The Oregon State Capitol was designed by the New York architectural firm of Trowbridge and Livingston in association with Francis Keally and completed in 1938. Erected in the Modernistic style, the Capitol was sensitively enlarged in 1977 by the Portland firm of Wolff Zimmer Gunsul Frasca in association with Pietro Belluschi. Constructed of reinforced concrete, the building is distinguished by angular, unadorned exterior elevations and a massive, ribbed lantern all sheathed in brilliant white Vermont marble.
In 2008, as part of the team creating a new Master Plan for the Capitol, PMA conducted a full exterior condition assessment of both the main building and east and west wings. On Labor Day 2008, an exterior fire damaged the Vermont marble and Oregon walnut interior panels adorning the Governor’s Ceremonial Suite. PMA was retained to guide the faithful restoration of this important Oregon icon.
Due to the third fire in the Oregon State Capitol’s history, the Governor’s Ceremonial Suite required complete restoration and renovation. PMA provided restoration documents for the repair and replacement of exterior marble, repair of interior walnut paneling, reinstallation of linoleum flooring, reintroduction of historic carpet, integration of preservation of historic materials, and the repair of plaster ceiling and walls. Additionally, PMA provided guidance to the conservationists repairing the WPA painting, which was also damaged. All restoration work was based on historic research and field analysis of existing materials.
Tag Archives: preservation
Towards a Death of Architecture
Buildings are physical representations of the social, economic, political, technological, and cultural climates of their eras of origin. Ultimately buildings represent our cultural heritage and our architectural history. However, mid-century modern era buildings are increasingly interpreted as antiquated architecture that is functionally obsolete and lacking use in today’s society. Our recent-past modern buildings are being labeled as “failed” or “useless” architecture. As a result, mid-century modern architecture is rapidly being demolished and replaced with newer sustainable structures believed to better represent our most current social and cultural ideals. Current architecture is believed to be far more aesthetically pleasing than their modern predecessors.
But in the context of society, including heritage, what constitutes “useful” architecture verses useless building? There must be a relationship of parts to complete the building, but structure and function alone do not equate to architecture. Perhaps “useful” should be a term connected to architecture exhibiting enduring design excellence? Paradoxically, design excellence is tangled with style, and history demonstrates that style preference is ephemeral, subjective, and fluxuates at a high velocity. Yet the loss of style preference, or the falling out of design aesthetics favor, is one of the biggest rationale for the demolition of modern era buildings. Presently, Brutalism is at the crux of the demolition/ preservation debate.
Framed in the context of history, it can only follow that Brutalist buildings were going to be executed as formal monumental concrete structures that directly juxtapose (even challenge) their environments. But more often than not, the perspective of historic context is outnumbered by present aesthetic preference. For example, Prentice Women’s Hospital (Bertrand Goldberg) in Chicago, the Berkeley Art Museum (Mario Ciampi) in California, and several of Paul Rudolph’s brute beauties were technological and architectural triumphs of their time. However, the Brutalist buildings like other modern era buildings that rate low on the aesthetic-scale have been equally disregarded in their maintenance. The argument for demolition based on deficiencies caused by a lack of maintenance becomes all too convenient. The wide-spread demise of brutalist civic and urban buildings is a demise of the ideologies behind the intent of the architecture and those housed within.
Aesthetics cannot be the pretext for significance or the preservation of architecture. Letting aesthetics judge value will strip our architectural history of some of the most influential and innovated examples of modern era architecture. In effect, we are killing, and ultimately denying claim to, a portion of our architectural history. There is value in the perspective of context and value in re-using and re-imagining modern era architecture. If aesthetic preference continues to get in the way, what use is there for the architect or an architectural legacy?
Written by Kate Kearney, Marketing Coordinator
Preserving an Icon
Under the leadership of the Pittock Mansion Society, Portland Parks & Recreation, and hundreds of volunteers, the venerable Pittock Mansion is undergoing the first phase of preservation activities in anticipation of the Mansion’s Centennial celebration. Built for Henry Pittock, an Oregon pioneer, newspaper editor, publisher, and wood and paper magnate, “the Pittock Mansion occupies a place of special importance for Portland. It is a City of Portland Historic Landmark, a State of Oregon Landmark, and a national landmark listed in the National Register of Historic Places. The City of Portland owns many historic landmark properties, but Pittock Mansion is the only [property] operated as a historic museum [within] the city parks system.” (Historic Structures Report, 1st Edition, A Staehli, 1984)
After successfully raising funds, and with City Council approval of additional funding, the Pittock Mansion is repairing the exterior terraces with new waterproofing membranes, new sandstone replacing inappropriate concrete castings, and structurally reinforcing the baluster railings so that all the brides and grooms, admirers, and visitors, can once again perch and pose with the vista of Portland and Mt. Hood as the splendor of Pittock Mansion is in front of them.
“Pittock Mansion was design in 1909 by Edward T. Foulkes and took five years to complete. Georgiana Pittock, wife of Henry, died in 1918, having lived in the house for only four years. Despite its prominent site, imposing French Renaissances exterior, formal rooms and parlors, and impressive central hall with a grand stairway, Pittock Mansion was fundamentally a home for a family with modest tastes having lived most of their lives in undistinguished Victorian houses in downtown Portland.” (Historic Structures Report, 1st Edition, A Staehli, 1984)
Original stone quarries are no longer operational, so an exhaustive search for replacement stone was conducted finalizing in a selection of stone from Idaho closely matching color and texture of the original. Local and regional craftsman are again involved in the careful dismantling, numbering, cleaning, fabrication, and re-installation of the stone details. New terrace tile, selected to better match the variegated colored clay tile roof, will be installed with a new waterproof membrane and improved flashing details. The original glass “sidewalk” purple lights that admit light into the basement will remain for all to enjoy.
There is still much work to be done. The Pittock Mansion Society has identified the top priority projects ranging from the practical structural and electrical work to additional programming and preservation projects. The Centennial celebration will be a grand formal affair, fitting for such a magnificent and unique cultural icon within the City of Portland’s stewardship.
Written by, Peter Meijer AIA,NCARB, Principal
Preserving the Modern in St. Louis
St. Louis, MO is home to several architectural gems from the mid-century modern era. The city recently conducted a property survey of over 2,000 non-residential buildings constructed between 1945 and 1970. The Cultural Resource Office of St. Louis is highlighting a selective survey & inventory of 200 significant properties with input from PMA and the public to help develope a master list of 25 of the most significant mid-century modern masterpieces. Surveying these architecturally significant structures gives a voice to a past era that still directly influences today. St. Louis’s built heritage from the mid-century modern era showcases structures from internationally recognized architects that revolutionized architecture and design throughout the 20th century.
A Legacy of Modern Architectural Design
The post-World War II era in the United States led to the development of the Modern Movement Architecture across urban areas. Contributing factors of this development included the impact of the auto industry on the built environment, a more cost-conscious public and government, and several technological advances. In addition to these factors, St. Louis was home to the prestigious school of architecture at Washington University. The school had diverse and international students and teachers that contributed to some of the most prolific designs of modern architecture.
When discussing St. Louis mid-century modern architectural design three architects stand out: W.A. Sarmiento, Gyo Obata, and Minoru Yamasaki. Their designs were sleek, yet whimsical, and made St. Louis globally recognized for its modern architectural designs.
W.A. Sarmiento is an internationally regarded architect who designed some of the most prolific buildings in the city of St. Louis. A native of Peru, Sarmiento began as a draftsman for Oscar Niemeyer. In 1952 he accepted a position with the Bank Building & Equipment Corporation. From 1952 through 1964, Sarmiento revolutionized the design and function of banking facilities. Ten years after working for the Bank Building & Equipment Corporation, Sarmiento left after J.B. Gander’s death and formed his own company. W.A. Sarmiento Architects expanded to included offices in St. Louis, Phoenix, and San Francisco. Sarmiento closed his practice in 1978 and left behind a legacy of modern architectural design including the saved American Automobile Association (AAA) Building (1976), the Chancery of the Archdiocese of St. Louis (1962), and the Jefferson Bank and Trust Building (1955).
The St. Louis Science Center James S. McDonnell Planetarium (1963), was designed by the local firm of Hellmuth, Obata, & Kassabaum (HOK), with Obata as lead designer. HOK was founded in 1955, and to this day is a global leader in architectural design. The practice began by designing schools in suburbs of St. Louis, and by the 1960s it a grown and began to open offices nationally, with their first international branch opening in 1984. Obata was the lead designer of the Saint Louis Science Center along with other notable St. Louis buildings. The building has a visually striking and expressive shape, somewhat reminiscent of a nuclear power plant tower. It is a thin concrete shell structure, hyperboloid in section. This architectural design is a premiere example of continuous contemporary design.
Minoru Yamasaki’s domed design for Lambert’s main terminal became the forerunner of modern terminal building plans. In 1951, the firm of Hellmuth, Yamasaki, and Leinweber was commissioned to design and update the Lambert- St. Louis Municipal Airport. In 1956, their design was the first building in St. Louis to receive a National AIA Honor award. This building was originally composed of three vaults, with a forth added in 1965. Yamasaki’s design became a model for a new generation of airport terminals. Eero Saarinen’s designs for the TWA terminal at John F. Kennedy Airport in New York, and the Dulles Washington Airport terminal both echo the repetitive concrete vaults of Lambert St. Louis Municipal Airport.
For more information about this exciting project, including a list of buildings for intensive research, mid-century modern properties, city map with property locations, and property descriptions. Visit: Mid-Century Modern Survey
Written by Kate Kearney, Marketing Coordinator
Historic Preservation and New Construction in Historic Districts
Historic Districts are not frozen in time.
Ideally, Districts are busy, vital places where people live, work, socialize, and see community values reflected. Typically, buildings contribute to a district and share common characteristics becoming more historically valuable as a group than as individual properties. If we create, restore, and invest in Historic Districts, the Districts will continue to tell a story about a particular time period, a particular community, or perhaps a particular industry. So is new construction appropriate within a Historic District, and if so, how does one properly design and integrate the new building within the existing historic context? This posting will explore some factors and opinions on new construction in Historic Districts.
Some individuals argue that appropriate infill must be visually identical to nearby historic resources. Most architects in practice today have a condescending reaction against recreating previous styles as making “faux” or “Disneyland” architecture, even though western architecture for hundreds of years has recycled various stylistic revivals. It is not an absurd concept to design and build beautiful, high-quality buildings that reflect an older style and method of construction. Other individuals have no trouble placing a contemporary structure next to older structures, since modern buildings have a responsibility to reflect our shared culture and lifestyle.
Neither of these absolutes works for most situations. New buildings, as stated in the Secretary of the Interior Standards, do need to be “differentiated” from contributing buildings in a District to avoid a false sense of history. The question is how much differentiation is required? Though there are cases where a “missing tooth” in a very cohesive pattern of buildings should be constructed to resemble its historic neighbors, in other cases the visual diversity of architectural styles and periods within a District allows for more flexibility in differentiating new buildings. Historic Districts are listed on the National Register because they possess a concentration of buildings that are linked either historically, aesthetically, or both. One Historic District might represent a fairly large span of time, various architectural types and styles, and a number of different uses. Another District might be much more specific in its focus.
As Preservationists and Architects, we need to analyze the characteristics and contexts that are the same and the characteristics and contexts that are different about the resources within the District. Each case is unique and site-dependent. It is possible to allow for stylistic additions and change without showcasing the change; to temper the inclination to design an individually iconic building; and to limit a modern “intrusion” so as to respect and highlight the older buildings. Good design, high-quality detailing, and high quality materials contribute towards compatibility, and adaptive reuse and change is inevitable to the vitality of a Historic District.
Each jurisdiction having authority makes its own interpretation of what it means to be compatible. One recent example is an approval by the Historic Resources Commission (HRC) in Corvallis, Oregon. The Corvallis HRC approved a design for a freestanding metal and glass canopy in the heart of the national registered Oregon State University Historic District. The HRC concluded that there was no historic precedent for a freestanding non-building element, but found that the canopy was visually light and well-designed and fit into the open space pattern of development without detracting from the neighboring Contributing resources. The role of the historic consultant in this case was to construct an argument as to why the canopy was compatible in the District, and push back against earlier suggestions that the canopy become more “building-like” with masonry columns. An open structure with a veneer of building material would have created a less compatible design.
Each proposal for new construction in a Historic District should be informed by its context. There is latitude for new construction to be distinct, as long as the new work does not detract from the surrounding historic resources.
Written by Kristen Minor, Preservation Planner
Super-Sized Historic Structures: A Preservation Dilemma
The Blimp Hangar, Naval Air Station Tillamook
Without considerable effort, the Guinness Book of World Records’ largest wooden structure, and the most extant naval air station from World War II is endanger of disappearing.
Commissioned in 1942 and operational through 1949, the Naval Air Station Tillamook (NAS) is a 1,600 acre site comprised of buildings, structures, landscape features, as well as a current active runway. A smaller 400 acre site has been designated an eligible historic district. The original use by the NAS Tillamook contained 32 defense, eight industrial, five government, four transportation, three commercial, three agricultural, three residential, two recreation and culture, one education, and one utilitarian structures, plus one cemetery. The most significant structures include the airfield, Hangars A & B, ammunition magazines, and structures that supported the operation of the Naval Air Station. Many of the buildings may be the only remaining example of their kind. Much of the site is still operational: the roads, sidewalks, water power sewer and utility lines, as well as the railroad infrastructure were constructed by the US Navy remain on site and are character defining features.
Hangars A & B were built for “K type” dirigibles that are steerable, non-rigid, lighter than air aircraft used for naval air patrol of enemy submarines. During World War II, the hangars served as mooring and maintenance sites for two squadrons of dirigibles that patrolled the coast line from the Strait of Juan de Fuca to California. A fire in 1992 destroyed Hangar A. The remaining U.S. Naval Air Station Dirigible Hangar B, is the world’s largest wooden clear-span structure measuring ¼ mile long and 23 stories in height. Its construction technique is considered both resourceful for war time efforts and an innovative structural solution. Incredibly, the hangar was completed in just 90 days.
Hangar B reflects the unique challenges associated with super-sized historic properties. Monumental historic properties pose significant management, maintenance, and financial challenges to the long-term stewardship of such properties. Aging infrastructure, 70 or more years of service-life, and limited lease markets for using enormous structures increasingly place pressures on the decisions to retain the resources. Despite the desire to be good stewards, large properties rarely generate sufficient funding to go beyond very basic emergency and/or minor piece meal repairs. Straight forward maintenance items, like new roofing or painting, can cost several million dollars.
Creative, multi-jurisdictional, community involvement, private / public partnerships, government programs, and national and international marketing campaigns have become key elements to long range cultural resource management plans. The unique structures require innovative solutions matching the monumental character and commanding presence. Success stories abound from the saving of West Baden Springs Hotel in French Lick, Indiana to Centennial Hall in Wroclaw, Poland. The efforts to retain the giant structures are well deserved, because the continued loss of such buildings diminishes our understanding of world events.
To learn more about PMA’s experience at the Port of Tillamook Bay, please visit: PMA + PoTB
Written by Peter Meijer AIA, NCARB, Principal
Conservation: A Case Study between Art and Architecture
The Oregon State Capitol
The Oregon State Capitol is a landmark of Modernistic design based on Classical Architecture, and was designed by the New York architectural firm of Trowbridge and Livingston in association with Francis Keally. Completed at the height of the Depression in 1938, the Capitol received funding assistance from the Federal Emergency Administration of Public Works (P.W.A.). Constructed of reinforced concrete, the building is distinguished by angular, unadorned exterior elevations and a massive, ribbed lantern – all sheathed in brilliant white Vermont marble. Artists of national reputation, Ulric Ellerhusen, Leo Friedlander, Barry Faulkner, and Franck Schwarz, collaborated in the winning design and were employed at the recommendation of the architects to produce sculptural relief and paintings of a taut and finely wrought decorative program. Erected in the Modernistic style, the Capitol was sensitively enlarged in 1977 by the Portland firm of Wolff Zimmer Gunsul Frasca in association with Pietro Belluschi.
On Labor Day 2008, a construction fire damaged the exterior Vermont marble, interior Oregon walnut wood panels and a painting by Barry Faulkner adorning the Governor’s Ceremonial Suite. A team of preservation architects and art conservators collaborated to guide the faithful restoration of this important Oregon icon. All restoration work was based on historic research and field analysis of existing materials, but conservation principles were applied differently to the restoration of interior finishes compared to The State of Oregon artwork by Barry Faulkner.
Fire destroyed all the wood panels on the south wall and caused extensive smoke and heat damage on the east and west walls. The north wall suffered minor smoke damage with little to no impact from heat. Oregon Walnut, a species of wood no longer readily available or milled, was incorporated into 30” x 30” veneer panels separated by 1” wide solid walnut splines. Each panel was book matched resulting in pairs of cathedrals providing strong visual character. It was determined through both field and laboratory testing that the original finish system was a shellac formula readily used during the late 1930s. Conservation strategies had to consider: proper dismantling techniques of the remaining panels; reproduction of original finishes using volatile compounds or the replacement with new finishes; repair options for the various degrees of damage to the wood panels, incorporation of new replacement panels, and anticipate potential similar catastrophic events in the future.
The remaining panels were measured, documented and classified by the extent of damage. Drawings were produced that recorded each panels’ location relative to the adjacent panel and position on the wall and compass orientation. It was determined that each panel and spline were individually blind nailed to a wood lath support grid which was in turn directly fastened to a back-up clay tile wall. Remaining panel construction from the south wall provided evidence of the construction techniques. As a result, it was determined to the remove the panels in an assembly as large as practical for transportation to a controlled restoration shop environment. At the shop, a more thorough, up-close evaluation of the damage was surveyed. During review of the restoration options, discussion ensued over the incorporation of pre-existing conditions, post fire damage, to include evidence of repair, or should all the panels have a uniform appearance.
After considering the impossibility of achieving uniformity with new panels and cleaned and repaired panels, it was decided to remove all finishes, including the protective shellac, by sanding to bare wood. Following the removal process, each panel was stained to match a patina color visible on a panel protected from damage. The final clear coat was a catalyzed finish formulated to provide long-term protection.
To further embellish the Governor’s Suite, a map of the State of Oregon was painted by Barry Faulkner, signed and dated in 1938. The work was framed within the wood paneling over the marble mantel on the ¬East end of the Governor’s Suite. Faulkner painted the work in oil on canvas that was subsequently marouflaged to a section of the wall. This section of the wall was clearly part of the original design of the room and was reserved and prepared especially for the painting. As was customary in New Deal era murals, Faulkner’s work was painted on canvas off site and then adhered to the wall when the construction process was advanced or complete. Also quite typical of New Deal murals was the use of a lead paste adhesive for the marouflage, which was suggested in the later W.P.A project guidelines to the artists. The presence of the lead paste adhesive proved to be decisive in the formulation of a method for the deinstallation of the piece. The tenacity of the adhesion of the canvas back to the plaster via the lead paste is such that separation of the canvas from the plaster was impossible, and so the entire section of wall needed to be removed intact for the conservation treatment. The section of wood framing was carefully removed from the clay tile wall substrate by severing the nails that fastened the wood to the tile, and cutting the vertical studs above and below the work. Special precautions were made to protect the fragile paint surface during transport of the work to the conservation lab.
The fire’s effects caused extreme heat damage to the painting primarily in the upper and right areas of the composition, with numerous areas of blistered paint, and many sections of blistered delamination of the canvas from the substrate plaster. The combustible by-products of the fire combined with embedded soot and smoke created a deposited layer of darkened material that obscured the image. The solubility testing results were consistent with the combustible origin of the fire, and a solution of organic solvents was used to remove the deposited surface material, revealing the original chromatic palette of the work. It also became evident that the painting had been cleaned in a previous treatment. The fragile areas of heat-blistered paint were consolidated and smoothed. The areas of blistered delamination were brought back into plane with localized use of humidity and mild head and then, once smoothed into place, were adhered to the substrate plaster. The large blister in the upper right corner of the painting protruded 1 ½” from the plaster surface. Areas of loss were filled, textured and retouched to match the original surface and color. A protective layer of varnish was applied to the painting.
The exposed finish plaster surrounding the painting was also cleaned with dry sponges, consolidated and filled. Some original pencil drawings by the artist were found on the plaster that had been hidden under the paneled frame.
The most extreme heat damaged areas were irreversibly altered in both their color and texture, and the full extent of the color shift was not revealed until after the cleaning process. In these darkened areas, Gamblin conservation colors were applied over the varnish layer to retouch the creamy yellow ground color only, leaving the darkened red color of the letters in THE STATE OF OREGON untouched. This manner of retouching allowed the painting to acquire a more finished appearance in line with the decisions made regarding the restoration of the wood paneling, while conserving also the memory of the history of the piece.
Written by Peter Meijer AIA, NCARB, Principal. A special thanks to Nina Olsson, Nina Olsson Art Conservation, LLC, who helped write this post in conjunction with Peter Meijer. Nina Olsson Art Conservation , LLC is a private practice for the conservation of paintings and polychrome sculpture based in Portland, Oregon.
More than Decorative: Portland’s U.S. Custom House Symbols
The second-half of the nineteenth-century was a prosperous time for architectural development in Oregon. This period saw the establishment of professional architects in Oregon, allowing the state to be comparable with eastern architectural development of the same era in the United States. Portland was the center of economic growth and abundance in Oregon, and the U.S. Custom House was built to promote and accommodate Portland’s economic prosperity. Originally U.S. Customs Services was housed in one of Oregon’s earliest public buildings, the Pioneer Courthouse, which was constructed in stages between 1869 and 1903. However, the U.S. Customs Services quickly outgrew this building, and by 1898 construction began on the present U.S. Custom House. (Ross, Marion D., “Architecture in Oregon, 1845-1895,” Oregon Historical Quarterly 57 (1956) 32-64.)
The present U.S. Custom House is a testament to the Italian Renaissance Revival style, popular in the late nineteenth-century architectural vernacular of Oregon. The building was designed in the office of James Knox Taylor, Supervising Architect of the U.S. Treasury Department, and supervised under noted Portland architect Edgar Lazarus. Portland’s U.S. Custom House is a symmetrical four-story building, H-shaped in plan, and encompasses a full city block. Joint efforts by Taylor and Lazarus resulted in a fusion of style that references Renaissance, Mannerist, and Baroque features that are showcased on the exterior and interior of the building. (GSA. U.S. General Services Administration, U.S. Custom House, Portland, OR
This fusion of style begins on the first-story walls which are composed of brick masonry enclosed in light-gray granite, with window and door openings that feature semicircular arches. The first and second floors are separated by a balustrade and a granite stringcourse carved with Vitruvian scroll details. The two upper stories are composed of Roman brick and use terra-cotta to display dentil cornice molding and scrolled consoles detailing. The most distinctive Italian Renaissance Revival style is found in the architectural ornamentation of the exterior fenestration, and is most prominently featured around the second and third-story windows. (GSA. U.S. General Services Administration, U.S. Custom House, Portland, OR
Allegorical Symbols
The architectural ornamentation or “Gibbs-surround” of the second and third story windows of Portland’s Custom House borrow directly from Italian Palazzos and include several allegorical symbols: a key and a balance, a symbol of the God of Mercury, a hand with two extended fingers, a laurel wreath, a palm branch, and a flaming torch. At the time of completion the Oregonian ran an article that focused on the obscure nature of these allegorical symbols. Lazarus was questioned on the purpose of the symbols, and he commented on how the allegorical symbols held no significance except for their use as decorations. In agreement with the author of the 1901 article in The Morning Oregonian, “Merely Allegorical and Without Special Significance,” it does not follow that a building in the Italian Renaissance Revival style would showcase allegorical symbols solely for their ornamentation. Allegorical ornamentation is purposeful, with every symbol representing to the public a function or aspect of the intended purposes of the building on which they are represented. (“Custom-House Symbols. Merely Allegorical and Without Special Significance,” The Morning Oregonian, Aug 5, 1901, 5. NewsBank and/or the American Antiquarian Society. 2004.)
The balance is the most recognizable symbol, symbolizing justice. It follows that since the U.S. Custom House was built for the U.S. Custom Services, which played a significant role in the economic growth of the area, architectural ornamentation of the symbol of justice would be included. This symbol tells the audience that all services by its governing body will be conducted justly. The key is borrowed from a Christian symbol which references the bureaucratic nature of Saint Peter’s ability to grant or withhold salvation. This symbol was common in architectural ornamentation in the sixteenth-century, when politics and religion were heavily and most complicatedly intertwined. Perhaps the keys are meant to remind those within to repent, but more likely serve as an emblem of time and removers of obstacles- which are also emblems of the Roman God Janis.
Two other classical symbols are those of the God of Mercury and the flaming torch. The God of Mercury is represented by a staff with serpents entwined. While the symbol of the God of Mercury is often noted as a representation of speed, it is also a representation of opportunity and commerce, which is fitting for its inclusion among the architectural ornamentation of the building. The flaming torch is often related to the God of Eros, who is commonly depicted with bow and arrow and a flaming torch. However, the flaming torch represented on the U.S. Custom House building is more likely an emblem of both enlightenment and hope, similar to the function of the flaming torch in the hand of Lady Liberty. The final two symbols are the palm branch and the laurel wreath, both of which represent victory and glory.
Portland’s U.S. Custom House is unquestionably one of Portland’s finest historic structures. It is an exquisite display of the Italian Renaissance Revival style of architecture with a symmetrical organization, use of terra-cotta, Roman brick, and granite materials, classically engaged Doric, Iconic, and Corinthian Columns, and displays of richly detailed architectural ornamentation found throughout the Gibbs-Surround. While it has been said the allegorical symbolic ornamentation used on U.S. Custom House is without significance and merely decorative, the explanation of each symbol has led to the credible reason for the inclusion of all these symbols. For the architecture of Portland’s U.S. Custom House is in the Italian Renaissance style, a style that uses symbolic ornamentation to signify both emotion and reason.
Written by Kate Kearney, Marketing Coordinator
Surveying Modern Resources in Portland’s Central City
“Modern” is not traditionally part of a historic preservationist’s vocabulary, but as time rolls on, modern resources have become notable for their architectural significance, construction technologies, and association with significant social patterns that define national, state, and local history.
During Summer 2011, Peter Meijer Architect, PC (PMA) performed a reconnaissance level survey of modern historic resources in Portland’s Central City. The work was completed for the City of Portland Bureau of Planning and Sustainability to dovetail with the Bureau’s Central City 2035 Plan. For this survey the modern period is defined as 1945-1985, beginning with Post-World War II development and ending when all Modern era properties will be at least fifty-years in age when the Central City plan is fully realized in 2035.
Many of Portland’s iconic landmark buildings are modern era resources, such as the Veterans Memorial Coliseum, Lloyd Center Mall, U.S. Bancorp tower, and the Portland Building. The survey intentionally excludes these well-known properties in order to highlight broader architectural patterns and identify some of the less prominent buildings that may be considered historically significant in the future.
Of approximately 976 modern period resources within the Central City’s seven geographic clusters, PMA selected 152 properties for reconnaissance level survey. Representation of geographic clusters, resource typologies, and potential eligibility were considered when selecting properties to survey. In a selective survey, most properties should be considered potentially eligible for historic designation. Online maps, tax assessor information, and Google Earth were used to inform the selection process. Fieldwork involved taking photographs of each property, recording the resource type, cladding materials, style, height, plan type, and auxiliary resources, and then making a preliminary determination of National Register eligibility based on age, integrity, and historic character-defining features. A final report outlines the project and findings, and survey data was added to the Oregon Historic Sites database.
Mod-toids: Some interesting modern survey findings:
• Glass and metal curtain wall, roman brick, and various treatments of concrete (block, poured, panels are the most common exterior materials found on Modern Period buildings.
• No single-family residential units were constructed in the Central City during the modern period.
• Small industrial buildings, including warehouses and service bay resources, are found in every cluster of the Central City. These building types have highly adaptable plan types and their size, character, and location make them ripe opportunities for redevelopment as industrial needs change.
• Modern period transportation developments, such as freeways and bridges, have greatly impacted the Central City urban landscape. Many of the Central City clusters are geographically defined by transportation developments. Larger modern resource types tend to be more concentrated near freeways and freeway entrances.
Written by PMA preservation staff.
Post- Modern Buildings: The Portland Building
Peter Meijer Architect, PC nominates Michael Graves iconic Post Modern Portland Building to the National Register of Historic Places. The Portland Public Service Building, known universally as the Portland Building, is one of the most notable works by internationally-known master architect Michael Graves and is widely credited as the design that established Graves’s preeminence in the field. The Portland Building itself is significant as one of a handful of high-profile building designs that defined the aesthetic of Post Modern Classicism in the United States between the mid-1960s and the 1980s. Constructed in 1982, the Portland Public Service Building is nationally significant as the notable work that crystallized Michael Graves’s reputation as a master architect and as an early and seminal work of Post-Modern Classicism, an American style that Graves himself defined through his work. The structure is ground-breaking for its rejection of “universal” Modernist principles in favor of bold and symbolic color, well-defined volumes, and stylized- and reinterpreted-classical elements such as pilasters, garlands, and keystones.
As one of the earliest large-scale Post-Modern buildings constructed, Graves’s design for the Portland Building was daring; almost shocking, in its vision for the future, and for its proposition as to what “after Modernism” could mean for architecture. The building itself is a fifteen-story regularly-fenestrated symmetrical monumental block clad in scored off-white colored stucco and set on a stepped two-story pedestal of blue-green tile. The building’s style is expressed through paint and applied ornament that implies classical architectural details, including terracotta tile pilasters and keystone, mirrored glass, and flattened and stylized garlands, among other elements that are intended to convey multiple meanings. For instance, the building is organized in a classical three-part division, bottom, middle, and top in reference to the human body, foot, middle, and head. At the same time, the building’s colors represent parts of the environment, with blue-green tile at the base symbolizing the earth and the light blue at the upper-most story representing the sky. The building uses layers of references to physically and symbolically tie it to place, its use, and the Western architectural tradition.
The boxy, fifteen-story building is located in the center of downtown Portland, Oregon, occupying a full 200 by 200-foot city block right next to City Hall. The Portland Building is a surprising jolt of color within the more restrained environment and designs of nearby buildings, with its blue tile base and off-white stucco exterior accented with mirrored glass, earth-toned terracotta tile, and sky-blue penthouse. The figure of Lady Commerce from the city seal, reinterpreted by sculptor Ray Kaskey to represent a broader cultural tradition and renamed ‘Portlandia,’ is placed in front of one of the large windows as a further reference to the city. The building is notable for its regular geometry and fenestration as well as the architect’s use of over-scaled and highly-stylized classical decorative features on the building’s facades, including a copper statue mounted above the entry, garlands on the north and south facades, and the giant pilasters and keystone elements on the east and west facades. Whether or not one judges the building to be beautiful or even to have fulfilled Graves’s ideas about being humanist in nature, it is undeniably important in the history of American architecture. The building has been dispassionately evaluated in various scholarly works about the history of architecture and is inextricably linked to the rise of the Post-Modern movement.
Written by Kristen Minor, Preservation Planner