Ed,

From what I understand, it's a liability thing—as long as there's construction going on, the township needs to have the fence up for safety reasons.

The Situation brings it.... Remove the fence, if little Johnny steps on a nail, give him a tetanus shot and the parents should have been more careful. To me, the fence reeks of, we spent our time and our money for this barn so we will control who uses it and for what purpose.

What's next, special permit regulations for those that wish to visit the shack?

Hey Dudley if your going to try and break someones stones at least get your comments right. The shingle are not asphalt, they are a specially-engineered composite roofing shingle to look like real slate but are cheaper and lighter than real slate. If you don't like them keep your eyes on the road where they should be when driving by the site!

Ed,
I agree with Dudley, it looks more like an asphalt shingle roof then a slate roof. Also, I question, whether a structure like that would have originally had a slate roof. Slate was expensive even in the early 1800's. My guess is either wood shingle or thatch would have be accurate for a structure like that. Is there research to support a fake slate roof in lieu of wood or thatch?

Neither asphalt or fake rubber slate are historical which begs the question what is
is stopping Dudley and me from putting up the vinyl siding and a nice steel door to finish the job? Well, except we will need to get the key to unlock the gate on our land.....

Hey Steve did you see what was on there for years? LOL It was slate. So I would say they are historically correct by putting a like material back on the roof. From what I understand it may not have even been a barn or shed either. I don't know for sure. Slate that far back in the day was a common material used because it lasted so long. They didn't have asphalt shingles 200 years ago, so it was either slate, cedars, or tin. Thatch now that's funny.... I think your going a little to far back like to Little House on the Perry to far! LOL The reason fake slate is used on historical renovations is because it is much cheaper and I'm telling you I could line a pile of it up side by side and from a distance of 30 ft. you would have trouble telling the difference. People just don't like the color choice they made. It is not a uniform color which was common because it was cheaper back then compared to paying for all one color slate. Ask Larry, they saw it up close when they took it off. they can tell you if it was a low grade slate which may explain why a farmer put it on an out building. Who knows I wasn't around back then but they are historically correct.

Thanks Ed,
I didn't realize there was a quarry that close by to warrant a farmer to travel to it when cedar and pine would have more plentiful closer to the site. They may not have had asphalt shingles back then; they also didn't have trucks and paved roads to get a heavy material like slate easily to what I imagine would have been a fairly secluded area back in the day. I defer to your expertise on this subject.

Well Steve how old is the building, they obviously had the slate back then because it was on the building to start with. So wouldn't putting slate back make sense. You are equating historical to as far back as our country was founded. Well I doubt that building is that old. Historical is 100 years or so. Not sure what the historical society deems, but make sense right. So 100 years ago do you think that slate was more available. I would think so with all the homes in this town with a plaque on them and slate for roofs. Bringing up unpaved roads and limited availability because we are in the stone age is no argument. As I said earlier we're not talking Little House in the Prairie. The material was obviously readily available considering there are so many houses in this town with slate. Once again .... just saying!

Rob, I think I can explain....the relative anonymity of the internet and the ability to virtually hide behind that anonymity to make comments is both a very unconstrained yet sometimes volatile combination. The way I see it is that we get to see how people really think about it as opposed to in person communication where the vast majority of thoughts remain unsaid.

I believe some of it also stems from venting frustration (no matter how misdirected) on how this town manages and spends money on projects. I say that fully realizing the "town" monetary input for this project has been minimal, but the frustration and more specifically, the opportunity to vent that frustration continues to bubble to the surface.

Boy, I certainly didn't think that a common sense comment that I made would start all this! Rob, it's really simple. I am a small business owner and I would never pay for something that was not needed that took from my bottom line. Meaning take the food from my family, the car insurance, ect. The same should go for the township. I realize this line item on the township's bottom line is very small, but it is still money not needed to be spent anymore. Paying for this fence that is now no longer needed because the site has been made safe and there are requests to get access to the site at this point is why I pointed out that the fence should come down. Waiting for barn doors should not equate to the building is still under construction. I have no issue with the historical society, I think they have done a good job. I know the shingles are a issue but the are historically correct. Lets face it people the charm of the barn was it's run down condition. Old but not fallen, hole in the roof, covered in snow! That was it's charm. A old barn made new is not going to have the same effect. It is what it is, it had to be done or torn down. We didn't have a choice. People need to lay off the roof. Be happy the historical society was willing to take on the project. Now let's get the township to remove the fence and let the people that want to enjoy it do so. Just saying!

Not up to Mr. Button! Call the township manager!

:)