1. Q. What is the issue with the former Chamber of Commerce building at 142 Free Street in Portland?

A. 142 Free is a protected structure within the Congress Street Historic District. The PMA has requested that the City reclassify the building from “contributing" to "non-contributing" to allow for its demolition.

back to the top.

2. Q: What is the purpose of Portland's Historic Preservation Ordinance?

A: The ordinance ensures that the fates of historic buildings are not decided by individual whims or grand plans, but rather judged equitably on their merits using fair, rational, objective, time-tested criteria.

Portland's historic districts, established in response to the loss of historic structures in the 1960s, have stricter development regulations aimed to ensure compatibility with surrounding buildings compared to other parts of the city. In 1990, the city adopted a preservation ordinance to protect its exceptional historic assets. Since then, more districts have been created, mostly on the peninsula, encompassing nearly 2,000 buildings and housing one-quarter of Portland's residents. The districts are significant employment centers and popular tourist destinations.

back to the top.

3. Q: What is the impact of these Historic Districts?

A: Portland City Council commissioned a study to answer this question. It found that Historic districts have been highly effective in preserving the city's unique architectural character and sense of place. Another finding was that Portland's historic districts are a major asset - culturally, economically and environmentally. The protections they provide have substantially benefited property owners, residents, businesses, and visitors while safeguarding the city's irreplaceable historic legacy for future generations.

One can read the entire "Trends in Portland's Historic Districts" report by clicking here. Be sure to look for the link to supporting documents.

back to the top.

4. Q: Are there financial benefits connected to Historic Districts?

A: Yes. There are significant financial benefits. The historic districts allow the City to access federal funds as part of its Certified Local Government status. Owners and developers may qualify for substantial Historic Tax Credits.

Currently underway historic tax credit projects in the certified Congress Street district include the Chapman Building (Time & Temp) complex, the Fidelity Trust Company Building, and the New England Telephone and Telegraph Building. Tens of millions of dollars in state and federal historic tax credits for these projects are dependent on the Certified status of the local historic district.

back to the top.

5. Q: Why was 142 Free Street designated as a contributing resource to the Congress Street Historic District?

A: The building meets four of the six criteria for historical and architectural significance required for designation as a contributing structure. Only one is needed to qualify.

The building's architectural significance was a primary reason for its listing. The building you see today dates to 1926. Renowned Portland architect John Calvin Stevens transformed the building based in part on its original 1830s appearance.

The appearance remains today as it was when designated in 2009 and in 2019 when the National Park Service confirmed this designation for its inclusion in the historic district.

back to the top.

6. Q: Do the interior alterations matter?

A: No. Interior alterations have no relevance to qualification as a Contributing building in a district and should be ignored in evaluating the exterior appearance. Window and door replacement and minor, reversible, alterations to the roof are commonly found on Contributing buildings in historic districts and are regularly approved as alterations under the standards of the ordinance by the Historic Preservation Board.

back to the top.

7. Q: What about John Calvin Stevens?

A: In addition to the estimated 1,000 architectural works in the Maine, John Calvin Stevens was also a founder of the Portland Society of Art, which later became the Portland Museum of Art. His contributions to the architectural heritage of Portland and his role in promoting the arts have made him an important figure in the city's and state’s cultural history.

back to the top.

8. Q: How does 142 Free Street relate to Stevens' other works in Portland?

A: Stevens designed the 1926 renovation as part of his efforts to improve Portland with public buildings like City Hall, the Portland Museum of Art's Sweat Memorial Gallery, and the Post Office (1933). Most of these buildings, including 142 Free Street, remain points of interest and beauty a century later.

back to the top.

9. Q: What is the relationship between 142 Free Street and the PMA's Charles Shipman Payson Building (1983)?

A: Designed by architect Henry N. Cobb of Pei Cobb Freed & Partners, the Payson Building was intended to relate to its neighboring building at 142 Free Street. Cobb believed he had an obligation to connect the new building to the city and its context.

back to the top.

10. Q: Is a grand new museum building worth the destruction of one old building?

A: No. That is the kind of thinking that prompted the creation of historic districts in the first place. Historic District protections are based on well-established criteria and put in place so everyone plays by the same rules. While tastes may change over time, once a building is gone, it is gone forever.

back to the top.

11. Q: What is Greater Portland Landmarks' position on this issue?

A: GPL supports PMA's expansion but strongly believes it can be done without demolishing this building. GPL finds no basis for stripping the building of its contributing status and is willing to work with PMA on alternate plans that preserve it. Reclassifying the building would inequitably violate the standards of Portland's Historic Preservation Ordinance.

Over its 60 years GPL has been a major public voice in creating our historic districts and defending them vigorously.

back to the top.

12. Q: Doesn't this set a precedent for reclassifying other historic buildings?

A: Yes. How the City handles demolition of 142 Free threatens the integrity of the Historic Preservation Ordinance. The Ordinance clearly defines the limited criteria for reclassifying a contributing building. Ignoring the criteria for one property owner undermines the predictability and protections the Ordinance provides for all historic buildings. It also is unfair to the many other property owners and developers who have played by the rules in renovating and rehabilitating historic properties. Making an exception for the PMA will only invite similar requests in the future.

back to the top.

13. Q: What is the decision-making process and where does it currently stand?

A: In November, the Historic Preservation Board voted unanimously to reaffirm 142 Free St's contributing status. In February, the Planning Board voted against reclassification, by a 5-1 margin. The final decision now rests with City Council.

back to the top.

14. Q: Does City Council have to follow its Ordinance?

A: Yes, the City’s legal counsel and GPL’s attorney, a former Planning Board chair, agree that the Council is bound by the criteria set forth in the Historic Preservation Ordinance when deciding on the reclassification request.

back to the top.

15. Q: Is the City's Comprehensive Plan allowed to be part of this process?

A: No. The City must follow specific rules for its historic districts to access federal CLG funds. The Comprehensive Plan is not part of the criteria for reclassification under the Historic Preservation Ordinance.

back to the top.

16. Q: Does demolishing 142 Free Street truly enhance Portland's vibrancy and revitalization, as argued by PMA expansion advocates?

A: The benefits the PMA states for the new building could hold true by including the 142 Free building as part of the expansion.

back to the top.

17. Q: Is demolishing 142 Free Street the only option for the PMA's expansion?

A: No. The PMA has several viable options that allow for a wide range of creative solutions and a win/win for everyone. 142 Free and all of the PMA’s other historic buildings can and should be thoughtfully integrated into any new design for the museum campus. Landmarks is willing to work with the museum on alternate plans.

back to the top.

19. Q: Is the building structurally sound?

A: Yes. The structure was strengthened and stabilized during the Children’s Museum renovation. It is currently being used by the PMA for offices.

back to the top.

20. Q: Was the building protected when it was purchased?

A: Yes, ten years before the PMA purchased it, 142 Free Street was designated as a contributing historic structure in 2009.

back to the top.

21. Q: Did the PMA know the building was protected when they bought it?

A: Yes. Inclusion in a Historic District carries benefits and restrictions. Clearly understanding these at the time of purchase would be incumbent upon the buyer and part of its listing. The museum mentioned the Historic District in its Request for Design Proposal but the building was removed from the site map given to the design firms in the RFP.

back to the top.

22. Q: Do the economic projections for the museum expansion only work if 142 Free Street is demolished?

A: No. This is not an either/or situation. A win/win is possible.

back to the top.

24. Q: What is the environmental impact of the proposed demolition?

A: Building reuse is the highest form of environmental stewardship; demolition is the worst because it contributes to landfill waste and then requires the use of carbon-intensive materials in new construction. Even very energy efficient new structures may not offset the damage of captured carbon demolition in their lifetime.

back to the top.

25. Q: What other parts of the current museum do they hope to demolish?

A: While the focus is now on 142 Free St. the PMA plans appear to show the removal of the octagonal Sculpture Gallery, much of the Sculpture Garden, and the Administration wing of the Payson Building. The plans also show a tunnel through the Payson Building.

back to the top.

26. Q: Will the PMA have to come back for more approvals for those demolitions?

A: Yes. These changes would require design review since the Payson Building is also protected as a “Landmark” structure within the Congress Street Historic District. The project as a whole will need to be reviewed by the Historic Preservation Board based on criteria in the City’s ordinance to receive a Certificate of Appropriateness before they proceed.

back to the top.

27. Q: What is happening with the Clapp House?

A: The PMA also owns the historic Clapp House on Spring Street and has chosen to address the use of this building at a future date. We believe that the Clapp House should be integrated into the current phase of construction. Right now, it is not open to the public, is used for storage and appears to need exterior maintenance and repair.

back to the top.

28. Q: What can you do to help protect historic preservation efforts in Portland and this historic building?

A: On May 6th the City Council will take up a motion to uphold the Planning Board’s vote to keep the contributing status. It concludes: NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDERED, that the City Council hereby adopts the Planning Board’s findings and conclusions contained in the Planning Board Recommendation, and, pursuant to Portland City Code, Chapter 14, Section 17.5.9, the Building shall continue to be classified as a contributing structure in the District.

We urge you to contact the Portland City Council members and urge them vote in favor of the motion to keep the Contributing status of 142 Free Street. This would prevent the building's demolition. The community's overwhelming opposition has made a difference in the HP Board and Planning Board decisions so far.

The City Council needs to hear your strong support for preservation.

back to the top.