Portland Museum of Art Expansion | Portland

Cosakita18 said:
In the PMA's presentation at the 2/13 Planning Board meeting, they showed a massing of how the proposed building would look if they were to keep 142 Free St. and instead build their expansion on the surface parking lot on Free St. next to the Clapp house. I don't totally hate it honestly.

View attachment 47702
Click to expand...
Not at all. I think it’s a better location for the new building.
 
Make the first floor of 142 Free the gift shop and exit, move their offices into the upper floors to free up space in the Payson building, build something on that parking lot that's similarly sized to the old YWCA, and create a path to do something with the Clapp House? I think they've disproved their case for delisting!
 
Now this is where a top tier arch and design firm can come into play, with a much longer connector for the two buildings. The firm that they have selected will not measure up, so have another one just do this part. A comparative: The MFHA in Houston. You must see their contemporary addition across the street (Kinder). But not for a tunnel connector, a snaking elevated enclosed one with visuals...

https://thebuzzmagazines.com/articles/2020/12/trip-mfahs-new-kinder-building
 
I can't imagine the full council says yes. I just hope that this doesn't completely kill the project and if it doesn't - and they seriously consider the Spring St lot - that they aren't afraid to radically change the design. I'd just hate for it to look awkward, sticking a building designed to work with the Payson building in a parking lot and connecting it with a pedestrian bridge.
 
It's almost a guarantee that the Council will follow the recommendations of the HPB and Planning Board. Hell I wouldn't be surprised if the PMA sees the writing on the wall and decides to give up on Free St. and advance a Spring St. design
 
I think they'll have to which I kind of prefer because it will add some life to that section of Spring Street. Was also not a fan of the big hole cut into the west end of the Payson building.
 
nomc said:
I can't imagine the full council says yes. I just hope that this doesn't completely kill the project and if it doesn't - and they seriously consider the Spring St lot - that they aren't afraid to radically change the design. I'd just hate for it to look awkward, sticking a building designed to work with the Payson building in a parking lot and connecting it with a pedestrian bridge.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I agree. If they have to change the location to Spring street, I think it would be better scrap it all and start over. Design a new building that is intended to be in that location rather than just picking up the current design, rotating it 90 degrees and plopping it back down somewhere else.
 
There is such an easy and even better architectural solution, or for firms that are good at what they do. And yes, the director could be the key obstacle.
 
PlantArch said:
Well this could get interesting ... he really needs to be removed as Director. I'm not sure if/why the PPH seems to be supportive of him by giving him this public forum.

www.eventbrite.com

Like a Boss with Mark Bessire, Portland Museum of Art

Join us for a live conversation at the Portland Museum of Art on Wednesday, May 1 at 8 a.m.
www.eventbrite.com www.eventbrite.com
Click to expand...
Agreed. The only thing he has to do is to dig deep inside his noggin to find some intelligence to hire this firm.... (A contest between a few mediocre firms is not a smart solution.)

https://www.jtcampo.com/projecthist-jw-marriott-savannah-plant-riverside-district-power-plant-hotel

JW+Marriott+Savannah+Plant+Riverside+District+Power+Plant+Hotel_Savannah,+GA_Campo+Architetcs+...jpg


There was a notable posting in the Boston arch blog on them for a solution to keeping some of the Mystic Generating Station where the new soccer stadium next to the Encore is supposed to go. They are an ideal firm for the PMA, especially now that the old Children's Museum will have to be included into the design. And so not the mediocre and much smaller firm that they've hired to fill all of the right DEI boxes. The best arch firms can or will use their creativity to reduce the build costs ($68 million in 2020 for this reimagined power station). I'll send him a link on his LinkedIn. You never know. But I doubt it.
 
TC_zoid said:
Agreed. The only thing he has to do is to dig deep inside his noggin to find some intelligence to hire this firm.... (A contest between a few mediocre firms is not a smart solution.)

https://www.jtcampo.com/projecthist-jw-marriott-savannah-plant-riverside-district-power-plant-hotel

View attachment 48675

There was a notable posting in the Boston arch blog on them for a solution to keeping some of the Mystic Generating Station where the new soccer stadium next to the Encore is supposed to go. They are an ideal firm for the PMA, especially now that the old Children's Museum will have to be included into the design. And so not the mediocre and much smaller firm that they've hired to fill all of the right DEI boxes. The best arch firms can or will use their creativity to reduce the build costs ($68 million in 2020 for this reimagined power station). I'll send him a link on his LinkedIn. You never know. But I doubt it.
Click to expand...
There could be legal and financial ramifications to terminating the relationship with the current firm unfortunately. They may have a termination clause in their contract to include a significant fine for ending the relationship. However, it might well be worth it in the long run. I still believe he needs to go however.
 
It would be money well spent as the current firm is not capable of creating a proper solution. As we all know, sometimes in business you have to accept a loss in order to move past it. If not, this will continue to be a quagmire and headache for all of us. Egos must be put aside.
 
Given the uncertain situation around 142 Free St., is it probable that they've signed a firm contract with the firm they selected from the contest?
 
markhb said:
Given the uncertain situation around 142 Free St., is it probable that they've signed a firm contract with the firm they selected from the contest?
Click to expand...
With 142 Free Street remaining, the proposed design will have to be radically changed. I would not let a mediocre arch firm with *no experience with this kind of reimagining* take a swipe at the museum's now more complicated addition. It's a veritable roll of the dice. Someone with a head and guts needs to take over managing this project to find the right firm for the job. Pay that Portland, OR arch firm to go away, though it looks like the work done so far is only a proposal design, like the others. This kind of build with up to $100 million being spent will require a long and complicated contract, and I don't think there has been enough time for this yet with both sides in agreement. I would assume that some lawyers will end up getting paid for whatever has been worked on so far.
 
TC_zoid said:
With 142 Free Street remaining, the proposed design will have to be radically changed. I would not let a mediocre arch firm with *no experience with this kind of reimagining* take a swipe at the museum's now more complicated addition. It's a veritable roll of the dice. Someone with a head and guts needs to take over managing this project to find the right firm for the job. Pay that Portland, OR arch firm to go away, though it looks like the work done so far is only a proposal design, like the others. This kind of build with up to $100 million being spent will require a long and complicated contract, and I don't think there has been enough time for this yet with both sides in agreement. I would assume that some lawyers will end up getting paid for whatever has been worked on so far.
Click to expand...
It's always safe to assume that the lawyers will get paid! :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top