After more than three hours of debate Monday, the only sure thing about the design of the Portland Building improvement project is that the team in charge will return before the Portland Historic Landmarks Commission on July 24.

City staff had recommended that the commission approve the team’s restoration plan with conditions. But the commission held off on making a decision Monday after Kate Kearney, communications director for Docomomo Oregon, requested that the public record be kept open to allow further testimony. Docomomo Oregon is a nonprofit dedicated to promoting the architecture, art, landscape and urban design of the modern movement.

That request triggered an automatic 21-day period for further testimony to be taken and various rebuttal statements to be entered into the record.

Even if the delay had not occurred, it was unclear exactly what action the commission would have taken.

“I am up in the air,” Commission Chairman Kirk Ranzetta said.

Commissioner Matthew Roman indicated that he would have voted to approve the proposed design. Commissioners Wendy Chung and Annie Mahoney were troubled by the plan, but noncommittal as to which way they were leaning.

The Portland Building, designed by the late Michael Graves, is considered an iconic example of postmodern architecture. It was added to the National Register of Historic Places in 2011. A sticking point in the proposed improvement plans for the building at 1120 S.W. Fifth Ave. is whether installing a rain screen over the structure could cause it to be removed from the national register.

That concern was spurred by a letter from the National Park Service in which it addressed the materials in the proposed rain screen. Its early opinion was that aluminum in the rain screen would constitute a substantial change to the building and could lead to it being delisted.

“We have a disagreement with SHPO (the Oregon State Historic Preservation Office) and NPS (National Park Service) over the definition of preservation,” said Erica Ceder, an architect with project designer DLR Group. “I think that this is part of a larger conversation in preservation. This is a different building type. The principles of preservation are hard to apply.”

It’s unclear if proposed modifications would result the Portland Building being delisted. The NPS based its letter on an earlier version of the plan presented at a design advice request hearing last year. The building could be removed from the national register only if requested by someone and if an ensuing investigation by the NPS found the changes were so significant that they affected architectural significance.

Commissioners were even split over whether the possibility of the building being delisted would be reason enough to deny approval of the plan.

“I am not swayed by the materiality argument,” Roman said. “It’s an iconic building, but not because of the materials that were used, but more of the overall forms. I think all of Michael Graves’ design intentions are carried forward. What the building represents, whether it’s on the national register or not, to me is unaltered by what is being proposed. What it symbolizes won’t change whether it’s listed or delisted.”

Patrick Burke, senior architect at Michael Graves Architecture & Design, was a student when Graves worked on the Portland Building project. He said Graves would likely have approved of the preservation plan and was always more concerned about his vision coming to life than which materials were used.

Burke told a story of contractors coming to Graves and telling him that the only way to build the structure within budget was to use a concrete skin and paint it instead of using stucco as he preferred.

“There is a famous quote that we have used since,” Burke said. “Michael said, ‘I don’t care if we make it out of bleeping oatmeal; we are going to get this thing in the budget.’”

Also, Burke doesn’t believe the building’s listing on the national register was a focus of pride for Graves.

“In all honesty, I am not sure that was important to him,” he said. “The building design mattered to him more than what list it was on. When this was put on the national registry, he didn’t exactly jump for joy.”

For commissioners, however, the possibility of the building losing its national recognition is a serious concern.

“To me, in this particular matter, we have an obligation to protect the resource,” Ranzetta said. “If it is delisted as a consequence of operation that we authorized, I would say we failed in that obligation.”

Portland’s rainy weather and the tight budget for original construction are big reasons why the 35-year-old building needs improvements totaling $195 million. Tiles were stuck on a concrete structure, and an inadequate seal has resulted in water leaking into walls and causing significant structural damage.

The city considered other options, including demolition, but decided the rain screen fit within its budget and preserved the building’s unique look and architectural importance.

The basic plan is to cover the building with aluminum plates that closely, but don’t exactly, match the building’s current appearance. The plates will shield the structure from the elements. Under the plan, tiles will be larger than the originals and structural changes will increase seismic strength.

The possibility that those changes could result in Portland losing one of its few structures on the national register was enough to convince Restore Oregon to oppose the proposed plan.

“Do not alter the building in this way,” said Dan Everhart, preservation programs manager for the group.

With the 21-day delay, the design team will have a chance to seek additional guidance from the NPS and possibly learn whether the current plan would allow the building to stay on the register.

“NPS doesn’t normally weigh in until after construction,” Ceder said. “There is really no time for a response.”

Given the timeline that the city and the commission are working under, the commission may have to choose between risking the listing on the national register or saving the building.

“If it got delisted, but got saved,” Roman said, “that, for me, is the higher goal.”

The post Iconic structure’s fate unclear appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.