My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Historic Contexts Study and Phase II Inventory (Downtown Elk River) 2022
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
Boards and Commissions
>
Heritage Preservation Commission
>
HPC Documents
>
Inventory
>
Historic Contexts Study and Phase II Inventory (Downtown Elk River) 2022
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2025 1:13:53 PM
Creation date
7/23/2025 12:53:29 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
90
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Exhibit Station: 15 <br />Topic: Folk Construction Techniques in Sherburne County <br />Story: <br />Plank Construction <br />Some sort of frame provides structural support for most houses built of wood. The Fox <br />House is the only known example in Minnesota of a construction technique known as <br />"plank" construction. In most plank construction, there is no frame, and vertical planks <br />provide the structural support. <br />The term "plank" construction may have been used for the first time in 1639 in Salem <br />Massachusetts. Construction specifications for the Salem church called for it to be "covered <br />with 1 '/2 plank with board upon that to meet close." (As quoted in John Rempel, Building <br />with Wood, and Other Aspects of Nineteenth -Century Building in Central Canada, (Toronto: <br />University of Toronto Press, first edition, 1967, revised edition 1980, 174.) Plank <br />construction became popular in northeastern United States and in Canada, where it was <br />especially common in Quebec. The style was popularized in architectural pattern books as <br />late as 1887, when it was recommended for a three-room settler's cottage. The technique was <br />generally inexpensive and was used for tenant and farm homes in the South and West, and as <br />late as the 1940s, when it was used for temporary World War II structures. (Stephen B. <br />Jordan, "Houses Without Frames," Old House Journal, May -June 1993, 38; John Rempel, <br />Building with Wood, and Other Aspects of Nineteenth -Century Building in Central Canada, <br />(Toronto: University of Toronto Press, first edition, 1967, revised edition 1980, 174) <br />There were several different approaches to building plank homes. The earliest plank <br />structures started with a post and beam timber frame to which vertical planks were added to <br />create the walls. In these structures the large corner posts and beams bore the weight of the <br />roof. A later version of the plank house, which is now considered the true form of the plank <br />house, had wider planks and no vertical posts. The post -and -beam framing was eliminated, <br />and the vertical planks became load bearing, supporting the weight of the roof. (John <br />Rempel, Building with Wood, and Other Aspects of Nineteenth -Century Building in Central <br />Canada, (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, first edition, 1967, revised edition 1980, <br />175) <br />Depending on skill and resources, different builders took different approaches to building <br />load -bearing plank structures. The most skillful plank homebuilders grooved the sill and <br />fashioned a tenon on the ends of the vertical planks. The planks were slipped into the groove <br />and plank was butted against plank for a solid wall. Sometimes wooden pegs driven through <br />the sill and planks secured the planks in place. A second approach, almost as skilled, was to <br />cut a rabbet, or an L-shaped cut, on the edge of the sill timber. The end of the plank was slid <br />onto the ledge created by the rabbet and nailed or pegged in place. In both of these <br />approaches, the plank was held securely top and bottom, and the entire load of the structure <br />sat on the sill timber. <br />Sherburne County Historical Society Heritage Center Interpretive Plan, April 21, 2005, page 97 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.