE.

Navascués,P.,AguilarCivera,I.(1980).IntroducciónalaarquitecturadelasestacionesenEspaña.EnLestempsdesgares,pp.137-230.Madrid:MinisteriodeCultura.


329

Labor & Engenho

L&E ISSN2176-8846

SantosyGanges,L.(2007).Urbanismoyferrocarril.Laconstruccióndelespacioferroviarioenlasciudadesmediasespañolas.Madrid:FundacióndelosFerrocarrilesEspañoles.

SantosyGanges,L.(2008).Ciudadesandaluzasycaminosdehierroenlahistoria:aportacionesdesdeelurbanismo.En150añosdeferrocarrilenAndalucía:unbalance,Vol.II,pp.721-765.Sevilla:JuntadeAndalucía.

Sobrino,J.(2008).LaarquitecturaferroviariaenAndalucía.Patrimonioferroviarioylíneasdeinvestigación.En150añosdeferrocarrilenAndalucía:unbalance,Vol.II,pp.823-885.Sevilla:JuntadeAndalucía.

Solà-Morales,I.de.(2001).Teoríasdelaintervenciónarquitectónica.PHBoletin,(37),pp.47-52.

Sostres,J.M.(1951).Laarquitecturamonumental.RevistaNacionaldeArquitectura,Mayo(113),pp.24-27.


330

labor & engenho l&e

Documents