Zagadnienia związane z konserwacją żeliwnych wiat peronowych na przykładzie dworców Pomorza Nadwiślańskiego

Michał Kwasek

doi:10.37190/arc210106

Streszczenie

Żeliwne wiaty były stosowane w XIX w. jako tańsze odpowiedniki wielkich hal peronowych. Mimo to wyróżniały się swoją estetyką na tle późniejszych – nitowanych – rozwiązań. Ze względu na ich trwałość i ciągłą przydatność nie podlegały rozbiórkom jak wiele obiektów techniki transportowej w ostatnich dziesięcioleciach. Celem artykułu jest wskazanie dobrych praktyk konserwatorskich w trakcie prac budowlanych dotyczących żeliwnych wiat peronowych. Współcześnie mają one najczęściej miejsce przy modernizacji dworców kolejowych. Jak przedstawiono w niniejszym tekście, sposób podejścia do zabiegów konserwatorskich może być znacząco różny. W artykule przedstawiono wyniki badań rozwiązań technicznych oraz architektonicznych wybranych przykładów żeliwnych zadaszeń peronowych na terenie Pomorza Nadwiślańskiego. Przedstawiono także nawiązania do realizacji poza granicami Polski. Analiza literatury przedmiotu i archiwalnej dokumentacji projektowej, a także badania terenowe umożliwiły sformułowanie wniosków – rekomendacji dla właściwego postępowania przy tego typu obiektach. Jako unikatowa pozostałość po architekturze XIX w. żeliwne wiaty peronowe powinny być bezwzględnie chronione. W trakcie prac wskazane jest stosowanie odpowiednio dobranego materiału, a także dążenie do przywrócenia żeliwnym wiatom ich walorów artystycznych poprzez odtworzenie pierwotnej kolorystyki. Autor artykułu odnosi się również do realizacji nowych zadaszeń, powstających w bezpośrednim sąsiedztwie zachowanych historycznych obiektów. Bazując na przedstawionych przykładach, rekomenduje dążenie do zachowania spójności nowych lub rekonstruowanych obiektów z autentycznymi realizacjami z XIX w. Jednocześnie podkreśla konieczność dbałości o to, by granica między nimi nie uległa zatarciu. Zwrócił uwagę na trudności, jakie mogą dotyczyć prac naprawczych przy żeliwnych słupach, podając przykłady technik możliwych do zastosowania.

Podgląd pełnego artykułu jest możliwy wyłącznie na większych ekranach.

2021

1(65)

DOI: 10.37190/arc210106

Michał Kwasek*

Conservation aspects of cast-iron platform shelters on the example

of Vistula Pomerania railway stations

Introduction

The development of railroads, which took place in the

half of the 19

century, signicantly changed people’s

lives and the European countries’ economies at that time.

Numerous railroad lines connected signicant cities, fa-

cilitating the exchange of goods and people’s transporta-

tion, even over long distances. This means of transport,

modern for those times, contributed to the intensive de-

velopment of agglomerations. It signicantly expanded

markets for industry

and became an integral part of their

economies. However, the architecture and urban planning

of cities also transformed. It was a period when many pub-

lic buildings were erected. They were given the features

that characterized representative buildings. Such an atti-

tude can also be found in the emerging railroad infrastruc-

ture. Railroad buildings, especially those used for passen-

ger service, were often given monumental or decorative

forms, referring in the 2

half of the 19

century to the

Classical, Renaissance, or Gothic periods [1, pp. 27–29],

[2, pp. 380, 394]. Presumably, the activities undertaken

were also intended to demonstrate the new technical pos-

sibilities of the time and, through their aesthetics, to en-

hance the railroad’s public perception. Initially, as a nov-

elty, the railroad could arouse resentment among society

* ORCID: 0000-0002-3485-7219, Faculty of Architecture, Gdańsk

University of Technology, e-mail: michal.kwasek@pg.edu.pl

Before establishing iron railroads, the natural river routes were

the most eective means of transport for all kinds of goods. They had

signicant inuence on the shape of the market areas of crafts and in-

dustry.

Similar activities, aimed at reducing the initial reluctance of city

dwellers towards the new urban infrastructure – tramways – were carried

out during the construction of their catenary networks, giving the catena-

ry poles very decorative forms [3, p. 58].

[4, p. 39]. The construction of linear infrastructure was the

cause of the rst land expropriations in history [1, p. 22],

which may have compounded public antipathy to new city

facilities.

Platforms became an inseparable element of railroad

stations, in the parts dedicated to passengers. To increase

travellers’ comfort, they were often covered with roofs

shel tering from rain or snow. By connecting platforms

with station buildings (usually by underground passages),

passengers were protected against the weather conditions

mentioned above from the moment they entered the sta-

tion until the end of their journey. The most signicant

stations received highly decorative platform shelters, both

on double- and single-edge platforms. Rows of decora-

tively painted cast-iron columns were placed rhythmically

in sometimes very long (300 m) sequences. The canopies

supported on them were placed at such heights so that the

shielding structures were not overwhelming for the travel-

lers and did not impede boarding the trains or disembark-

ing from them. The slenderness of the supports used in the

shelters gave a sense of lightness to the entire structure.

The innovative 19

-century solutions described here are

a testimony to an era long gone. Despite the cast iron du-

rability from which the shelters were built, it is still nec-

essary to take care of their technical condition and, above

all, to be aware of their value.

This article presents technical and architectural solu-

tions of selected examples of this type of railroad platform

shelter found in the Vistula Pomerania. References of for-

eign realizations from the 19

century are also included.

This analysis concerns a crucial element in the history of

architecture, between technical and representative build-

ings. Even though the subject of railroad history in the

area of contemporary Poland has been described in a rel-

atively large number of works, e.g., [5]–[7], they hard-

ly ever refer to (or omit) the issue of platform shelters.

50 Michał Kwasek

Many papers deal only with aspects of the functioning

and the impact of railroad stations on past and present

urban structures, e.g., [8], [9]. Also, in the literature that

considers the history of the development of railroad con-

struction worldwide, e.g., [2], [10]–[12], the scope of the

subject matter undertaken in this article remains vaguely

recognized. The few mentions of the 19

-century railroad

platform shelters are insuciently detailed and some-

times misleading

. Our present attempt to introduce and

assess this issue may contribute to highlighting the sig-

nicant values of these objects and the necessity of their

preservation.

Characteristics of cast-iron platform shelters

and their functional

and structural significance

Cast-iron structures of platform shelters have been cre-

ated since 1830 [12, p. 9], but they became widespread in

the 2

half of the 19

century. This was possible, among

other things, due to the development of engineering the-

ories and the elaboration of new technologies for pro-

ducing structural elements at that time. Using metal, in-

cluding cast iron, it became possible to obtain impressive

and robust building structures [13] with large spans and

an unprecedented form

. The prefabrication of structural

components resulted in considerable shortening of the con-

struction time. Simultaneously, the possibility of ob taining

repeatable products in industrial production exceeded the

possibilities of craftsmanship many times over.

The earliest type of roong used in railroad stations was

platform halls. They were the most popular, particularly in

Western Europe. They were sometimes spectacular, usual-

ly arched or frame structures and their spans made it possi-

ble to cover all the platforms at once. Thus, they provided

shelter for both travellers and trains

. The further towards

the east of the continent, the less popular such a solution

was

, and platform shelters took their place. This simple

roong was a somewhat later solution, invented in 1849

for cost-saving reasons [12, p. 31]. They were two to three

times cheaper variant of roong [12, p. 37], covering sin-

gle platforms, both those adjacent to the station buildings

(single-edge) and island (double-edge). Various types of

solutions of cast-iron platform shelters, including those

with untypical forms, are presented, among others, in

a German construction handbook from the beginning of

the 20

century [14, pp. 306, 344].

Sometimes structures erected using cast-iron components are

considered as made of steel, or there is no dierentiation between later

riveted solutions.

Addis [10, pp. 294, 295] demonstrates the correlation between

the growth of railroads worldwide and the increased use of cast iron and

wrought iron in construction, even in areas far distant from steelworks

and foundries. These new materials also gave rise to the construction of

railroad buildings with large roof spans from 1850 onwards [10, p. 291].

As Wesołowski [12, p. 30] proves, the original reason for using

coverings at railroad stations was primarily to protect rolling stock, not

passengers.

They were also found on the territory of present-day Germany,

but their use was, in most cases, relatively late [12, p. 16].

The vast majority of columns supporting such cano-

pies were made of cast iron

. In addition to its good struc-

tural parameters, this material’s castability enabled very

aesthetic forms to be obtained, particularly decorative in

the parts of the column capitals. Therefore, the structure

was also a decorative element of the platforms. The cho-

sen material and production method ensured that the cast-

ings also fullled many practical demands. A signicant

advantage of cast iron is its durability and atmospheric

resistance, providing better corrosion resistance [15]. The

high strength and castability made it possible for the de-

signed structural and architectural requirements of cast-

iron columns to be maintained in each casting. These el-

ements have small cross-sectional dimensions compared

to elements with the same structural parameters made of

other materials. As a result, they are highly slender and

therefore delicate in form. Nevertheless, they have a sub-

stantial load-bearing capacity margin. Many numerical

and strength tests of cast-iron columns supporting ceilings

even in multi-story buildings conrm that [16], [17].

Platform shelters, though initially erected as cheaper

versions of platform roong, over time began to displace

the halls, which appeared too dark and too expensive to

maintain (the need for conservation). In the last decade of

the 19

century, numerous criticisms of these large struc-

tures began to be expressed. Simultaneously, the positive

aspects of small shelters were pointed out, as they provided

sucient or even better (compared to high halls) protec-

tion of travellers from the weather. They were cheaper and

ensured better conditions such as ventilation (air circula-

tion removing smoke released from locomotives), light-

ing, and acoustics. After several decades, the construction

of roong over the halls was destroyed by smoke [12, pp.

56, 57]. As a result, from the beginning of the 20

century

(sometimes the end of the 19

century), large platform

halls were often dismantled and replaced with continuous

shelters [12, pp. 61–63], [1, p. 37]. Newly built objects

were usually constructed as one- or two-column riveted

structures, which was a sign of “progress in railway sta-

tion architecture” [12, p. 63]

. Consequently, railroad sta-

tions that, for reasons of location or inadequate funding,

gained platform shelters instead of large halls in the 2

half of the 19

century can now stand proud with highly

ornamental cast-iron structures that are aesthetically far

superior to steel riveted shelters.

Cast-iron platform shelters

in Vistula Pomerania

In Vistula Pomerania cast-iron platform shelters are

located at the stations: Gdańsk Główny, Sopot, Malbork,

Lę bork, Bydgoszcz Główna, Toruń Główny, Elbląg. The

examples selected and presented in the article are at sta-

tions of the railroad line that reached Pomerania in 1852. It

was an extension of Berlin’s line, built successively from

Because of its strength properties, cast iron was mainly used to

create parts under compression, such as columns.

Prussia was an exception in that trend. They often did the oppo-

site there, erecting new halls as late as 1960 [12, pp. 64, 65].

Conservation aspects of cast-iron platform shelters on the example of Vistula Pomerania railway stations 51

1841 to Bydgoszcz, Tczew, and further to Gdańsk. In 1857

it also reached Königsberg (via Malbork). Its construction

was completed in 1873 in what is now Chernishevskoye.

This railroad, the longest in Prussia (about 750 km), was

called “Ostbahn”. In 1870 a line connecting Gdansk with

Słupsk (via Sopot) was built. Additionally, in the 1870s

and 1880s, routes connecting Tczew with Iława, Chojnice

and Grudziądz were established [1, pp. 22–24], [7, p. 12].

As mentioned, shelters were a less representative solu-

tion for platform roong. In Vistula Pomerania, a relative-

ly new eastern province of Prussia at that time

, they were

used quite commonly since the stations situated there

were not of great economic and political interest. It was

a standard, cost-saving procedure of the authorities in less

signicant locations

[12, p. 35]. Nevertheless, to give

platform shelters a decorative and aesthetic appearance,

cast-iron construction elements embellished with histori-

cal details were used at the train stops of larger cities. The

solutions presented in the following text originate from

the 2

half of the 19

century

Construction, architecture, and conservation

of cast-iron platform shelters

from selected examples of the Vistula Pomerania

The standard type of shelter for double-edge platforms

is the gable roof (Fig. 1). It is a self-sucient structure.

Cast-iron pillars contain decorative capitals and bases.

At the top, they are provided with endings that lengthen

the support of the wooden rafters. This also leads to an

increased stiening of their connection with the pillars.

The form of this part of the columns imposes the angle

of the roof inclination. The cast-iron supports are paired

to form load-bearing frames, usually set rhythmically at

6–7.5 m intervals. The elements that bind the pillars to-

gether are the wooden rafters. They are the supports for

the roof purlins laid perpendicularly on them. The frames

are reinforced with metal ties attached above the heads of

the columns. To reduce the deformation of these horizon-

tal bars, they were hung to the rafters at mid-span. Such

a construction solution was used at least as early as 1850

[12, p. 211] and is representative of the 2

half of the

century. It was applied at many stations of the rail-

road line connecting Königsberg with Berlin. They were

also made in Gdańsk Główny and Sopot.

At the main station of Pomerania’s capital city, the can-

opies of platforms 2–5 are historical examples of cast-iron

shelters with a large, as for such objects, roof angle. It is

about 20 degrees (the slope of the shelters used on this rail-

road route was usually about 6 degrees) and may derive

At the time the railroad was built, the area described was under

Prussian rule.

This also referred to present-day Poland areas, which were under

other occupations, including the Warsaw–Vienna Railway, on the route

of which even the largest stations were more modest, and their platforms

equipped only with shelters [1, p. 34].

The buildings of the current Main Railway Station in Gdańsk

do not originate from when the railroad line was built in the city. The

construction of this complex of buildings began in 1894 and lasted until

1900 [18, p. 261].

from the large width of the platforms and thus the long

span (distance between the pillars) of the frame, which is

as much as 8.2 m

. Consequently, these shelters reach

7.7 m in height, and the horizontal ties are also xed in

a non-standard way – at 2/3 of their height (Fig. 1). These

canopies range in length from less than 100 m to just over

200 m. On platform two (the most extended authentic

shelter), the decorated cast-iron columns are unusually

arranged in four rows. The vast majority of them are situ -

ated at a standard distance from the platform’s edge

How ever, in places where stairs lead to the platform, the

cast-iron pillars were moved 1.3 m further from the plat-

form’s edge (Fig. 2). The purpose of this was to create

more space for travellers to move around where, due to

the location of the stairs, there was less space. The use of

the same cast-iron pillars (of equal height) while main-

taining the same roof plane required additional elements

to raise the rafter support line. For this purpose, a set of

wooden beams was used (Fig. 2).

In the 2

decade of the 21

century, modernization

works started at this railroad station. They also aected

the platforms. They were performed successively in order

to allow the station to continue functioning. During the

remodelling of platform No. 3 in 2013–2014, its histor-

ic shelter was transformed. Several of the cast-iron and

The lower the roof inclination, the greater the horizontal com-

ponent of the forces acting on the structure – in this case, transmitted

by the tie rods. It, therefore, seems appropriate to widen the angle of

the roof slope to increase the load on the columns, which are already

oversized.

In the 19

century, during the construction of such roongs, the

distance of columns from the edge of the platform was regulated (in

Great Britain and the USA – min. 1.8 m. In Prussia – the distance from

the axis of the tracks to the axis of the columns had to be 3 m [12, pp. 49,

50]). Example guidelines are available, among others, in: [14, p. 288].

Fig. 1. Gdańsk Główny railway station,

cross section through a cast-iron shelter on platform No. 2,

inventory 2014 (source: collections of KTPPA, WA PG,

elaborated by: A. Urbańska, M. Wachowiak, A. Wyżlic, M. Kwasek)

Il. 1. Gdańsk Główny, dworzec PKP,

przekrój poprzeczny przez wiatę o konstrukcji żeliwnej na peronie 2,

inwentaryzacja, stan z 2014 r.

(źródło: zbiory KTPPA, WA PG,

oprac. A. Urbańska, M. Wachowiak, A. Wyżlic, M. Kwasek)

52 Michał Kwasek

wood frames had their transverse spacing of posts re-

duced. The shelter on the north side was extended

. The

ve metal structural frames installed there have been giv-

en a simplied form reminiscent of the historical one. The

new elements were to receive a distinctive colour, and the

platform’s oor was to be dierentiated by the material to

emphasize the various times of construction. At present,

it is not denite whether this idea was not carried out or

whether subsequent actions obliterated the distinction. By

2017, the shelters on other Gdańsk platforms underwent

essential repair works, primarily to improve their visual

condition. These mainly included the lower parts of the

poles and entailed cleaning them and applying new paint

layers (Fig. 2). Between 2014 and 2017, another coat of

paint was applied to the cast-iron structure, which referred

to the original one – dark blue. It was noticeable in the

upper (unpreserved) parts of the columns (Fig. 2) and was

further conrmed by stratigraphic examination in 2014

Comprehensive works were undertaken in 2017 to the

platform 1 and platform 2 shelters have involved remov-

ing their roof sheathing and the cast-iron supports on the

platforms, which were out of service for the time.

The pillars have been subject to conservation works.

They were thoroughly cleaned of all paint coatings, the

original colours were restored, and areas of pitting caused

by corrosion were lled in. In 2018, the pillars were repo-

sitioned to their former places (Fig. 3), and the wooden el-

ements were replaced with new ones. These were conserv-

ative measures, enabling the continuation of such a unique

structure, restoring their original appearance from the turn

of the 20

century. The shelter of platform 1 is a contem-

porary implementation from the early 1990s. As with the

added pillars of platform 3, their upper parts refer to the

Based on the documentation provided by the Provincial Oce

for Monuments Protection in Gdańsk.

Based on the documentation provided by the Provincial Oce

for Monuments Protection in Gdańsk.

historical design solution. The steel poles have the same

diameter as their counterparts from other platforms. Nev-

ertheless, they have been given a simple form deprived of

ornamentation. Thus the pillar shafts do not even contain

a separate base. The pillar capital has been simplied ge-

ometrical, using a historical technique (cast iron).

At the Sopot railroad station, there are about 200 m

long cast-iron platform shelters. Their form is resembling

the ones implemented in numerous S-Bahn stations in

Berlin, among others in Yorkstraβe, Ostkreuz, Schönhaus-

er Allee, S Wannsee Bahnhof, Potsdam Griebnitzsee and

many others (Fig. 4). Occasionally they dier in dimen-

sions, details – the form of decorative capitals or bases,

the way of suspension, and the fastening of metal ties

However, structurally and architecturally, they are similar

solutions. As in the Berlin’s stations mentioned above, the

Sopot shelters are characterized by a signicantly reduced

roof inclination compared to the later construction in

Gdańsk – only about 6 degrees. These structures are much

lower than in Gdańsk (4.5–4.7 m) and have a shorter span

of the metal and wooden frames (5.2–5.5 m). Nonethe-

less, only one of the presented Sopot shelters is an original

structure (Fig. 5). It is located on the platform currently

used by suburban trains (SKM). During the 2008–2010

modernization and restoration works, the cast-iron pillars

were repositioned, the historic character of the oor was

reconstructed, and based on the stratigraphy examination

of the pillars, their cream-golden coloration, dating back

to the 1870s, was restored

A nearly identical shelter, located on the long-distance

platform, is a structural and architectural copy of the

-century cast-iron construction (Fig. 6). It also applies

a similar colour palette, which makes its contemporary

For example, at Yorkstraβe station, metal ties were omitted, de-

spite using the same cast-iron pillars (due to their short spacing).

Based on the documentation provided by the Oce of the Mon-

uments Conservator in Sopot City Hall.

Fig. 2. Gdańsk Główny railway station, platform No. 2 roofing, 2012 (photo by M. Kwasek)

Il. 2. Gdańsk Główny, dworzec PKP, zadaszenie peronu 2, stan z 2012 r. (fot. M. Kwasek)

Conservation aspects of cast-iron platform shelters on the example of Vistula Pomerania railway stations 53

ban space are currently encountered in many cities, whose

growth was strongly related to railroad development, e.g.,

in Berlin or Tczew (Poland).

The railroad station in Malbork presents an intermedi-

ate approach between the conservative works in Gdańsk

and the Sopot creation, with a strong reference to historical

forms. In this facility, a row of cast-iron pillars supports

a pent roof, added to the station building from the plat-

forms’ side (Fig. 7). During the renovation works carried

out in 2014, all elements of this structure were cleaned

and painted. Additionally, the pillars were provided with

origin hardly recognizable at present. It is distinguished

only by individually designed details of the pillar capitals

containing maritime motifs. This platform was covered by

a double-braced shed of riveted steel construction until ten

years ago, presumably dating from the early 20

century.

It was demolished in 2011. At the same time, the city au-

thorities acquired the historical structural elements from

the railroad company. Some of them have been recently

renovated and installed as small architecture in front of

the Sopot railway station building. Solutions in which au-

thentic elements of railroad infrastructure are used in ur-

Fig. 4. Comparison of the upper parts of cast-iron columns supporting platform shelters: a) Berlin S Wannsee Bahnhof, 2019, b) Sopot, 2020

(photo by M. Kwasek)

Il. 4. Porównanie górnych partii żeliwnych słupów podpierających zadaszenia peronowe: a) Berlin S Wannsee Bahnhof, 2019 r., b) Sopot, 2020 r.

(fot. M. Kwasek)

Fig. 3. Gdańsk Główny railway station, works of reassembly of the renovated cast-iron pillars of platform No. 2, 2018 (photo by M. Kwasek)

Il. 3. Gdańsk Główny, dworzec PKP, prace przy ponownym montażu odnowionych żeliwnych słupów zadaszenia peronu 2, stan z 2018 r.

(fot. M. Kwasek)

a b

54 Michał Kwasek

Fig. 5. Sopot railway station, general view and construction detail of the 19

-century cast-iron platform shelter on the platform of the SKM

(Rapid Urban Railway), 2020 (photo by M. Kwasek)

Il. 5. Sopot, dworzec PKP, widok ogólny i detal konstrukcji XIX-wiecznej żeliwnej wiaty peronowej na peronie Szybkiej Kolei Miejskiej,

stan z 2020 r. (fot. M. Kwasek)

Fig. 6. Sopot railway station, general view and construction detail of the platform shelter on the long-distance platform created about 2011,

the state in 2020 (photo by M. Kwasek)

Il. 6. Sopot, dworzec PKP, widok ogólny i detal konstrukcji wiaty peronowej na peronie dalekobieżnym zrealizowany około 2011 r., stan z 2020 r.

(fot. M. Kwasek)

Fig. 7. Malbork railway station,

single-pitched platform shelter

with cast-iron pillars,

the state in 2020

(photo by M. Kwasek)

Il. 7. Malbork, dworzec PKP,

jednospadowa wiata peronowa

o żeliwnych słupach,

stan z 2020 r. (fot. M. Kwasek)

Conservation aspects of cast-iron platform shelters on the example of Vistula Pomerania railway stations 55

decorative capitals bonnet (Fig. 8). They replaced the orig-

inals, which presumably were present here and were dete-

riorated over the decades

. The contemporary form of the

overlays applied is a relatively liberal reference to those

used in 19

-century capital realizations, and its contem-

porary origin is recognizable without diculty. Neverthe-

less, the material and quality of workmanship are not of the

highest standard. They were made of plastic or thin sheet of

non-ferrous metal

. These materials have aged dierently

from the painted surfaces of the metal pillar (Fig. 8). While

the fastening systems of the cast-iron capital elements

remain in most cases invisible, the described bonnets in

Malbork were attached to the column using steel clamps.

Undoubtedly, such a method of assembly is exposed to

easier destruction and may also have a negative impact

on the aesthetics of the solution. Commendable in this re-

alization is the decision to restore the pillars’ incomplete

form and the use of patterns indicating their non-authentic

origin. To some extent, the selection of material applied

may be justied by the nowadays diculty of replicating

a historic building fabric – in preference to a readily avail-

able plastic. Nevertheless, as the examples illustrate:

– the use of material more durable and resembling the

original is possible (Sopot),

– using a synthetic product is not advisable (Malbork).

Conclusions

Cast-iron platform shelters, as durable objects, are still in

service today. Presumably, due to their long-term useful-

ness, they have not been subject to disassembly, as many

The form of the upper part of the column (Fig. 8, condition as of

2014), with an isolated section (with the use of a minor, simple band), in-

dicates that cast-iron decorative bonnets have initially been mounted there,

which were usually attached around the shaft to form decorative capital.

The element does not react to a magnet.

Fig. 8. Malbork railway station,

detail of the head of the cast-iron

pillar of the platform shelter

before and after the installation

of the decorative overlays:

a) the state in 2014,

b) the state in 2020

(photo by M. Kwasek)

Il. 8. Malbork, dworzec PKP,

detal głowicy żeliwnego słupa

wiaty peronowej przed

zamontowaniem dekoracyjnych

nakładek i po zamontowaniu:

a) stan z 2014 r., b) stan z 2020 r.

(fot. M. Kwasek)

transport infrastructures have been in recent decades [19,

p. 125]. In most instances, they underwent only essential

works to enhance their visual appearance until r

ecently,

and their preservation was conditioned, inter alia, by the

superior properties of cast iron. The precise extent

of dam-

age to Poland’s platform shelters due to the destruction

of World War II is unknown

. Thankfully, a large part of

them evaded destruction during military operations. Such

a situation is particularly noticeable in Gdańsk, where the

entirely ruined historical city district is located in a rela-

tively short vicinity of the railroad station. As the litera-

ture analysis showed, platform shelters with cast-iron pil-

lars were rare in Western Europe. However, although they

were built much more frequently in its central and eastern

parts, their number is relatively small for economic con-

cerns. The replacement of this type of structure with a va-

riant built of steel riveted elements limited the construction

of cast-iron shelters (mainly in the 2

half of the 19

cen-

tury). Therefore, they are unique objects, distinguished by

their aesthetics against the background of later solutions.

Con tem po rary

, numerous modernization works undertak-

en at railroad stations favour the renovation of these his-

toric shelters. Cast-iron elements are usually protected and

treated in order to restore their former magnicence. As nu-

merous instances prove, it is also relatively easy to restore

their historic colours

. Their ornamental form is slight-

ly preferred over riveted, wooden, or reinforced concrete

structures. The necessity of preserving platform shelters,

They were not included among the more important railroad fa-

cilities that were subjected to such analysis in 1945. It is only known

that Poland’s railroad stations’ destruction (service buildings includ-

ing) ranged from about 28% to about 40%, depending on the region [7,

p. 25]. The war activities certainly contributed to the demolition of the

old railroad station in Tczew, and thus, no cast-iron platform shelters are

preserved there. There may be more such undocumented cases.

It is required to perform a stratigraphy examination in every case.

a b

56 Michał Kwasek

which were historically built using various materials, has

been noticed by the scientic and heritage preservation

communities, e.g., [20], [21]. However, their continuation

is most often secured through legal protection. As the ex-

ample of the Frankfurt (am Main) Hauptbahnhof station

demonstrates, even considerable structural modications

can be carried out while respecting and preserving the au-

thentic cast-iron structural components [21, p. 23].

Potentially the most serious diculties that may occur

during the exploitation of a cast-iron structure may be gen-

erated by possible reparatory works. As indicated by un-

successful attempts to repair cast-iron pillars [22, p. 58],

identifying an adequate intervention method is then cru-

cial. Similarities in the applied forms, material, and con-

struction solutions of cast-iron platform shelters in Poland

and abroad permit analogous and proven repair means. In

Germany, techniques have been developed that allow for

the temporary or permanent strengthening of such dam-

aged pillars, using additional external metal jackets or an

auxiliary wooden structure (Fig. 9). The conducted exper-

imental studies indicate that cast-iron columns’ reinforce-

ment is also possible using composite bres, which does

not signicantly aect the columns’ aesthetics [23].

As outlined in this article, the approach to conserva-

tion eorts can be signicantly dierent. It is essential to

select the proper material, and even before the works – to

perform a stratigraphic examination of the historical paint-

ing coats. Such actions will make it possible to enhance

the authenticity factor. Works on neighbouring platforms,

which do not have shelters with cast-iron pillars, e.g., in

the process of station extension or modernization, may

take various forms. It is advisable to strive for consistency

of new or reconstructed objects with authentic, 19

cen-

tury realizations. Unquestionably, it should not obliterate

the boundary between the former and the contemporary

solution, as is the instance in Sopot. As the example of

Malbork demonstrated, it is equally inappropriate to use

technical and material measures that dier signicantly

from the original. A proper exemplication of the proce-

dure is the work undertaken on the Gdańsk Główny train

station’s platforms. Both in the shelter on platform No. 1,

created in the 1990s, and the shelter on platform No. 3,

extended in 2013–2014, the contemporary pillars were

given a form resembling the original, however simplied,

making it possible to distinguish them. Simultaneously,

the material and colour consistency with the historical

shelters have been maintained there, which should be con-

sidered a benecial outcome.

The preserved cast-iron platform shelters are a testi-

mony to dynamic transformations in the European con-

struction industry in the 2

half of the 19

century. They

also evidence a signicant, unprecedented 19

-century

inclination to erect buildings where structural elements,

due to their slenderness and meticulous consideration of

details, acquired an interesting artistic form. Their resist-

ance to environmental factors ensured that their mainte-

Fig. 9. Berlin, examples of repair work on cast-iron columns of platform shelters in S-Bahn stations, the state in 2019

(photo by M. Kwasek)

Il. 9. Berlin, przykłady prac naprawczych żeliwnych słupów wiat peronowych na stacjach S-Bahn, stan z 2019 r.

(fot. M. Kwasek)

Conservation aspects of cast-iron platform shelters on the example of Vistula Pomerania railway stations 57

nance did not require signicant nancial expenditures

over the years, making it possible for them to survive, of-

ten unaected, until the present day. As remnants of con-

struction technology and station architecture of the 19

century, cast-iron platform shelters are now a valuable

technical concept document. Nevertheless, even though

historical objects’ authenticity is not suciently valued

among the Polish society [24, p. 9], it should be particular-

ly protected by properly undertaken conservation works.

Translated by

Michał Kwasek

References

[1] Załuski D., Dworce kolejowe. Śródmiejskie przestrzenie podróży,

Wydawnictwo Politechniki Gdańskiej, Gdańsk 2010.

[2] Watkin D., Historia architektury zachodniej, Arkady, Warszawa

2001.

[3] Zomkowski S., Tramwajem przez Gdańsk, Wydawnictwo Seba-

stian Zomkowski, Gdańsk 2015.

[4] Rutkowski M., Powstanie pierwszych linii kolejowych w Królestwie

Polskim, [in:] M. Proniewski, W. Czarnecki (red.), Obiekty kole-

jowe. Układy przestrzenne, architektura, elementy techniki, Wy -

dawnictwo Wyższej Szkoły Finansów i Zarządzania, Białystok

2005, 39–47.

[5] Dylewski A., Historia kolei w Polsce, P.H.W. Fenix, Wierzchy Pa-

rzeńskie 2014.

[6] 150 lat kolei na ziemiach polskich, A.E. Kubicka (red.), Kolejowa

Ocyna Wydawnicza, Warszawa 1995.

[7] Zamkowska S., Odbudowa i funkcjonowanie kolei polskich 1944–

1949, Wydawnictwa Komunikacji i Łączności, Warszawa 1984.

[8] Foljanty K., Przekształcanie zabytkowych dworców i terenów kole-

jowych w struktury wielofunkcyjne, “Architectus” 2016, nr 2(46),

65–78, doi: 10.5277/arc160205.

[9] Załuski D., Dworzec kolejowy w strukturze miasta: nowe szanse,

[in:] D. Załuski (red.), Dworzec kolejowy w strukturze miasta,

Urbanista, Warszawa 2006, 273–284.

[10] Addis W., 3000 years of design engineering and construction, Phai-

don Press, London 2015.

[11] Dobraszczyk P., Meta-Ornament: Iron and the Railway Station in

Britain, [in:] P. Dobraszczyk, P. Sealy (ed.), Function and fantasy.

Iron architecture in the long nineteenth century, Routledge, Taylor

& Francis, New York–London 2016, 201–219.

[12] Wesołowski J., Od wozowni do katedry. Hala peronowa w architek-

turze dworców, t. 1: Historia. Konstrukcja, Wydawnictwo Politech-

niki Łódzkiej, Łódź 2014.

[13] Kwasek M., Piwek A., Lightweight glass and metal roof structures

in the 19

century. Architecture and construction, [in:] L. Małysz-

ko, R. Tarczewski (ed.), XXII Lightweight Structures in Civil Engi-

neering: contemporary problems. Monograph from XXII Scientic

Conference of IASS Polish Chapters, Wydawnictwo UWM, Olsz-

tyn 2016, 31–36.

[14] Schmitt E., Handbuch der Architektur, Tl. 4, Entwerfen, Anlage und

Einrichtung der Gebäude, Hbd. 2, H. 4, Empfangsgebäude der Ba-

hnhöfe und Bahnsteigüberdachungen (Bahnsteighallen u. -dächer),

Leipzig 1911.

[15] Czapliński K., Dawne wyroby ze stopów żelaza, Dolnośląskie Wy-

dawnictwo Edukacyjne, Wrocław 2009.

[16] Brych I., Sýkora M., Assessment of cast-iron columns using analy-

tical models, “Applied Mechanics and Materials” 2016, Vol. 821,

782–788, doi: 10.4028/www.scientic.net/AMM.821.782.

[17] Kwasek M., Piwek A., Jankowski R., Study on 19

-century cast

iron columns from the former nancial oce building in Kwidzyn,

“MATEC Web of Conferences” 2018, Nr 219(3), 1–8, doi: 10.1051/

matecconf/201821902011.

[18] Gruszkowski W., Rozwój przestrzenny Gdańska, [in:] E. Cieślak

(red.), Historia Gdańska, t. 4, Wydawnictwo Prawnicze LEX, So-

pot 1998, 250–267.

[19] Fuglewicz S., Zabytki komunikacyjne – dziedzictwo ginące, [in:]

S. Januszewski (red.), Dziedzictwo postindustrialne i jego kultu-

rotwórcza rola, Fundacja Hereditas, Warszawa 2009.

[20] Skalimowski A., Tucholski Z., Modernistyczne wiaty i przystanki

ko lejowe Warszawskiego Węzła Kolejowego. O konieczności ochro-

ny konserwatorskiej, “Ochrona Zabytków” 2010, nr 1–4, 73–84.

[21] Wesołowski J., Hala peronowa jako problem konserwatorski, “Tech-

nika Transportu Szynowego” 2014, nr 7–8, 17–26.

[22] Czapliński K., Gawron K., O żeliwnych elementach konstrukcyj-

nych i dekoracyjnych, “Przegląd Budowlany” 2011, nr 4, 56–59.

[23] Marcinkowski J., Różycki Z., Reinforcement of existingcast-iron

structural elements by means of ber reinforced composites, “Civil

and Environmental Engineering Reports” 2016, nr 20(1), 37–45,

doi: 10.1515/ceer-2016-0004.

[24] Kwaśniewski A., Polskie podejście do waloru autentyzmu zabyt-

ków architektury, [in:] E. Łużyniecka (red.), Dziedzictwo architek-

toniczne: rekonstrukcje i badania obiektów zabytkowych, Ocyna

Wydawnicza PWr, Wrocław 2017, 6–22.

Acknowledgements

Special appreciation to Marta Jedlikowska and Olga Broniewska from

the Oces for Monuments Protection in Gdańsk and Sopot for their help

in collecting archival documentation and Professor Aleksander Piwek,

for valuable factual comments.

Abstract

Conservation aspects of cast-iron platform shelters on the example of Vistula Pomerania railway stations

Cast-iron shelters were used in the 19

century as cheaper alternatives to large platform halls. Nevertheless, they were aesthetically distinguish-

able from later riveted solutions. Because of their durability and continuous utility, they were not the subject of disassembly, as numerous transport

infrastructure objects have been in recent decades. This article aims to indicate proper conservation practices during construction works on cast-iron

platform shelters. Nowadays, most frequently, they take place during the modernization of railroad stations. As presented in this text, the approach to

conservation procedures can be signicantly dierent. The paper investigates technical and architectural solutions of selected instances of cast-iron

platform shelters in Vistula Pomerania. Some references to foreign designs are also presented. The analysis of literature and archival documentation of

the project, as well as the eld studies, enabled us to formulate conclusions – recommendations for the proper procedure in respect of this type of object.

58 Michał Kwasek

Cast-iron platform shelters ought to be preserved as the unique remnant of 19

-century architecture. It is recommended to use an adequately se-

lected material during the works and to restore the artistic qualities of cast-iron structures by restoring their original paintings. The author also refers

to the realization of new roong created in the preserved historical objects’ closest vicinity. Based on the illustrated instances, he recommends eorts

to maintain consistency between new or reconstructed structures and authentic 19

-century ones. Simultaneously author emphasizes the necessity

of avoiding the obliteration of the distinction between them. He drew attention to the challenges of repairing cast-iron pillars, giving examples of

techniques that can be applied.

Key words: platform shelters, cast-iron construction, 19

-century architecture, monument conservation, cast-iron columns

Streszczenie

Zagadnienia związane z konserwacją żeliwnych wiat peronowych na przykładzie dworców Pomorza Nadwiślańskiego

Żeliwne wiaty były stosowane w XIX w. jako tańsze odpowiedniki wielkich hal peronowych. Mimo to wyróżniały się swoją estetyką na tle póź-

niejszych – nitowanych – rozwiązań. Ze względu na ich trwałość i ciągłą przydatność nie podlegały rozbiórkom jak wiele obiektów techniki trans-

portowej w ostatnich dziesięcioleciach. Celem artykułu jest wskazanie dobrych praktyk konserwatorskich w trakcie prac budowlanych dotyczących

żeliwnych wiat peronowych. Współcześnie mają one najczęściej miejsce przy modernizacji dworców kolejowych. Jak przedstawiono w niniejszym

tekście, sposób podejścia do zabiegów konserwatorskich może być znacząco różny. W artykule przedstawiono wyniki badań rozwiązań technicz-

nych oraz architektonicznych wybranych przykładów żeliwnych zadaszeń peronowych na terenie Pomorza Nadwiślańskiego. Przedstawiono także

nawiązania do realizacji poza granicami Polski. Analiza literatury przedmiotu i archiwalnej dokumentacji projektowej, a także badania terenowe

umożliwiły sformułowanie wniosków – rekomendacji dla właściwego postępowania przy tego typu obiektach.

Jako unikatowa pozostałość po architekturze XIX w. żeliwne wiaty peronowe powinny być bezwzględnie chronione. W trakcie prac wskazane jest

stosowanie odpowiednio dobranego materiału, a także dążenie do przywrócenia żeliwnym wiatom ich walorów artystycznych poprzez odtworzenie

pierwotnej kolorystyki. Autor artykułu odnosi się również do realizacji nowych zadaszeń, powstających w bezpośrednim sąsiedztwie zachowanych

historycznych obiektów. Bazując na przedstawionych przykładach, rekomenduje dążenie do zachowania spójności nowych lub rekonstruowanych

obiektów z autentycznymi realizacjami z XIX w. Jednocześnie podkreśla konieczność dbałości o to, by granica między nimi nie uległa zatarciu.

Zwrócił uwagę na trudności, jakie mogą dotyczyć prac naprawczych przy żeliwnych słupach, podając przykłady technik możliwych do zastosowania.

Słowa kluczowe: wiaty peronowe, konstrukcja żeliwna, architektura XIX w., konserwacja zabytków, kolumny żeliwne