The Portland Museum of Art, of which I am a member, wants to expand in order to transform programming and increase attendance. No problem.

The museum chooses to expand by forcing a bad plan on the city. Now there’s trouble.

The museum has plenty of vacant land on which to build. Forget that. The bad plan before city boards is the work of Portland Museum of Art leadership and LEVER Architecture of Portland, Oregon. Ignoring the vacant land, ignoring the fact Maine’s Portland Museum of Art exists in the Congress Street historic district, the museum proposes tearing down the former Children’s Museum; radically altering the landmark Payson Building; closing the existence entrance from Congress Square; cutting a tunnel through the Payson Building to a new entrance facing High Street, the better to lead into a sparkling addition designed by LEVER.

Destroying 142 Free Street and trashing the Payson Building smacks of contempt for history, contempt for context, contempt for local ordinances.

As step one of the bad plan, PMA insists the city should reclassify the former Children’s Museum at 142 Free Street as non-contributing to the historic district – a non-starter. Declared “contributing” based on its intact transformation between 1926 and 1927 for the Chamber of Commerce by John Calvin Stevens, its temple-front elevation continues to grace Congress Square.

Perhaps because there is no legitimate case for reclassifying 142 Free Street, the PMA has fabricated a novel charge to make this building seem unworthy to exist. The slur: that 142 Free Street embodies racism.

“142 Free Street’s current façade,” museum leadership has stated, “was erected during the Jim Crow era. Our region is one that is striving to become more inclusive, dynamic, and diverse … and some architectural styles can carry unfortunate legacies of the past into the future.”

Where’s the proof? Half the historic buildings in Portland date to the Jim Crow era. What is their future – what future for historic preservation in the city – if the museum critique prevails? Or is it just Classical Revival buildings that carry “unfortunate legacies of the past”? By the PMA’s logic, the U.S. Supreme Court should be demolished. So too the museum’s Charles Clapp House on Spring Street.

The charge against 142 Free Street is not only fiction; it is hypocritical. The PMA has failed to acknowledge its own racist past. The museum’s elegant Sweat Memorial Galleries honor L.M.D. Sweat. Congressman Sweat voted against repealing the Fugitive Slave Law and against ending slavery through the 13th Amendment.

Although irrelevant to proposed reclassification of 142 Free Street, the present PMA submissions to city boards trumpet the glass and timber addition proposed by LEVER Architecture, claiming that, through it, the museum “will forever change Maine and New England. We will redefine our region, unite our communities, and sustain our economy for generations to come.”

This is a laughable overreach. Hype aside, whatever could be achieved in terms of “art for all,” or boosting the economy through the LEVER design, could be accomplished through a different plan. None of the benefits ascribed to the musuem’s proposal are particular to it. They certainly could be achieved without diminishing the fabric of the Congress Street Historic District.

Although the PMA professes commitment to community values, it fails to acknowledge the museum stands at the center of a historic district valued by the community. Historic preservation has been key to Portland’s revival. It is incorporated into the city’s comprehensive plan. In assessing new construction here, context should be critical. Henry Cobb’s award-winning Payson Building is a masterpiece of contextualism, yet modern. LEVER Architecture’s context-be-damned proposal would fit Oregon better than Maine.

Copy the Story Link