• SAVED!•
Commonly known as "Coal Oil Johnny," John Washington Steele was the Pennsylvania oil boom's prodigal prince. Adopted at a young age by the McClintock family, John resided in this circa 1850 wood-frame farmhouse for much of his life. In return for decades of helping the widow McClintock run the farm and manage oil leases on the property, John inherited the estate when Mrs. McClintock died in 1864. His inheritance included well royalties of $2,000 to $3,000 per day, plus a huge reserve that the widow had stored in a safe in the farmhouse.
Almost overnight, John stopped working hard and started playing hard. He left his wife of two years and young son in western Pennsylvania and adopted a flamboyant, expensive lifestyle that included extended stays in New York and Philadelphia, where he rode in a bright red carriage decorated with pictures of oil wells gushing dollar signs. According to local lore, Johnny once spent $100,000 in a day; he bought a hotel for a night; he lit cigars with hundred-dollar bills; and diamonds dripped from his fingers. His life was reflective of the boom and bust of the industry. After living the high life and drinking heavily in cities along the eastern seaboard while poorly managing his money, Coal Oil Johnny quickly depleted his fortune. He returned to this farmhouse and his wife and son in 1866, and filed for bankruptcy in 1867. Johnny returned to work. After hauling other people's oil to market and dabbling in business, he moved his family farther west, dying nearly penniless in 1921.
After sitting vacant for more than 50 years and subjected to water infiltration as well as insect and rodent infestation, the structural integrity of the building's foundation was in jeopardy. Its support beams had rotted, and the building's exterior cladding was damaged beyond repair. Unable to find a new owner for the house, the owners announced plans to demolish the building in 1996. By 1997, when the house was listed in Pennsylvania at Risk, the Oil Heritage Region, Inc. (now Oil Region Alliance) had stepped forward to coordinate emergency stabilization measures. Making good use of both public funds and private donations, they succeeded in moving the house across Oil Creek to the Rynd Farm in Oil Creek State Park in 2001, where they were able to rehabilitate the house over the following years. The Coal Oil Johnny House is open for special events, an annual open house, and by appointment. The immediate threat of demolition has been overcome, and the building is currently safe from harm. But the Oil Region Alliance could still use additional financial support for expanded programming at the house.
To support this project, please contribute to the Oil region Alliance via their website: www.oilregion.org.
[sws_grey_box box_size="630"]
Lessons Learned:
Intervention tools such as grants and tax credits are helping to make preservation projects possible.
The Pennsylvania Historical & Museum Commission's Keystone Historic Preservation grants make a significant impact on the ability of municipalities and non-profits to preserve endangered historic buildings for public use. At least 48 grants have been given to 25 of Pennsylvania's 201 At Risk properties as a result of the Keystone Recreation, Park & Conservation Fund. The federal Save America's Treasures program assisted at least six additional projects that were once at risk of being lost. At least nine additional endangered historic properties in Pennsylvania have benefited from grants from the National Trust for Historic Preservation (NTHP). The NTHP has invested additional funds into initiatives started to address the threats identified in Pennsylvania at Risk, such as the demolition of historic properties for construction of new, large houses and stores, and addressing problems common among specific property types, such as churches and schools.
At least 20 historic properties that were included in Pennsylvania At Risk over the past 20 years have benefited from the federal Rehabilitation Investment Tax Credit. All relatively large commercial rehabilitation projects, these projects are scattered all around the state, occurring in Allegheny, Bedford, Blair, Crawford, Dauphin, Erie, Lehigh, Luzerne, Lycoming, and Philadelphia Counties. With the new state tax credit in place, rehabilitation tax credits will certainly continue to provide important financial incentives for preserving Pennsylvania endangered historic properties in years to come. [/sws_grey_box]
The Central Pennsylvania Preservation Society recently hosted representatives from the Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission for a presentation on the brand new state historic tax credit program. You can read their summary of the presentation here.
As important as it is to preserve how our historical buildings actually are, inevitably replacements will need to be made when features are so deteriorated that stabilization, conservation, or restoration are simply not viable options.
In these instances, the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for the Treatment of Historic Properties allow for “replacement in-kind” (replicating the original feature in all respects, except improved condition) if there are surviving features that can be used as prototypes. The Standards & Guidelines also notes that, “The replacement materials needs to match the old both physically and visually, i.e., wood with wood, etc. Thus…substitute materials are not appropriate in…preservation.”
One example is the Thaddeus Kosciuszko National Memorial on the corner of 3rd and Pine streets. The Thaddeus Kosciuszko house is a part of Independence Park and in 2011 the National Park Service embarked on exterior restorations of the building to repair and restore wood windows, doors, and a cedar shake roof that were deteriorated.
Without this attention to detail, the Kosciuszko house would not have been preserved as an accurate testimonial to our architectural heritage. It would have been easier and more inexpensive to have replaced the shake roof with any number of other options, including some that are commonly considered “historically accurate”. But they would not have been historically accurate to this house. Even if they are considered “period appropriate”, when we choose a different treatment than what was there originally we are altering, not preserving the very things that make the building historic.
It also alters a building’s historical fabric, sometimes irretrievably. Original wallpaper that is often destroyed during the removal process can’t usually be replaced with in-kind period wallpaper. Replacing one species of wood with another sometimes can’t be undone if the original species of wood is not readily available, or is priced so exorbitantly that it is not financially feasible for your project.
In order to avoid significant, and sometimes irreparable, damage to your building, consider replacing only the deteriorated or missing parts of your building’s features, use materials that match the old in design, color, and texture (both physically and visually), and document the original material and the replacement process and materials used extensively for future reference and research.
[sws_grey_box box_size="630"] Things to Ask Yourself About the Materials on Your Building
Bean Latch
In the Suffolk family of latches and handles, the Bean latch is a simple latch design, the most common found in early New England homes. Ours is a beautifully hand made replica of an early latch found in Horsham, Pennsylvania, circa 1755.
Can be ordered with a rubbed oil finish for interior, or painted black finish for exterior use. 2-1/2” x 8”
Spade Latch
Another Suffolk variety, our Spade Latch is a beautifully hand-crafted piece that will grace any handsome paneled or plank door. The history of this latch extends all along the eastern shoreline, and its ancestors can still be found in many antique homes in New England.
The Spade is suitable for interior or exterior use, and can be ordered in a beeswax boiled Linseed oiled finish or painted black.. 3” x 10”
Meeting House Latch
This handsome latch is quite an eye-catcher. Reproduced from a latch found on the front of a 1780 Connecticut meeting house, this large latch is a beautiful representation of colonial craftsmanship.
The Meeting House latch would grace the front entryway of any restoration or reproduction home. 4-1/2” x 18-1/2”
Mission Latch
Another Suffolk Latch variety, the Mission latch is a slightly different design than was commonly seen in early colonial homes. Ours is similar to a door in the Wayside Inn, Sudbury Massachusetts, circa 1683.
This beautiful latch, with its beveled edges and detailed hammered finish, would be a handsome addition to a period home or elegant outbuilding. Because of its size, the Mission latch is primarily an exterior latch, so is painted black to withstand the weather. 3-1/2” x 13-1/2”
The Wilmington Library was built in 1922 and has remained a landmark on Rodney Square for ninety years. Especially in recent years, due to heavy use by the public and the changing role of libraries in an urban environment, there has been an increasingly evident need for expensive repairs.
Very little historic architecture has caught the public imagination as much as log houses have. To many people, these simply designed structures are the epitome of early American life, and thus the log house has assumed a rather mythic and romanticized place in our national history. However, log buildings played a real and significant part in Pennsylvania’s architectural past.
The Swedes, who settled in southeastern Pennsylvania in the mid-17th century, are credited with first bringing the log house historic architecture form to the American colonies. The Swedes had established several permanent settlements as part of the colony of New Sweden in southeast Pennsylvania andDelaware from 1638 through 1654. Despite some challenges by the Dutch, the Swedes and Finns of New Sweden continued to control their land until William Penn claimed the land under his charter for Pennsylvania in 1682. The few remaining Swedish log buildings in the southeast corner of the state are the earliest evidence of European settlement in Pennsylvania . The earliest surviving building in our state is the Lower Swedish Cabin, which dates from circa 1640 and is located along the Darby Creek in Drexel Hill , Delaware County. The Lower Swedish Cabin is a typical Swedish log house, built from hewn logs, stacked horizontally and joined by notched ends with a corner chimney. Clay chinking fills the space between the logs. Almost all the buildings in New Sweden were of log construction: houses, barns, churches, forts, mills, sheds, stables, and trading posts. Even the house of the governor of the colony was made of logs. Unfortunately, just a few of these early Swedish log buildings survive.
Another early survivor is Morton Homestead in Prospect Park , Delaware County. It is a one and one half story three-room house, built in three periods. The earliest section of the house dates to circa 1698; a similarly-designed log addition was made in 1758, and a stone connecting center section dates from the late 18th century. Log construction was not just for houses; it was used for forts, taverns, barns, churches and mills.
The log building historic architecture form was adopted from the Swedish by other settlers in Pennsylvania . When the English, Irish, and Welsh settlers arrived with William Penn, constructing a log house was an expedient way to provide shelter in the new world. Oftentimes a log house was built, only to be replaced as fortunes improved, with a house of brick or stone. The log houses were then abandoned or relegated to use as a shed or agricultural outbuilding or housing for relatives. Log houses were also incorporated into newly expanded buildings as seen in the Morten Homestead. Log buildings were constructed by the German and Scots-Irish settlers as settlement moved westward. While the Swedish preferred corner chimneys, the Germans generally built central chimneys, and the English often used wall end chimneys. Log buildings were usually of one or two story design, with some beginning as a single story, and then enlarged. Windows were small, originally employing sliding wood shutters before glass was commonly available. The gable ends were made of boards and the roofs of wooden shingles.
Vernacular architectural historians have identified a number of traditional log house forms and patterns commonly found in the United States. A simple, one-room, log house is called as a single pen or single crib house. Another common descriptive term for log houses in the Mid-Atlantic region is a Continetal Plan house, made up of a single-pen log house with three rooms arranged around a center fireplace. The Continental Plan type of log house is associated with the early German settlers of Pennsylvania who brought this building tradition with them from Europe. Another common log building plan is the Saddlebag Plan, where two single-pen log rooms are joined by a center chimney. The Saddlebag Plan often reflects the addition of another log room onto an earlier building with the old exterior chimney wall now forming a center interior one. The Dogtrot Plan includes two log pens with an open porch or covered passageway between. The Dogtrot Plan is often associated with the building traditions of the southern states because its open air design is well suited for warm weather.
In the mid to late 19th century, log buildings were often covered by clapboards in an effort to make these vernacular buildings fit into the architectural styles of the day. Many historic buildings thus have an inner core of logs, long covered and forgotten. Due to the immense practicality of log construction, log buildings continued to be built throughout the 19th century, especially in more remote areas of the state. Log construction also remained popular for sheds and agricultural buildings.
Certain types of late 19th and early 20th century buildings incorporate log construction to create a consciously "rustic" design. In the 1870s as part of the "Great Camp Movement" rustically designed vaction homes and visitor lodges were built in the Adierondack Mountains of New York. Buildings of similar style and design were also constructed in the Poconos area of Pennsylvania as rustic retreats. Designed with natural materials to better fit into their wooded enviroment, these buildings featured native stone, wood shingles, and logs, often with the bark retained. In the 1930s and 1940s the Civilian Conservation Corps (a federal program created as part of FDR's New Deal) also produced log buildings for public parks. These early 20th century log cabins, visitor centers and support buildings are still present in Pennsylvania's public parks and recreation areas. Thus, every log building should not be assumed to be of especially early construction.
Preservation Pennsylvania has released their “Pennsylvania At-Risk: Twenty-Year Retrospective of Pennsylvania’s Endangered Historic Properties, Where Are They Now” edition. It’s a fascinating look at preservation in action and we’ll be posting a look at each property in a series of posts over the next several months.
INTRODUCTION
Preservation Pennsylvania established the annual Pennsylvania At Risk list in 1992, making us the first statewide preservation organization in the United States to have an annual roster of endangered historic properties. Since 1992, we have listed and worked to preserve more than 200 endangered historic resources, including individual buildings, historic districts and thematic resources statewide. For 2012, as we celebrate the 30th anniversary of our organization, we are presenting a 20-year retrospective edition of Pennsylvania At Risk. In this issue, we revisit some of the amazing historic places across the Commonwealth, some of which have been rescued from extinction through preservation and rehabilitation efforts, and others that still need our help.
Approximately 18% of Pennsylvania’s At Risk properties have been lost, having been demolished or substantially altered. Another 32% have been saved or are in a condition or situation where the identified threat no longer poses a problem for the historic property. Approximately 50% of the 201 At Risk resources remain in danger, or we have not been able to confirm their current status as either saved or lost.
By monitoring these properties over the past 20 years and working with individuals and organizations trying to preserve them, we have learned many valuable lessons. Those lessons are called out throughout this publication.
1999 – Thomas Kent, Jr. Farm, Green County
- Photo from the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
• SAVED! (Sort of…)•
The 1851 brick farmhouse and the associated outbuildings and fields that comprise the 102-acre Thomas Kent, Jr. Farm reflect the agricultural heritage of southwestern Pennsylvania from the mid 19th century until the onset of the Great Depression. In 1999, the structural integrity of the farmhouse was threatened by longwall mining, an underground coal mining technique that removes whole panels from a coal seam without leaving columns of earth in place to support the mine ceiling. As the land above the extracted coal seam drops between four and six feet, an event known as subsidence, the surrounding land slumps and shifts. This movement results in damage to land and buildings, often disrupting or eliminating the natural water supply.
In an attempt to protect their historic farm from longwall coal mining impacts, the property owners engaged in an expensive, all-consuming multi-year legal battle. They opposed the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (DEP), which issued a permit for longwall mining under their property despite the clear potential for adverse effects to this historic property. Rather than choosing an alternative that would avoid or minimize harmful impacts to the historic farm, the DEP allowed the mine operators to proceed as long as they agreed to repair the damage or compensate the property owner for their loss.
Recognizing that the DEP’s standard subsidence control and mitigation plan was insufficient, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) entered into a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with the federal Office of Surface Mining, the Pennsylvania Historical & Museum Commission, and the DEP in 2001, allowing longwall mining to proceed under the farm, provided that appropriate repairs be carried out afterward.
Despite bands and cables wrapped around the house in an attempt to hold the structure together during mining and the subsidence that followed, cracks more than 1 3⁄4 inches wide formed in the exterior walls of the 1851 brick house. Upon completion of the longwall mining, an entire corner of the house (more than 15,000 bricks) had to be reconstructed.
Large crews spent months working to repair the damage. It is fortunate that the MOA was in place because the level of work required to repair the house was well beyond what the DEP’s standard subsidence control and mitigation plan would have repaired. Despite a monumental legal battle to prevent damage to the farm, longwall mining was still allowed to occur. While the Thomas Kent, Jr. Farm was technically “saved” from destruction by longwall mining and has been cosmetically restored, the integrity of the building has been compromised. The owners still hear subsidence cracking more than 10 years later and worry that the house remains in danger.
While the Thomas Kent, Jr. Farm was technically saved from destruction by longwall mining and has been cosmetically restored, the integrity of the building has been compromised.
[sws_grey_box box_size=”630″]Longwall Mining:
Today, longwall mining still threatens historic resources in Pennsylvania. Plantation Plenty (the Isaac Manchester Farm) was listed in Pennsylvania At Risk in 2010 and was included in the National Trust for Historic Preservation’s list of America’s 11 Most Endangered Historic Places as a result of proposed longwall mining. Preservation Pennsylvania continues to work with our partners to protect this historic farm and other properties from damage by longwall mining.
- Photo from Act 54 Reform
[/sws_grey_box]
These features and variances can be difficult to duplicate with modern technology. Our manufacturing and installation process is significantly different than the process used hundreds of years ago and the characteristics modern machinery and installation techniques impart create an entirely different window than the traditional building methods created when your building was originally constructed. Such a loss of historical elements is a permanent scar on your historical building.
