Historic Kemblesville barn is sold and dismantled,

The J.G. West barn in Kemblesville is being dismantled by a company that will re-use the lumber. By John Chambless

Staff Writer

Last week, the time finally ran out for the J.G. West barn in Kemblesville.

The huge bank barn, built in the early 1800s, began to come down, piece by piece. In about a week and a half, there will be nothing left at the site next to the Franklin Township Building except the concrete silo and the earth ramp that led up to where the barn door used to be.

For a loyal group of preservationists, the demolition is a frustrating end to an ongoing dispute with the Franklin Township Board of Supervisors. Heated public meetings, beginning more than a year ago, culminated in a lawsuit that sought to stop the demolition of the barn. Dolores Hughes, who serves as chairman of the Franklin Township Historical Commission, filed the suit in Chester County’s Court of Common Pleas on Feb. 13.

Supervisors Paul Overton and Nan Latimer had voted to preserve the historic building — or at least stabilize it until renovations could be undertaken. Private donors had pledged about $11,000 to replace the roof and prevent further water damage inside. The barn is listed on the Pennsylvania Register of Historic Places. However, Board of Supervisors chairman John Auerbach, along with supervisors Eric Brindle and Penelope Schenk, voted for demolition.

The barn, which sits next to the township building in the Kemblesville Historic District, was built by John Davis, who sold it to George Kimble in 1817. Dr. J.G. West bought the property in 1867 and owned it until his death in 1917. The building has been in the care of the township for at least 20 years, during which time it has been used for storage. It has been clad in metal siding which has helped preserve the wood. The Historic Architectural Review Board (HARB) admitted that there is some roof damage that has allowed water to damage some floorboards of the barn. Two professional structural evaluations concluded that the barn is fundamentally sound.

Overton believed the barn could be refurbished and used as a township office or rented out as office space or meeting rooms.

The lawsuit said that the township intends to use the slab of the building as a salt-mixing pad, and Hughes stated that the value of her home, which sits less than a mile from the site, will be reduced because of the unsightly proposed use.

The lawsuit also pointed out that the township is required to consult with the Pennsylvania Historic Preservation Board before altering anything in a historic district. The suit asked the court to stay the demolition of the barn until the board complies with the requirement.

Township resident Lou Mandich has been a vocal proponent of preserving the barn. In a letter sent to the supervisors last week, Mandich wrote, “Other townships and private owners throughout Chester County — including myself — have made adaptive re-use of the vast space found in most barns. … The Historical Commission and the HARB have not been looking backward, but forward. The five acres surrounding the barn property are perfect for a community gathering place — it is indeed the ‘Town Square’ of Kemblesville. The fact that no one has stepped forward to take over the barn in no way diminishes its potential for future use. … Please reconsider.”

In an e-mail sent to those who fought to save the barn, former supervisor Bill Skalish wrote, “Thank you for all your efforts to help save such an important piece of our township’s heritage. It’s unfortunate that a majority of the board of supervisors did not have the vision, courage or leadership skills to do the right thing for the community, and allow volunteers to preserve the historic barn for future generations.”

During a phone interview in March, Dolores Hughes said she was shocked that the board voted for the demolition of the barn after a panel of experts presented clear evidence that it was worth saving.

“A group of people who were there — all private citizens — got together money to apply for a grant for the other part of the money,” she said. “That way, we could at least patch the roof and then be able to raise more funds to stabilize the barn.

“I live in a house that was built in 1790. Dr. Kimble owned this barn for about 67 years. The village is named after him,” Hughes said. “When you have a building like this, once it’s gone, it’s gone.”

Supervisor John Auerbach, in a statement to the press on Sept. 12, wrote that the board of supervisors provided a four-month waiting period to allow the HARB and others to present their case for rehabilitation of the barn. Auerbach felt that the barn was in poor condition, and that “the building has reached the tipping point where further deterioration will make the building significantly more dangerous and degrade the salvage value.”

Auerbach said that the township owns the building but has not used it. “The vision is to rebuild/reconfigure the barn so that it will function as township office and community center,” he wrote. “Although no specific cost was pursed from a contractor, general discussions talked about $700,000. With contingencies, the cost could easily reach $1 million for a building of this size, configured to comply with building codes for routine habitation by township personnel and group activities.”

Auerbach wrote that fundraising ideas put forward by community members, in his opinion, would

not cover the cost of rehabilitating the barn. As for direct monetary donations, Auerbach wrote, “One of the key elements in this process is for the people managing the fundraising activities to make some contribution first to establish their good faith, support for the project, and set an example. After much discussion, no one in attendance [at the meeting] indicated that they would make a donation. The room was silent.”

Auerbach noted that grants were a possible source of funding, “but require a matching amount from the township. The grant values that have been put forward are small, $10,000 to $25,000. Additionally, our poor economic conditions indicate that grants for building rehabilitation will be scarce.”

Noting that last year, voters turned down two referendums to increase taxes for open space, Auerbach wrote, “I do not believe the barn project and open space are near the same level of desirability by voters, with the barn project having a much lower priority.”

In a Sept. 12 phone call, Auerbach said that the township is strongly considering paying an additional $3,000 to have the silo removed from the site. In the current tally, costs associated with the barn are $27,582, when totaling the legal fees ($12,001), asbestos removal from the barn ($6,731), filling in a well at the site ($500), and demolition of the barn and silo ($8,350).

The lawsuit against the township is ongoing, Auerbach said, “but our attorney reviewed the lawsuit and found that it does not have a stay that prevents us from going ahead with demolition.”

The barn site will eventually hold a paved pad, Auerbach said, where salt and anti-skid materials will be stored for use on township roads during winter weather. “Right now, we have to do the mixing of that material in the middle of the parking lot,” he said. “Eventually, I would imagine having some shed storage for those materials” on the pad site, he added.

Supervisor Nan Latimer, in an e-mailed statement on Sept. 13, wrote, “I continue to be disappointed that supervisors Brindle, Schenk, and Auerbach did not accept the offer by Franklin residents to donate and raise private funds to stabilize the barn. The use of taxpayer dollars to tear down the barn, instead of using no tax dollars to fix it, is in conflict with the platform on which Schenk and Auerbach were elected. I also regret that these supervisors turned a blind eye to the township ordinance concerning demolition in the Historic District.

“I would like to recognize the hard work and broadmindedness of the Franklin HARB and Historical Commission members who worked hard to educate the Franklin supervisors opposed to preserving the barn and also sought to find an alternative use for the barn. These individuals were publicly recognized for their efforts by the Chester County Historic Preservation Network, which presented them with its Grace Under Fire Award.”

Paul Lagasse of the HARB had long been in favor of saving the barn. On Sept. 13, he wrote to the Chester County Press, saying, “The loss of the J.G. West barn, the only sizable barn in the township that the Board of Supervisors was in a position to protect, is regrettable. It is not as though the supervisors were without options: I was one of those who, back in June 2012, outlined for them a plan to stabilize the barn without resorting to the use of Franklin Township taxpayer funds. The failure to at least try this option has led to a larger failure, the loss of what could have been a valuable community resource once it had been given new life as a township meeting hall, local museum, or the like. It is a loss that might have been prevented had a majority of the supervisors showed more patience, flexibility, and imagination.

“It is not just a barn that is being demolished: Part of the historical fabric that the Kemblesville Historic District was created by the township to protect is also being destroyed,” Lagasse continued. “More than any other structure, the J.G. West barn made it clear how closely intertwined agriculture once was with the small commercial village of Kemblesville.

As the metal siding is being removed in preparation for the tearing apart of the barn, we can see — for too brief a time — the roughsawn beauty of its stout wooden sides once again, and see all too clearly just what we have taken from our children and grandchildren. I wish it were otherwise.”

kemblesville historic district, j.g. west barn, kemblesville, barnyard boys, franklin township historical commission, pennsylvania historic preservation board Related Articles: History falls in Kemblesville , Efforts to save J.G. West Barn recognized by preservation group 

‘The bitterness of poor quality lingers long after the sweetness of a cheap price.’ There are lots of ways to make a poor quality, inexpensive farm table. The tips below will help you to avoid the phrase so often heard, “I didn’t know”. Good luck and remember that most often ‘you get what you pay for’.

1. Where did the wood come from? Ask the table manufacturer if they know the ‘story behind the wood’ — was the wood originally cut from the virgin forests of America? Was it from some other forest in another country? Or did it come from an old house or barn? Where was this structure located? When was it built? Who lived there? What function did the lumber serve in its first use? Ask for this information to be written down so you can tell the ‘story’ to friends and family. Where did the wood come from? Ask the table manufacturer if they know the ‘story behind the wood’ — was the wood originally cut from the virgin forests of America? Was it from some other forest in another country? Or did it come from an old house or barn? Where was this structure located? When was it built? Who lived there? What function did the lumber serve in its first use? Ask for this information to be written down so you can tell the ‘story’ to friends and family. Ask if the wood the table is built with comes with a ‘Certificate of Authenticity’.
2. How is the tabletop secured to the aprons? Is the tabletop nailed or screwed firmly to the aprons? The tabletop should be attached to the aprons with clips to allow the wood to move. A table top that is rigidly attached to its base will crack as it expands and contracts with seasonal changes and subsequent changes in humidity.
3. Are the turned legs machine duplicated or hand turned? We live in a “cookie cutter world” and often times, due to the lack of skill of the table assembler*, the legs are mass produced on a duplication machine compromising the handmade appearance of old and giving the table a standard furniture store look*. A professional wood craftsman can hand turn each leg without the aid of calipers* enhancing the handmade ambiance of the table. A machine turned leg spins at a high speed and is pressed against a profile knife* that cuts the leg out in one swift operation. Each leg is the exact duplicate of the other, which is a perfect example of our “cookie cutter world”. There is something special about a hand turned leg. The gentle differences in proportion, the slight waves, and dips of the craftsman’s chisel add another dimension to the overall texture of the table.
4. Are the legs made from reclaimed wood? Ask if the origin of the leg and apron stock is from the same structure as the table top? If they are tapered legs, look to see if the clean-cut side of the leg has been embellished to resemble the uncut faces of the old beams?
5. Is there a choice of table ends? Quality table ends include:
   • Breadboard ends – is a term that originated from early bakery breadboards. They are narrow boards (2” to 3” wide) that are applied to the end grain of the main table boards. If the breadboard ends are rigidly attached with nails or screws, they will cause the main table boards to crack. A quality table with breadboard ends is engineered to accept movement so the wood can expand and contract with the seasonal changes in humidity without cracking.
   • Square cut ends– is when the table top has been cut off square, straight and even.
   • Uneven ends – is when each board making up the tabletop is cut at random lengths giving the table a more rustic look.
   • Mountain range ends – is when the boards making up the tabletop ends are cut with slight variations in straightness, much like a primitive table top would have been.
6. How are the bowtie patches made? Are they hand cut and slightly irregular giving them a handmade, more primitive farm table look? They should be the same thickness as the tabletop if expected to have any structural holding power. If the bowties are machine cut using a router and a template, they will be perfectly symmetrical and won’t look appropriate on a farm table top. This method only allows the thickness of the bowtie to be about ½” which affords little holding power. They are used more for cosmetic, decorative purposes. You will find symmetrical bowties used more on modern furniture creations.
7. How are the holes in the wood filled? You do not want the holes filled with handyman type wood fills or wax crayons* that will chip away and fall out as the wood moves. Holes and cracks should be filled with quality epoxies* that can be colored as desired and will stay put with the natural expansion and contraction of the wood. If preferred, nail holes can be filled with wooden pegs* of the same vintage wood or in some cases, authentic hand forged rose head nails* that were on the boards originally.
8. What types of finishes are used? Beware of wax finishes* as they may cause white marks and may get sticky in the summertime. Many table assemblers*, who do not have a finishing background or a finishing facility, use wax finish because of its simplicity. If the wax has been heavily applied, you will be able to scrape it off with your fingernail, which is not a good thing. A durable wipe on the finish that finishes the wood from the inside out is far superior. This finish is in the wood and not sitting on top. This type of finish eliminates chipping, flaking and cracking. Be sure the finish is maintainable. Ask how it could be repaired in the event of a scratch? Ask if another coat of finish can be applied as part of a table maintenance program?
9. If you have your own reclaimed wood, can it be used in your custom-made farm table? A caring craftsman will be more than happy to build the farm table using wood from the client’s homestead, which adds sentimental value.
10. Is the bottom of the tabletop finished? When the bottom of a table is finished with the same number of coats as the tabletop it allows the even absorption of humidity, which prevents future warping, cupping or twisting of the wood. This also produces a hygienically safe surface. Most table bottoms found in the marketplace display raw boards still dusty from the barn or attic carrying untold microorganisms.
11. Is the table identified by the furniture maker? Does the table have a signed and dated paper label glued to the bottom of the tabletop and/or is it branded in a way that cannot be removed? This craftsman adds his signature signet mark on the tabletop. A seemingly significant addition that could add greatly to the value of the piece as it ages.
12. Does the table carry a warranty? Confirm that the furniture maker will repair or replace structural defects or a defective finish barring misuse or abuse.
13. Are custom orders considered? Confirm that the furniture maker will sit down and consult with you and your interior designer about your taste and style, the style of your home and other furniture you may have in your home when you are investing in a custom piece. It is important that clients get exactly what they desire.
14. If there are drawers in the table, are they dovetailed? A good sign of a quality farm table is if the craftsman adds a dovetailed drawer in the apron of each handmade farm table. Also, ask if the front of the drawer is made from reclaimed wood like the tabletop.
15. How long has the furniture maker been on the table making business? Anyone can place a couple of boards on top of 4 legs and call it a ‘farm table’. It takes years to learn all the nuances of how to do it correctly. Beware that if table making is the person’s sideline, they may be ‘here today gone tomorrow’. Make sure furniture making is the craftsman’s full time passion and don’t be afraid to ask for references.
16. Does the furniture maker have a “buy back consignment” policy? If you move and cannot take the piece with you, a custom furniture maker may be able to sell it for you.
17. Do the boards for the tabletop match? Do they come from the same tree? Are they the same species? Were they reclaimed from the same building and/or floor? May you choose your own boards? If they do match, it means the maker took the time to ensure the uniform look of the table. Boards should be chosen with an artistic eye making sure they are symmetrical with a similar age-worn character from the same reclaimed building.
18. Know where tool marks should and should not appear. All modern day tool marks made by the craftsman in the construction of the table, like the circular saw blade and jointer marks*, should be removed with a hand plane* at the same time leaving some of the tool marks from 200 years ago. If these clues to the age of the wood are preserved, it will always be possible to date the antique boards.
19. Beware of a skinned* table top. When an old wood tabletop is sent through a wide belt sander*, the entire surface is removed making the table flat and even. This process cuts hours off the production time and a century or more off the face of the old wood tabletop leaving it flat, smooth and speechless. Ask the furniture maker if the table top has been processed in this manner.
20. Will the table appreciate in value? It takes an artisan with a track record to build a piece of furniture that appreciates in value over time. It also takes a company who has built a name for quality and artistry in the industry. Look at their website and go to their ‘news page’. Every time they have appeared in a significant publication, they gain credibility and value is added to their creations as more and more people begin to collect their work.
21. Unwanted guests? Will you be taking home more than just a table? Wood from old structures is often home to a variety of burrowing insects. One, in particular, is the powder post beetle*, which can go undetected at the time of purchase only to be noticed when a little pile of dust or frass* starts to accumulate under the table. The powder post beetle is so named due to its ability to turn a post to powder (often times a table leg will do nicely). Many builders treat the wood with an insecticide (not the best method on your “green” table); however, more often nothing will be done at all, allowing these little fellows to emerge and venture throughout your home looking for that choice timber, whether part of your home or another piece of furniture. The only way to rid the wood of these pests, as well as mold spores and other living creatures, is sustained levels of heat. Stated by Carolyn Klass, Senior Extension Associate, Cornell University, in her document called ‘Powder Post Beetles’ dated April 1986, she recommends a core temperature of 120 degrees Fahrenheit for 30 minutes. This is achievable through the use of a kiln or oven. Ask if the furniture you are considering has been protected from unwanted guests.
22. Was the table made in America by Americans?

Thanks to all authors for creating a page that has been read 6,112 times.