Building owners are usually reluctant trying new construction materials unless they are adventurous or very knowledgeable. Mark Bessire, a director of the Portland Museum of Art, seems intent on promoting mass timber, a relatively new technology in the U.S., for the proposed PMA addition (“Commentary: Mass timber makes sense for new building in Maine,” June 16). No mass timber manufacturing exists in Maine, so transport of materials (from where?) will cost the project in dollars and carbon. Bessire acknowledges that this adventure would be a first for a U.S. museum. Unforeseen problems could result. Early mass timber buildings were unexpectedly noisy, requiring materials over wood surfaces to reduce distracting noise.

Mass timber has good sustainability properties, but arguably not more than repurposing existing buildings. The most sustainable building (lowest in carbon) is the one not built. Within Portland’s historical district, demolishing buildings on site and boring a large hole in the Payson Building, neither comports with preservation nor sustainability.

I understood that the PMA’s growing collection was the driving need for this project. Yet there was no mention of the addition’s attributes to display the collection. Do the glass walls admitting abundant sunlight (glare, heat) enhance art exhibitions? And a rooftop sculpture garden shared with seagulls? What do Maine artists think?

Perhaps Mr. Bessire will assure the art community that the LEVER addition is the best solution for the PMA collection – as well as a trial balloon for mass timber in Maine.

Robert Kahn
Portland

Copy the Story Link

« Previous

Letter to the editor: Consider gun background checks as suicide-prevention tool

Next »

Letter to the editor: Andrew Zarro for mayor of Portland