Tear that Landmark down!! …or maybe…don’t?

by Becca Cavell

Peter Meijer and I recently reprised a debate on the future of Portland’s iconic Portland Building (designed by Michael Graves in 1982) as part of the Portland Design Festival. Peter and I are on the board of DoCoMoMo-Oregon and were invited to present the same topic at DoCoMoMo-US’s National Symposium in Sarasota earlier this year. The Modernism conservation group is beginning to grapple with the issue of Postmodernism and we tried to highlight some of the major issues while maintaining a fairly lighthearted approach. In Florida we only had 20 minutes to present our cases, and this time we had over an hour, and we had a lively and engaged audience who brought their own perspectives to the discussion.

This whole venture grew from conversations Peter and I had after the successful nomination of the Portland Building to the National Register of Historic Places. Peter and his firm PMA wrote the nomination at their own volition, and I was unaware of the venture until after the entire process was complete. My initial reaction was one of outrage – how could this failed building be considered a historic landmark? How could a building that is so reviled, and one that is barely 30 years old, even be a contender? The opportunity to take this discussion to the stage was too good to miss, and we both jumped at the chance. And as we have prepared and presented this topic twice I’ve learned a lot more about the building and have – begrudgingly – developed more sympathy for it as part of our cityscape and yes, our history here in Portland.

The story behind the Portland Building is complex and fascinating. The bare bones are these: The project was achieved through a design-build competition, with Philip Johnson advising the selection committee; three teams competed in the final round, and Graves’ team prevailed because it met various criteria including a very challenging budget. Graves was primarily an academic, teaching at Princeton at this point, although he enjoyed early fame as a member of the “New York Five” with several modernist houses to his credit. Always an exceptional draftsman, his sketches, drawings and models for the Portland Building were highly evocative and displayed a use of color and texture as well as material rendering that was a jolting contrast to the formal, somewhat austere language of Modernism that still dominated the design arena at that time. With Philip Johnson’s endorsement, and despite Pietro Belluschi’s protestations, Graves’ design was realized. Or was it?

meijer-cavell image 2

Michael Graves’ rendering of the Portland Building

My argument in opposition claimed that the building as constructed is not a representation of the design. The budget couldn’t support the details that gave richness to the building – materials were cheapened and details flattened to the point that the building is a caricature of the original intent – alarming, since the design sketches themselves are very gestural. The windows have always been and remain highly controversial. They are very small – according to Graves this was a budget-driven issue – but they are also placed without consideration of the staff who work within the building. When seated you cannot see out of the windows, and the interiors are quite dark and rely on artificial light. The loggias – one of the competition-winning “criteria” – don’t connect to the sidewalk because of grading issues and the intended street-level retail isn’t viable. And the coloration of the façade is achieved through paint rather than materials with the exception of the oddly under-scaled blue tiles that clad the street level.


This model indicates that Graves’ intended  for the building to have more three dimensionality than we got.

But Peter’s argument in favor has serious teeth too: the Portland Building is the first built example of Postmodern architecture in the United States. The building represents a sea change in style, materials, and use of color. And the building is potentially endangered. Well known internationally, Peter claims that it is only Portlanders who truly dislike the building, and its various construction problems are of increasing concern to its owner. Peter made it clear that the Landmark status now enjoyed by the building isn’t necessarily strong protection. The building can still be demolished or significantly altered, although the review mechanism is different with Portland’s Landmarks Commission having oversight.  And Peter argues that it’s too soon – the building is too young – for us to judge it a failure. That time will tell.

I can trot out my cheap shots – the building’s only redeeming feature is the enormous sculpture “Portlandia” that adorns its West elevation, that it faces the wrong way, that the blue tile reminds me of a public restroom. I can argue that it is an “object” building that has complete disregard for the wellbeing of its occupants. But I understand that Graves’ Portland Building is a significant design from a particular moment in our architectural history. A movement that I hope never enjoys a revival – but perhaps our Portland Building should survive. Or maybe the solution – the win-win – is to retain its shell and to completely reimagine everything that happens within its four walls. Now, that would make a great design studio project.


Alas, the three-dimensional flowing ribbons became flat, painted decoration… (photo by Brian Libby)


...and look at those tiny windows...

…and look at those tiny windows…




  1. Eric Wheeler says:


    Sorry I missed your debate with Peter, but I imagine the article above is a good representation of your major arguments. Did you know that the sculptor of the statue (Kaskey?) took the basic image of “Portlandia” from the female figure on the Portland City seal? I just learned that recently.

    I have finally made the permanent move to Portland.

    It would be fun to share a cup of coffee with you sometime and chat a bit. I am leading walking tours of Portland architecture year around now.



  2. Chris Wise says:

    Love it or hate it – it is a Postmodern classic. 30 years from now, when Postmodernism is not so reviled, the loss will be mourned.

    Tearing down buildings every 30 years is not a good architectural solution. If we as architect’s eat our own, why will anyone else will care about architecture? (witness the demo of the Williams/Tsien Folk Art Museum with Diller/Scofidio paving the way of its demise).

    Shore up its sagging parts, plug the holes (or add more for windows!) and improve it. Repurpose it – but don’t tear it down.

  3. […] the many ideas for the building: tear it down, rehabilitate it as-is, or “retain its shell and completely reimagine everything that happens within its four […]

  4. Robert B says:

    I’m torn. This building is iconic only in that it demonstrates how mediocre a building can be when it’s value engineered to the point of missing the point.
    Back in ’82, the city should have done all those things that the city planners should have learned in RFP-101 class.
    I’m leaning toward either letting Graves (or another firm) have another crack at it, or pull it down, since it’s not even close to Graves’ concept. Build something iconic. Keep the statue.

  5. […] time to follow up on my earlier piece about the Portland Building. Peter Meijer and I publically debated the fate of the building for the […]

RSS feed for comments on this post. / TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply


Farewell, Balfour-Guthrie Building

by Jonah Cohen

After 16 years, Hacker has vacated the Balfour-Guthrie Building and moved to its next iteration, which in many ways is a perfect symbol for our successful leadership transition that has taken place over the last five years. This is an emotional milestone for a few of us, especially me.

Read more


Cultivating a New Generation of Leaders

by Stefee Knudsen

How do we cultivate our future leaders? It’s a core question for educators and one that ultimately influences the design of schools. Two projects in Portland, the Oregon Episcopal School’s Lower School and the French American International School’s new Gilkey International Middle School, illustrate how new environments can help to advance institutional missions.

Read more


Hackers = Makers

by Scott Barton-Smith

If you’ve been to Hacker’s office in the past year and a half, you probably noticed art on the walls of our building’s vestibule and reception area. This rotating Makers exhibit showcases the off-hours work of our multi-talented team. By day we are architects, interior designers, and talented support personnel; by night we are artists. What began as a desire to exhibit some of our creative endeavors outside of work has turned into an amazing get-to-know-you. Every couple of months, a new batch of artistic expression graces our walls and gives us insight into our colleagues’ broad talents, inspiration, and personalities. Twelve Hackers have already displayed their art since October 2015 and there is no sign of it stopping! Scroll through for a sampling…

Read more


Hacker Builds!

by Garrett Martin

Our website typically shows you beautiful photos of our completed projects, or equally beautiful renderings of our projects “on the boards.” Have you ever wondered what happens in-between, or when those renderings will finally take actual form? Despite how it may appear sometimes, it all doesn’t happen in the blink of an eye or under cover of darkness.

Read more


What Pro Bono Work Has Taught Us

by Audrey Alverson

Pro bono architecture: Why do we do it?

Hacker has long been a signatory of the 1+ Program, which challenges designers to dedicate 1% or more of their time to pro bono service – but through trial and error over the years, we often found it challenging to bring this work to fruition. After a few fits and starts, and some mostly small-scale projects and studies, last year we decided to put some teeth to our commitment to pro bono service. Through this process, we’ve learned that the problem was never a lack of desire or good intentions, but more so a lack of planning.

Read more


Nurturing Growth in Lents Town Center

by Garrett Martin

On Sunday October 23rd of last year, we joined Bremik Construction and the Portland Development Commission to strike golden shovels into the ground and begin construction on the 9101 SE Foster project, a mixed-use multi-family building in the heart of Lents Town Center.

Read more


Why Hacker Started Paying for Parental Leave

by Sarah Bell

This year, Hacker implemented a new paid parental leave policy, covering six weeks at full salary for birth mothers and about four and ½ weeks full salary for a spouse of the parent who gives birth (adoptive parents get the same). This is in addition to the flexible paid time off granted to every Hacker employee.

Read more


A Saturday with Lou

by Scott Barton-Smith

Nearly half of the Hacker team caravanned north to attend the final day of the Bellevue Arts Museum’s retrospective Louis Kahn: The Power of Architecture on April 30th. Although the exhibit includes video interviews of notable architects enthusing Kahn’s work, we had a more interactive guide. Our firm founder Thom Hacker gave us a personalized tour of the exhibit, which includes several projects on which Thom collaborated with his mentor “Lou.” The exhibit features many models and drawings prepared by Kahn’s office spanning projects from the Esherick House to more well know works like The Salk Institute, The Kimbell Art Museum, and the National Assembly Building in Dhaka. The exhibit even includes a full scale reproduction of the famous window seat designed for the Fisher house. Much of this material has not seen the light of day since Kahn’s death and it is remarkable that the large yet delicate cardboard, clay, and wood models survived.

Read more


University of Wyoming Visual Arts Facility Wins COTE Award

by Nic Smith

Hacker is a proud recipient of a 2016 AIA COTE Top Ten Green Projects award for University of Wyoming’s Visual Arts Facility (VAF), a pioneering LEED Platinum facility that has shaped a new approach to health, safety, and sustainability in arts education. The 80,000-SF building consolidates the University’s fine arts program from its scattered locations, establishing a central component of the campus’s new arts district. It also marks a turning point in the campus’s thinking about environmental responsibility. Read more


From the Vaults: High Desert Museum

by Sarah Bell

When the Unitarian Universalist Fellowship of Central Oregon’s New Home had its dedication last year, I drove to Bend for the day with my two youngest boys, who were both under 5 years old. I arrived several hours before the dedication with both boys needing to expend energy built up over the 3-hour car ride. Not having planned on it, I took them to the High Desert Museum – not because I wanted to show them a Hacker building, but because I knew it would wear them out.

Read more