Did You Know, part 2: A Focus on Policy & Advocacy

November 16, 2022

The B&M Baked Bean Factory

Interior view of Fort Gorges

 As an organization that’s been around for nearly 60 years, we are involved in a lot of different things, and we want to make sure you know the full scope of what we do.

We are the only dedicated nonprofit devoted to the preservation of this area’s sense of place, our built environment, and our neighborhoods.

What does this mean for our work?

We attend most Portland Historic Preservation Board meetings, and regularly submit comments on projects that are undergoing review. We work with developers, architects, and individual homeowners to ensure that their projects are in harmony with preservation and historic district standards. Some projects we’ve advocated for recently include the Local Landmark designation of the former B&M Baked Bean Factory, now the anchor building for the new Roux Institute campus, the establishment of the Munjoy Hill Historic District and the endorsement of the contract between the Friends of Fort Gorges and the City of Portland to operate and offer programming at the fort. Advocacy efforts like this ensure that new construction works harmoniously with the existing built environment, and the sense of place we all know and love isn’t lost.  
 
We also work to ensure that maintaining and rehabilitating older buildings is affordable. Not only is adaptive use of existing structures environmentally more friendly than new construction, a matching benefit is the ability to create more affordable housing in spaces that are vacant or underutilized. Historic tax credits help to carry the cost of renovations, while a city’s density and architecture remains intact.

We worked closely with partners to get LD 201 passed, which extended the sunset of Maine’s State Historic Tax Credit program to 2030. Currently, only income-earning properties are eligible for Historic Tax Credit funding, but we’re working to change that so that individual homeowners will also be able to benefit from this program. These efforts will result in long-overdue incentives to assist  homeowners maintaining their historic homes as they increase energy efficiency, carry out routine maintenance, or undertake modernization efforts.
 

Historic Tax Credit Project at the former St. Dominic’s Parochial School for Boys on State Street

Historic Tax Credit Project at the former Mercy Hospital building on State Street

Did You Know, part 1: Training the Preservationists of the Future

November 9, 2022

2022 summer intern Hilary Bergen surveying historic resources

interns Hilary Bergen, Lilu McNiff & Liam McNiff take a break from research to visit the Observatory

As an organization that’s been around for nearly 60 years, we are involved in a lot of different things, and we want to make sure you know the full scope of what we do.

Our Anderson Family Internship Program brings the brightest student minds in the field to work at Greater Portland Landmarks for the summer, where these talented students learn from us while owning major research projects.

What does this mean for our work?
 

Interns are a phenomenal resource for us! Not only is it a wonderful opportunity to shape the direction that preservation will take in the future, but it is also a chance for our staff to revisit tried and true best practices and to be introduced to the most up-to-date scholarship and conversations in the field. We polish our own strengths through teaching and broaden our perspectives at the same time. We are pleased to be able to offer competitive wages to our interns thanks to the continuing generosity of our donors.

Our training efforts don’t stop with traditional students. We also serve as the hub for the Portland History Docent (PHD) program, which trains docents for a variety of historic sites in the area. The volunteers who go through this program are given a solid footing in Portland’s history, guiding techniques, and go on to be the lifeblood of so many of the wonderful museums and sites that bring Portland’s history to life for visitors and locals alike. Here at Greater Portland Landmarks, we rely on docents who come through the PHD program to guide our walking tours and tours of the Observatory. We couldn’t be more grateful for their contributions to our organization! Thank you, docents!
 
Does training preservationists speak to you? Support bringing interns to Landmarks and continuing the invaluable PHD program!
 

2022 PHD class

Docent Rick Scala leading a walking tour of the India Street neighborhood

Advocacy Alert: Munjoy Hill Neighborhood Conservation Overlay Zone REPEAL

Portland City Council to hold workshop on repealing the Munjoy Hill Neighborhood Conservation Overlay Zone on Monday, June 13


In February, Portland’s planning board recommended that Portland City Council dissolve the Munjoy Hill Neighborhood Conservation Overlay Zone (MHNCOZ).

The Council will hold a workshop on Monday, June 13 at 5pm to consider this, with a public hearing and vote scheduled for Wednesday, June 22.

The removal of this zone will significantly impact historic resources on Munjoy Hill that are outside the new historic district!

Greater Portland Landmarks strongly believes that evaluation of the MHNCOZ should occur as part of the broader review of the impact of historic preservation to be completed by Place Economics in September 2022, as well as ReCode Phase II and the revision of the R6 design standards.

With these three major reviews coming up, it is premature to pull the MHNCOZ out for review.

If the MHNCOZ is repealed, we would lose:

  • Demolition delay, which allows the city, the property owner and the community an opportunity for conversation and study about the best path forward for the property

  • Workforce housing incentive specific only to Munjoy Hill

  • Opportunity for review in context of ReCode Phase II

We are afraid that removing the Overlay Zone, which was never meant to be temporary, will result in a divided neighborhood – creating two Munjoy Hills – and destroy the cohesive and vibrant neighborhood we know today.

We encourage you to submit public comment as well as contact city councilors and urge them to delay considering this repeal until the MHNCOZ can be evaluated as part of the ReCode process! To submit written public comment, please send an email to publiccomment@portlandmaine.gov (and be sure to include your name and legal address).

Please reach out with any questions about what the repeal could mean for Munjoy Hill or if you would like assistance in crafting your public comment talking points.

Ian Stevenson, Director of Advocacy
istevenson@portlandlandmarks.org
207.774.5561 x102

November Federal Advocacy Alert: Historic Tax Credit Provision

Historic Tax Credit Provisions REMOVED from bill!

Last week, a new iteration of the reconciliation infrastructure bill was released and was significantly reduced in scope, excluding the Historic Tax Credit (HTC) enhancements and many other community development incentives that were in a prior bill.

With a very limited amount of time to influence the legislation and knowledge that the HTC is currently "out" of the bill, now is the time to tell your federal legislators how much HTC improvements mean to you. As we're seeing in the national news, Congress is poised to move forward on infrastructure legislation, including a vehicle that could carry HTC provisions, as early as next week.

For months, Greater Portland Landmarks has joined preservation supporters across the country to advocate for improvements to the federal Historic Tax Credit program. It's critically important that our members of Congress hear from YOU!


How You Can Help

Sign the National Trust Sign-on Letter

The National Trust for Historic Preservation has organized a National Sign-on letter to encourage congressional leadership to include the HTC enhancement provisions in the final bill. Click here to sign the letter.

Continue to Reach Out to Maine’s Members of Congress

Please ask for Historic Tax Credit enhancement provisions, not included in the “Build Back Better” framework, to be included back in the final reconciliation bill.

  • Call the Capitol Switchboard to connect with Maine’s Members of Congress: 202.224.3121

  • Introduce yourself as a constituent and provide our legislators with a message like:

"The Historic Tax Credit is the single most important tool for historic preservation. Though the HTC provisions were included in the Ways and Means bill in September, HTC provisions were not included in the recent “Build Back Better” bill. Please make sure to include the HTC provisions in the final reconciliation bill. These provisions would benefit projects from Main Street revitalizations to large-scale rehabilitation while also supporting community revitalization and climate change mitigation.”

October Federal Advocacy Alert

Ask your legislators to support the
Historic Tax Credit enhancement provisions included in the infrastructure legislation.


Your outreach will directly determine
how much support HTC provisions will receive in ongoing negotiations.

As you're seeing in the national news, Congress is poised to move forward on infrastructure legislation, including a vehicle that could carry HTC provisions, as early as next week.

For months, Greater Portland Landmarks has joined preservation supporters across the country to advocate for improvements to the federal Historic Tax Credit program. The $3.5 trillion bill recently passed by the House Ways & Means Committee is expected to be significantly reduced in size and scope. It's critically important that your member of Congress hear from you that the HTC provisions included in the Ways & Means reconciliation package remain in the next version of the package.

The following HTC provisions are at risk:

  • Temporarily Increasing the HTCs From 20% to 30% for all projects. (Sec. 135301)

  • Permanent increase in the rehabilitation credit for small projects. (Sec. 135302)

  • Modification of substantial rehabilitation definition. (Sec. 135303)

  • Elimination of basis adjustment. (Sec. 135304)

  • Modifications of tax-exempt use leasing rules. (Sec. 135305)

  • Enabling HTCs to be used for public school buildings. (Sec. 135306)

How can you help?

We encourage you to reach out and express to our legislators the impact Historic Tax Credits have on economic development and affordable housing creation in Maine communities today! Will you join us?

Call Your Members of Congress (during office hours)! To call the Capitol Switchboard to connect with your House Member and Senators dial (202)-224-3121, then:

Introduce yourself as a constituent!

Then say…

"The Historic Tax Credit is the single most important tool for historic preservation. Unfortunately, it has not been meaningfully improved since the 1980s. Please support and protect the Historic Tax Credit provisions in the House Reconciliation Infrastructure Bill. The provisions included in the House version of the bill would benefit Maine by rehabilitating downtowns and helping to fund affordable housing projects. Plus reusing our existing buildings helps to mitigate climate change. The greenest building is the one already built, so please help us preserve more and preserve better!"

or email them now through their websites:

These projects and more have benefited from the Federal Historic Tax Credit program.

Portland City Council Candidates Survey

As many of Portland's historic districts and buildings are located in District One and District Two, we know you are interested in learning more about the candidates in this year's City Council elections. We asked all eight of the Portland City Council candidates to answer a quick survey about preservation issues our supporters are concerned about, mainly affordable housing, climate change, and economic development. Candidates Roberto Rodriguez (At-large) and Anna Trevorrow (District 1) did not respond.

Greater Portland Landmarks does not endorse candidates, but we do like to help our supporters be informed of candidates' positions. We hope that you will find the following information helpful as you cast your ballots in the upcoming municipal election.

Question 1: What is your favorite historic place in Portland? Why?

Sarah Michniewicz (District 1): The Old Port makes me feel steeped in Portland's past, particularly any street with cobblestones, and most especially the working waterfront. But it's the interiors of historic buildings that make me feel the most connected to Portland's history. From detailed moldings to a single handcut nail, human energy is infused in the places that make Portland historically relevant and special.

Jon Hinck (District 2): The Abyssinian Meeting House. The building is elegant in its simplicity. But the Abyssinian Meeting House speaks to those who pay attention because of its history. It is also a special landmark because the building stands only because of community activism, philanthropy and care. Plus it needs more of our attention.

Victoria Pelletier (District 2): My favorite historic place in Portland would have to be the Abyssinian Meeting House. As we all know, it's the oldest standing African American Meeting House in the United States, and despite a lot of untold history of African Americans in this country, it's an important landmark that I'm proud to have in this city, and a starting point of conversation about Black history, specifically in Maine.

Travis Curran (At-Large): The Portland Observatory, it's always been present in my neighborhood and when I was a tour guide it was my favorite destination to recommend to visitors. The unique history of the building appeals to me as well as the in-depth tour with each floor presenting new and different information, culminating at the top with the breathtaking view of the city. I try to go up at least twice a summer.

Brandon Mazer (At-Large): Longfellow House--I have always had a fond appreciation for Longfellow and it is one of the places I always take visitors from out of state when they visit Portland. During high school (in Iowa), it was always with great pride when we would cover him in English class.

Stuart Tisdale (At-Large): Stroudwater. I used to live on outer Westbrook Street and I would drive through past the "Established in 1643" sign at least twice a day. I loved the sense of history that gave me, a high school history teacher. Also, there is a white clapboard house on the north side of Westbrook Street, just up from the corner of Congress. The house is three-stories with a barn-like shape. I read that the house was a way station on the Underground Railroad and has, or had, secret compartments to conceal runaway slaves. I am using that house in a novel I am writing about five abolitionist brothers from Portland who journey to Charles Town, West Virginia, in November 1859, to try to break John Brown out of jail.

Question 2: There is a significant correlation between affordable housing and historic buildings in Portland. Much of Portland’s existing reasonably affordable rental housing stock is found within the historic building fabric of the peninsula neighborhoods. In Portland’s historic buildings and districts, more than 900 new housing units have been approved and more than 400 completed in the last six years. Nearly 75% of those new units are affordable for low-income residents and seniors. What incentives would you support to promote the preservation and creation of affordable housing in conjunction with rehabilitating historic buildings and neighborhoods?

Sarah Michniewicz (District 1): The City recently agreed to further study historic districts and their relationship to affordable housing, and I fully support this effort. I would like to see rehabilitation programs like the New Neighbors program in the 90’s revitalize housing stock in order to both preserve existing an historical buildings and ensure a wide variety of housing types are available to a wide range of income levels in all neighborhoods, particularly on the peninsula. I also strongly support adaptive reuse of existing structures, such as has been done on the former public works site. Finding creative strategies to support and maintain our historic structures is part of how we can develop and enliven the city without losing touch with our past.

Jon Hinck (District 2): I would support: the creation of a universal safety net voucher program for those who want to live in historic as well as other neighborhoods; the creation of incentives generated from housing linkage fees on large commercial developments to support building affordable housing; and elimination of structural barriers that minority households face when seeking home ownership.

Victoria Pelletier (District 2): We need a full comprehensive review of our city zoning laws, which work to prohibit affordable housing, along with the data of the current income and wealth gap between people of color and white individuals in Portland. The current single-family zoning we have in place in Portland promotes city-wide segregation and makes housing less affordable for all. We have a wonderfully diverse district filled with low to moderate-income, working-class individuals like myself, and if we’re not discussing zoning laws, Airbnb’s, and other short-term rentals, we’re just upholding systemic barriers and actively driving our young people and seniors out of the city because they can’t afford to live here. In order to continue investment into the economy, we need to retain young people in Portland, and if we don’t work to prioritize their quality of life over appealing to tourists, then we cannot accurately say that Portland is a city for everyone. It’s important that all District 2 neighborhoods advocate for housing for all, especially those who are in higher quality living quarters, because if we can push to end exclusionary zoning laws, it’s the first step towards not just saying ‘housing is a human right’, but advocating for it with policy.

Travis Curran (At-Large): Enforcing the AirBnB regulations and non-owner occupied cap to free up already existing affordable units, for there are plenty of illegal AirBnB's skating by with little repercussions whatsoever. Portland's history is very important, but the housing crisis is worse than ever, so I'm pushing for rezoning the outer districts to eliminate single-family-unit only zones, allowing for more apartment buildings and mixed-use zones along our major corridors.

Brandon Mazer (At-Large): I believe we need to start focusing off peninsula to encourage more dense affordable housing. Much of these areas are not in current historic districts; however, a few are. We need to make it as easy as possible for those that are creating affordable housing to do so as efficiently as possible and provide any subsidies and grants to help offset some of the higher costs of rehabilitating historic buildings.

Stuart Tisdale (At-Large): I am not a builder, so I do not know the technical names of incentives; but, as a history teacher, I am inherently sympathetic to preservation efforts. I am also keenly aware of the affordable housing shortage in Portland, and not only for low-income people but also for those of moderate income. So, if historic preservation could be linked with affordable housing, then that would be a win-win situation, and I would support the creative use of incentives to achieve that goal. I would not permit developers to buy their way out of including affordable housing in their development projects.

Question 3: Historic (and non-historic) buildings in low lying and waterfront neighborhoods are at risk of– or are already experiencing – the damaging effects of sea level rise. How can the City address climate change while maintaining our critical historic places? What can the City do to assist Portland residents and businesses coping with sea level rise impacts?

Sarah Michniewicz (District 1): Slowing climate change is all of our responsibility. Historic and older buildings can contribute through robust weatherization measures that reduce the consumption of fossil fuels and historic preservation standard that allow for visually appropriate and energy efficient window and heating and cooling systems. The City should continue to educate and support weatherization programs, particularly for senior and low-income residents. Mitigating climate change is particularly important for historic buildings in low-lying areas of the City that are prone to flooding. Vulnerable areas in the Bayside and East Bayside neighborhoods need to be protected. A great deal of work has been done to evaluate and potential impact, from the 2009 Sustainable Portland Update through the 2017 Portland Comprehensive Plan update, and continued exploration of mitigation strategies like the League of Cities-sponsored Bayside Adapts design challenge is essential. I recently supported a living shoreline climate mitigation study and will continue to support such initiatives.

Jon Hinck (District 2): The City needs to undertake much more aggressive climate mitigation steps including for the protection of historic buildings and blocks. The undertaking presented from rising sea levels and other climate-induced flooding is substantial and unprecedented. Detailed plans for how to counter flooding and heat damage should be generated soon. This will enable Portland to seek funding from national sources particularly those dedicated to preservation. Some of Portland's threatened historic properties are certainly of national interest. We will need to be prepared to raise and contribute money needed for this vital effort.

Victoria Pelletier (District 2): This current climate crisis represents a precipice of culture change for people like me living in Parkside, Portland and all Wabanaki Confederacy Territory, and it's important to lead our community through this tipping point from confusion toward collective action. Mitigating climate change requires collaboration from many intersections; I’ve come to understand the most meaningful actions are embedded in local solutions. I will lead Portland in considering concepts of Equitable Adaptation where members of frontline communities, marginalized folks, and people who rely on environmental resources are encouraged to gather in dynamic practices of inclusive community driven engagement for climate action planning, especially for the waterfront and Bayside areas of Portland. In discussing climate change adaptation and mitigation with the Portland community, I also find that this is an issue that is often led in an overwhelming fashion by white individuals, despite the fact that our vulnerable and marginalized community members will feel the immediate impacts. Due to this, it's really important that in education on climate justice, I make sure to advocate that everyone has a role to play, regardless of the direct connection to emission reduction and green building standards -- it’s important to also intersect this conversation with the preservation of history and cultural significance, especially as Portland continues to diversify. I look forward to using my platform as an advocate to resume my ‘community chats’ I hold on the promenade, to educate Portlanders on the impacts of rising sea levels, climate adaptation, housing quality and affordability.

Travis Curran (At-Large): We need to seriously overhaul our infrastructure of the land that is historically landfill by researching safe ways to prevent flooding and studying other coastal cities at risk to see if their methods have been effective for not. The tide's not going to stop rising and we must prepare for that yesterday.

Brandon Mazer (At-Large): For new buildings, we can adjust some of our zoning regulations to allow for more flexibility with height and design to anticipate sea level rise.

Stuart Tisdale (At-Large): Again, I am not a builder or an architect, so I would rely on those professionals to propose ways the City might help cope with sea level rise. Global warming is real, human agency is certain, and Portland's goals of reducing greenhouse gas emissions among the general population and promoting the municipal use of clean renewable energy will do our part in mitigating sea level rise. I declare that I will be sympathetic to any reasonable proposals for what the City might do to assist Portland residents and businesses cope with rising sea levels.

Question 4: Currently there are many buildings in historic neighborhoods that have no protection from demolition and no guidelines for new construction, often resulting in tear-downs and new buildings that are not in scale or in keeping with the neighborhood. Do you have concerns about the loss of historic buildings and/or the design, mass and scale of infill development? How would you address this issue?

Sarah Michniewicz (District 1): Yes, I do worry about the loss of historic buildings, noting that the definition of historic can be subjective. In addition to preserving buildings that are more traditionally considered historic, it’s important to preserve smaller scale existing homes and blocks of homes that both provide affordable options for renters and memorialize Portland’s rich past, particularly in areas where immigrant communities and diverse populations formerly flourished. I have concerns about the definition of neighborhood context in areas where teardowns, both long ago and recent, and the new developments that have replaced them, have already changed that context. What does appropriate infill mean in areas where much of the original neighborhood fabric has already been altered? We need very clear definitions in order to make decisions that reflect our goals for historic preservation, smart growth, and neighborhood development. The design standards being examined in the current Re-Code phase 2 process should be considered carefully. This is an opportunity to make changes that will impact the look, feel, and growth of Portland for years to come. I would strive to support a balance between respecting existing context and encouraging the amount and type of development needed to grow our housing stock, particularly for lower and middle income residents and families.

Jon Hinck (District 2): Yes and Yes. Portland needs to examine extending historic preservation to cover additional historic buildings and zones.

Victoria Pelletier (District 2): The discussion of historic preservation is an interesting one, especially as Portland becomes more racially and ethnically diverse, because this opens up a conversation about whose history we’re working so hard to preserve. At times, ‘historic preservation’ feels synonymous with white centered dominance, and advocating to preserve this ideology feels like we’re not actively making room for the new Portlanders that we claim to welcome and support. The interesting thing about Portland is we celebrate it as a progressive melting pot, but the reality is, there are still many difficult conversations surrounding the impacts of historic preservation. Even the phrase “keeping with the neighborhood” feels white centered and not inclusive. It’s not a secret that our city is segregated - our housing density is in clusters of single-family zoning and short term rentals, that continue to displace working class Portlanders, many of whom are Black people, Indigenous People, and People of Color. It feels inauthentic to call for affordable housing for *all* if we’re also, in the same breath, having discussions about ensuring residents follow specific neighborhood guidelines. Not only does this specifically impact those of us who deal with housing inequities, but it also impacts our small businesses located on the peninsula. The strict guidelines that are put upon new businesses, especially those trying to sustain operations in the midst of a pandemic, act as an unnecessary barrier to economic success. Small businesses and frontline employees are the backbone of Portland, and putting guidelines as to how their businesses need to look, especially when we’re talking about a sign, paint color, or a garage door, undermines the personalization and creative control of the owners, and can have a negative impact on their long-term success. I’m always open to discussions on history, and listening to why and how it should be preserved, but there’s a level of classism that comes with wanting to keep neighborhoods the same while we have a large population of individuals that remain unhoused. I prioritize getting our most under-resourced community members into actual affordable houses, before worrying about a building being out of step with the rest of the neighborhood. Given last summer’s ‘listening and learning’ that came from white allies after the murder of George Floyd, I actually think we have a great opportunity to put an emphasis on inclusive historic preservation and highlighting the intersections between architecture and racial justice. (and, Preserving the Abyssinian House is a great start). I also think this is the crux of why it’s so important to ensure we have diverse perspectives in leadership positions. We need to advocate for shared understanding and open dialogues, while understanding that we each see these topics through different lenses. It’s these important conversations that will aid us in shaping a city that can truly be for all of us.

Travis Curran (At-Large): The Maine Historical Society needs to make important decisions on which buildings to protect and keep and which we can sacrifice for the sake of the others. Density is important to a city's growth but we can strike a balance without losing our historic structures that bolster Portland as a destination city rich with history.

Brandon Mazer (At-Large): We need to have an in-depth review of the design standards to ensure that if and when buildings are demolished that the new buildings that are built in there place are rightfully in the context of the surrounding buildings.

Stuart Tisdale (At-Large): I have always loved the aesthetics of historic streetscapes, like Park Street or the row houses on the corner of Carroll and Thomas Streets. I remember when the City intended to tear down most of the Old Port, but was deterred by Frank Akers and others who saw the value in historic architecture. I remember once, when I was very young, being taken on the train to Boston from Union Station, which was torn down for an Arlen's Department Store and parking lot. One can only imagine the value that old structure would have today if it had been properly preserved. So, yes, I do have concern. The City, no less than private developers, are capable of blindness to the value of historic buildings and to the worth of preserving the scale of historic streetscapes. To the extent that the City Council has veto power over any such projects, I will vote against them absent powerful countervailing considerations.

Question 5: Historically the peninsula and the City’s major transportation corridors were denser than existing conditions and had a greater mix of residential and commercial uses. The automobile, Urban Renewal, and mid 20th century zoning have had a lasting impact on the City – good and bad. The downside is Portland’s early 20th century public transportation network was displaced, parking lots replaced many homes and businesses, and dense historic building patterns and uses were curtailed. Would you support new zoning and land use policies that urge developers to create new well-designed, higher density developments on underutilized lots to reknit the fabric of our neighborhoods and enliven the city’s major corridors?

Sarah Michniewicz (District 1): Yes, I would like to see zoning examined and transportation systems improved in order to take advantage of existing infrastructure and transportation corridors thereby creating new, walkable village centers, particularly off-peninsula. This approach to growing and revitalizing the city is explicitly called for in Portland’s 2030 comprehensive plan. On peninsula the completion of the METRO peninsula loop and continued revitalization of underserved neighborhoods like Bayside with new mixed use developments and inspired adaptive reuse will help grow Portland’s housing stock, and vital neighborhood amenities, and build a more vibrant and connected community. The key word is “well-designed,” so that new development adds new energy while simultaneously harmonizing with the existing context in ways that make sense.

Jon Hinck (District 2): Yes. I am aware of the urban planning concepts outlined in this question. I share the views expressed here and would support the new zoning and land use policies suggested. My current thinking is completely in line with this. I would remain open to learn more and to assess how best to move forward on this important set of priorities.

Victoria Pelletier (District 2): I look forward to a full review of our zoning and land use policies and agree that we need to increase residential density (both on and off peninsula) on traffic corridors. This also opens up an important discussion on the necessity of increased public transit and reduction of parking requirements so that we can advocate for real affordable housing. Portland is a small, efficient, and walkable city. However, it has been morphed into an ideal that fits with the globalized commercial nature of our American culture. Our city has so much potential to be a leader in transportation efficiency, but it first could benefit from championing the characteristics which make the people and the infrastructure great, while denouncing the high carbon flair of the past. Due to this, not only is it important to review zoning and density, but we also need elected leaders that push for policies that will encourage less driving and mode switching, and more options for walkability and public transit.

Travis Curran (At-Large): As I stated above, yes, I will absolutely urge and create incentives for developers to build more affordable workforce housing along our major corridors, paired with smarter public transit, we can create thriving neighborhood centers while still keeping Portland's history and spirit intact.

Brandon Mazer (At-Large): Absolutely. We need to start getting away from having such high parking requirements, especially on major transportation corridors and using this space for housing.

Stuart Tisdale (At-Large): I am sickened by sprawl and strongly favor mixed use neighborhoods with greater density. To me, Deering Center, where I live, is our most successful neighborhood, because it has mixed uses and epitomizes the concept of the walking city. I can walk to the store, to a deli, to a restaurant, to a coffee shop, and to get a haircut, among other things. Kids in the neighborhood can walk to school, to a Friday night high school football or soccer game under the lights, or to the Little League Field. I am all in favor redesigning neighborhoods with a greater mix of residential and commercial uses. If there were more frequent Metro service between the neighborhood and downtown, it would be even better.

Note: Council Candidates Anna Trevorrow (District 1) and Roberto Rodriguez (At-Large) were contacted by email, twice, but did not respond to our survey.

Historic Preservation and Rising Waters

Flooding in Gardiner in 1936 Fogler Library, University of Maine

Flooding in Gardiner in 1936 Fogler Library, University of Maine

Downtown Gardiner Floods in 1987 Portland Press Herald

Downtown Gardiner Floods in 1987 Portland Press Herald

Flooding in a watery state like Maine is not unusual. Spring thaw usually brings warnings of flooding along Maine’s rivers and streams. An occasional Nor’Easter that arrives during high tide can mean flooding will wreck havoc on our coastal communities. What can we learn from past events? What can we learn from other coastal communities across the county? What happens to historic buildings that flood periodically? What can be done to alleviate the repeated flooding and damage to properties? As sea levels rise and storm intensity and frequency increase, preservationists are grappling with these issues. What should we do?

Doing Nothing

Doing nothing will likely result in the loss of historic resources. Maine has already experienced loss of coastal structures, notably thirty-eight homes at Saco’s Camp Ellis and the dramatic loss of an industrial building in Lubec.

Despite a fundraising campaign and plans to raise and relocate an endangered waterfront building, Lubec lost the historic landmark in a January 2018 storm that lashed the region with snow, rain and high winds. The storm coincided with an astronomically high tide. Listed on the National Registered of Historic Places, the McCurdy Smokehouse brining shed, was located in the channel east of Water Street and long a part of the Lubec Landmarks collection. It came free of supporting pilings during the peak of the storm‑surge driven tide, turning the shed from a historical structure into a hazard to navigation. After crossing the Lubec Channel into Canada, the shed ended up coming to rest on the Campobello shore, where scavengers dismantled parts of it before Lubec Landmarks and Canadian authorities could act. Thankfully, in its float across the channel it did not collide with the Franklin D. Roosevelt Memorial Bridge. More information on the McCurdy Smokehouse can be found at the Island Institute.

Recognize Loss: let nature takes its course

Rising seas and erosion poses an especially acute problem for managing cultural resources because our resources are unique and irreplaceable — once lost, they are lost forever. If moved or altered, they lose aspects of their significance and meaning. Every year, we lose irreplaceable parts of our collective cultural heritage, sometimes before we even know they exist. Therefore, the decisions we make and the priorities we set today will determine the effectiveness of our stewardship of cultural resources in the coming decades.

Economic or other practicalities may mean some communities will decide that they can’t save all their historic resources, either through relocation or adaptation. What then can be done in the short term to manage those properties? Documenting historic resources is always a good first step, then decisions can be made about short term actions.

“Responsible stewardship requires making choices that promote
resilience and taking sustainable management actions. Funding
temporary repairs for resources that cannot, because of their
location or fragility, be saved for the long term, demands
careful thought. Managers should consider choices such as
documenting some resources and allowing them to fall into
ruin rather than rebuilding after major storms.”
— National Park Service, PM 14-02

The United Kingdom’s National Trust stewards 775 miles of dramatic, diverse and ever-changing coastline around England, Wales and Northern Ireland. With over 700 properties that could be lost due to erosion by 2030 and 247,000 residences and businesses at risk from flooding, in 2005 the organization concluded that they could no longer rely solely on building their way out of trouble on the coast and that coastal ‘defence’ as the only response to managing coastal change looked increasingly less plausible. They established a new policy, Shifting Sands, committing them to working with natural processes and adapting to coastal change – for instance by rolling back, moving buildings and infrastructure out of harm’s way. Their policy sets out goals to:

  • Be driven by long-term sustainable plans, not short-term engineered defenses

  • See coastal adaptation as a positive force for good

  • Take action now – move from saying to doing

  • Work closely with communities – with everyone having their say

  • Act across boundaries – join forces with partners and people

  • Innovate – have the courage to try out new ideas

  • Aspire to a healthy coastline, shaped by natural forces.

Managed Retreat

Managed retreat or managed realignment is a coastal management strategy that allows a shoreline to move inland, instead of attempting to hold the line with engineered defenses. In many cases of managed retreat, buildings and infrastructure are “moved” out of harm’s way and natural areas are restored in the abandoned area. The restored natural coastal habitat provides extra protection or a buffer from flooding. This approach is relatively new but is gaining traction among coastal policy makers and managers in the face of increased coastal hazard risks. There is a growing recognition that attempting to “hold the line” in many communities is a losing battle - and a costly one.

For decades, federal policy has subsidized building in the flood zone via the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) of 1968. This facilitates a cycle of destroy-rebuild-repeat within the flood zone. Federal data shows that from 1978 to 2018, more than 36,000 NFIP-insured properties filed repeated claims for flood damage. A 2019 study published in Science Magazine laid out a case for strategic and managed retreat, found that a single home in Mississippi was rebuilt 34 times in 32 years using $663,000 in federal tax dollars—for a home worth only $69,000.

Retreat isn’t a word one normally associated with the U.S. military, but Naval Station Norfolk, because of its strategic importance and its vulnerability to climate change, is at the leading edge of adaptation and managed retreat discussions in the country. Naval Station Norfolk is a vast complex in southeastern Virginia whose 80,000 active-duty personnel make it the largest naval base on earth by population. The ships and aircraft stationed at Naval Station Norfolk are at risk as the seas are rising, and the soil is sinking. Already, key access roads to the low-lying Naval Station Norfolk are occasionally submerged during high tides. Current and former Navy leaders have been outspoken on the need to adapt to the increased numbers of days that they experience recurrent flooding and the critical need to make plans for what the Navy will do if Norfolk goes underwater. While headway has been made, planned critical safety upgrades at the naval station were halted and funds redirected by the previous administration.

Back in 2014, the federal government launched the Hampton Roads Sea Level Rise Preparedness and Resilience Intergovernmental Pilot Project (IPP). Its purpose was to bring together civilian and military officials to plan for a future of rising water and worsening floods. For the next two years, city leaders and state planners, Air Force colonels and Navy commanders worked across their own jurisdictional boundaries. They examined how rising sea levels could endanger roads, bridges, schools, businesses, and public health. Despite challenges, it helped change the conversation in the community. In 2019 the Navy and the cities of Norfolk and Virginia Beach released a joint report that looked at steps needed to protect schools, roads, a hospital, and Naval Station Norfolk from the encroaching water. Now Norfolk and Virginia Beach are taking steps to plan and execute relocation of residents in harms way.


Portland’s waterfront and the Bayside neighborhood are already experiencing recurrent flooding and are predicted to increasingly be impacted by the effects of sea level rise. Natural Resource Council of Maine

Portland’s waterfront and the Bayside neighborhood are already experiencing recurrent flooding and are predicted to increasingly be impacted by the effects of sea level rise. Natural Resource Council of Maine

As Greater Portland begins to plan how to address the impacts of climate change and preservationists assist in those conversations, hopefully we will look at the work being done in other communities here in the United States and abroad that are leading the way in mitigation and adaptation actions that will help to conserve our collective cultural heritage.

Landmarks has been studying the risks to historic properties in Greater Portland and documenting properties that may be impacted by recurrent flooding and sea level rise. We have compiled a guide for property owners to help them begin to think about their property’s risks and potential ways to adapt or mitigate the potential impacts of climate change. You can check out our new publication on our website!


Bayside's Cedar Street

by Julie Larry and Evan Brisentine

Bayside is full of some of the earliest homes in Portland, as they escaped the Great Fire of 1866. While other Portland neighborhoods lost most of their Federal and Greek Revival architecture during the Great Fire, Bayside suffered less damage with most of western Bayside left untouched by the flames. Some of the earliest homes on Portland’s peninsula are still standing in Bayside.

During the mid 20th century’s urban renewal period, Portland’s newly created Slum Clearance and Redevelopment Authority highlighted Bayside as a target neighborhood. In 1958 the Authority demolished 92 dwellings and 27 small businesses in what we now call East Bayside. Another 54 dwelling units were razed for the Bayside Park urban renewal project, an area that now includes Fox Field and Kennedy Park public housing. The razing of Franklin Street began in 1967 when a 100 structures were demolished and an unknown number of families relocated or were displaced.

The City’s urban renewal projects had a great effect on immigrant communities in Bayside including Italian-American, Armenian-American, and Jewish families that had settled in Portland from Eastern Europe. However many Armenian families remained in Bayside after Urban Renewal, but their numbers are dwindling and their homes are disappearing.

The first Armenian immigrants arrived in Maine in 1896 to escape growing persecution in Turkey. Starting in the early part of the 20th century, the Bayside neighborhood was home to an substantial Armenian community. More than 250 Armenian families settled in the neighborhood. The Armenians in Portland were a close-knit community. As their numbers grew, they established a school, stores, restaurants, a social club, and a bank.

Cedar Street, just downhill from Portland High School and uphill from the Oxford Street shelter, is home to a number of dwellings once owned by Portland’s Armenian community. Armenian families also lived on Lancaster, Alder, Oxford, and Smith Streets.

44 Cedar Street built c1855. Surrounded by parking lots, this wonderfully detailed brick building was recently for sale.

44 Cedar Street built c1855. Surrounded by parking lots, this wonderfully detailed brick building was recently for sale.

44 Cedar Street was owned for many years by members of the Tavanian [Tevanian] family (Book 1496, Page17 in 1936). Bagdasar & Gerigos Tavanian were listed as the owners in 1924 tax assessor documentation, having purchased the dwelling in 1921.

Bagdasar Tavanian (1889-1939) came to the United States in in 1906 and settled in Portland, working as a baker’s helper in a hotel at 638 Congress Street according to the 1910 US Census.

Gerigos Tavanian arrived in the United States from Turkey in 1915 according to census records. In April 24, 1915 several hundred Armenian intellectuals were rounded up, arrested and later executed at the start of a period of systematic mass murder of around one million ethnic Armenians in the Ottoman Empire during World War I. Many Armenians came to Portland 1915-1917 to escape the violence. A year before he purchased 44 Cedar Street, US Census records show Gerigos, age 24, was working as a cook and boarding with another Armenian family, the Amerigians, on Lancaster Street.

In the 1930s, 44 Cedar was owned by Louis Tevanian (36) a cook. He lived in the dwelling with his wife Rakel and their children. Rakel and Louis owned and operated a restaurant in Portland for 21 years. She also was a cashier for several years at the Pride's Corner Drive-In Movie Theater in Westbrook, a business opened by her sons John and Avadis in 1953. Also living at 44 Cedar Street in the 1930s was Robert Tevanian, a baker, and his wife Shaka and children. Until recently the dwelling was still owned by members of Shaka Tevanian’s family.

44 Cedar Street in 1924. City of Portland

44 Cedar Street in 1924. City of Portland

44 Cedar Street was originally owned by Sarah E. Loring. She purchased the lot occupied by 44 Cedar Street in 1853. Sarah was the wife of Charles Loring, and the couple lived on the street, taking out a mortgage on their new brick house in 1855. Sarah owned the dwelling until her death in 1885. Their son George B. Loring (c1835-1896) was a founding partner of Loring, Short, & Harmon, a stationery and business supply company.


19 Cedar Street was built c1859 for Mary Jane and Peter Lane. It was demolished in August 2021.

19 Cedar Street was built c1859 for Mary Jane and Peter Lane. It was demolished in August 2021.

19 Cedar Street’s earliest history shows that it was built for Mary Jane and Peter Lane in 1859. It was later owned by Sarah S. Hall, the widow of Stephen Hall, from 1867 until her death. It was purchased in the 1920s by Mesak (or Misak) Papazian 'Martin'.

19 Cedar Street in 1924. City of Portland.

19 Cedar Street in 1924. City of Portland.

Mr. Papazian (1874-1930) came to the United States in 1900 and established an Armenian grocery store. His son John Papazian Martin (1917-2010) attended nearby Portland High School and upon returning from World War II, started the 20th Century Supermarkets. John Martin built his stores into a chain of supermarkets, later known as Martin's grocery stores, that he sold to Hannaford Brothers in the early 1970's. He then began his second career in the restaurant business creating John Martin's Restaurants. John owned 19 Cedar Street following his mother's death from 1934-1944. John's daughter Andrea Martin became an Emmy and Tony Award winning actress.


15 Cedar Street was likely built prior to the Great Fire of 1866, as it had elements of Greek Revival details before the second floor was added sometime between 1924 and 1954.

15 Cedar Street was likely built prior to the Great Fire of 1866, as it had elements of Greek Revival details before the second floor was added sometime between 1924 and 1954.

15 Cedar Street in 1924. City of Portland.

15 Cedar Street in 1924. City of Portland.

15 Cedar Street’s early history is unknown, but it was probably built in the mid 19th century as it originally was a one story Greek Revival dwelling. To date in our research, Charles P. Rolfe is the first known owner of this home purchasing the dwelling c1871. He gave the property to his daughter Mary S. Deane in 1891. David W. Deane and Mary S. Deane (formerly Rolfe) married in 1861, and lived on Congress Street before owning the home on Cedar Street. David W. Deane (1838-1924) was born in Massachusetts but lived most of his life in Portland. His first career was a railroad car maker, but around 1870 became a furniture dealer. In 1879, Deane Bros. furniture store was located at 204 Franklin Street, until he added on a partner and became Deane Bros & Sandborn furniture shop and moved to 335 Congress Street. Upon Mary’s death in 1924, the property was left to David W. Deane who died later that same year.

In 1930, the property was owned by Arshag Kochian and his wife Bazza (often spelled Bazzar). Arshag and Bazza were Armenian immigrants who came to the U.S. in 1913 and 1920, respectively. Arshag worked as a laborer at a nearby pottery, possibly Winslow Pottery. In 1930s the dwelling’s second unit was occupied by the Litrocrapes family. The Litrocrapes family included Charles, his wife Helen, son George, daughter Evelyn, and Charles’ brother Lausarus. Charles (1897-1976) came to the United States from Greece in 1911 and became a citizen in 1918. His first job was a bootblack at a shoe parlor.

IMG_0592[1].JPG

The Boys and Girls Club of Southern Maine bought the properties located at 15 and 19 Cedar Street behind their Cumberland Avenue clubhouse. The Boys and Girls Club of Southern Maine has yet to announce what they would like to do with the properties, but the historic homes were demolished in early August of 2021.

These Cedar Street houses not only represent Portland’s mid-19th century architectural history as well as the history of Portland’s immigrant population. You can learn more about the history of the neighborhood on our East Bayside, West Bayside, and Portland’s Chinese Community in 1920 Walking Tours

Federal Advocacy Alert

Ask your legislators to support the
Historic Tax Credit enhancement provisions included in the infrastructure legislation.


Your outreach will directly determine
how much support HTC provisions will receive in ongoing negotiations with the Biden Administration.

For months, Greater Portland Landmarks has joined preservation supporters across the country to advocate for improvements to the federal Historic Tax Credit program. Last week, the House Ways and Means Committee passed a key piece of infrastructure legislation that will expand and improve a number of community development incentives.

Historic Tax Credit provisions, similar to the House version of the Historic Tax Credit Growth and Opportunity Act (HTC-GO/H.R. 2294), were included in the legislation and passed out of committee on a vote of 24 to 19. The following HTC provisions were included in the bill passed out of the Ways and Means Committee:

  • Temporarily Increasing the HTC From 20% to 30% for all projects. (Sec. 135301)

  • Permanent increase in the rehabilitation credit for small projects. (Sec. 135302)

  • Modification of substantial rehabilitation definition. (Sec. 135303)

  • Elimination of basis adjustment. (Sec. 135304)

  • Modifications of tax-exempt use leasing rules. (Sec. 135305)

  • Enabling HTC to be used for public school buildings. (Sec. 135306)

How can you help?

While Senate Democrats are in control of the present phase of negotiations and Maine doesn't have a Democratic Senator, we encourage you to reach out and express to our legislators the impact Historic Tax Credits have on economic development and affordable housing creation in Maine communities today! Will you join us?

Despite strong support in the House, the Biden Administration is currently negotiating with House and Senate leadership to reduce the cost and scope of the bill. All historic tax credit provisions are in jeopardy of reduction or elimination.

Saying Goodbye to the UMaine School of Law Building

The Home of the University of Maine Law School is being demolished after 50 years of looming over Oakdale.

By Archer Thomas

Since 1972, the hulking concrete mass of the University of Maine School of Law Building has quite literally loomed over the otherwise low-rise and residential Oakdale neighborhood. There is nothing quite like it in Portland, or Maine for that matter. In a city whose historic character is well reflected in the restrained traditionalism of most of its architecture, the Law Building is audaciously modern and unapologetically controversial.

UMaine Law’s home building is being demolished after 50 years of looming over Oakdale.

Admittedly, the structure is hard to love. For one, the Law Building sticks out like a sore thumb, an eight-story behemoth in the last state where the tallest building is a church. Being one of Maine’s very few Brutalist or Brutalism-adjacent structures, its raw concrete siding matches the drab gray of an overcast sky. The turret-like form of its main tower, complete with quasi-medieval crenellation, emphasizes the lack of correspondence between the building and its surroundings. Adding these aesthetic issues on top of its function as a law school and connotations surrounding the world of litigation, one can begin to understand the weariness that Portlanders have generally expressed towards the structure.

 

The building was designed by Wadsworth, Boston, Dimick, Mercer, and Weatherill, a local architecture firm.

The building was designed by Wadsworth, Boston, Dimick, Mercer, and Weatherill, a local architecture firm.

In 2017, Architectural Digest—one of the most popular architecture magazines in the country—published a list featuring “The 7 Ugliest University Buildings in America.” Lo and behold, the UMaine Law Building made the cut. Though the building escaped some of the harsher critiques levelled at the other unlucky finalists—including “prisonlike” (the Health Sciences Center at Louisiana State University) and “like a Disney villain’s lair” (Crosley Tower at the University of Cincinnati)—the listing caught the attention of local news outlets, who playfully reveled in the negative attention the structure was receiving. The Portland Press Herald noted that the building’s recognition as a “real stinker” was “surprising no one who works there,” including Associate Dean for Academic Affairs Dmitry Bam, for whom “there are days when he thinks it would be nice to have an office in a traditional brick building overlooking the water.”

Well, it appears that Bam and the rest of the Law Building’s critics are in luck—the University of Maine System announced this past spring that the concrete giant would be coming down. Temporarily, the School of Law will be relocating to an office building at 300 Fore Street in the Old Port. Ostensibly, the most pressing reason behind the decision is the continued deterioration of the structure. According to Dean Leigh Saufley, “What is wrong with the building is a four-hour conversation.”

The deterioration of concrete mid-century buildings (Brutalist or otherwise) is a rising concern in this country—look no further than the tragic collapse of a condo building in Surfside, Florida which claimed around 100 lives this summer. While concrete by itself is enormously resilient (the dome of the Pantheon in Rome, for instance, has lasted almost two millennia), the vast majority of concrete buildings erected in the past century are reinforced, meaning that rebar (steel bars) is embedded within the concrete. While this practice dramatically increases the tensile strength of concrete, both it and steel possess properties which threaten the integrity of the composite material as they weather. Concrete, although appearing extremely solid, can actually allow the infiltration of moisture after years of exposure. While moisture is not necessarily a threat to concrete on its own, steel can rust, gradually breaking down the rebar and leading to flaking and fracturing in the surrounding concrete, a process called spalling.

Moreover, once it begins, the degradation of reinforced concrete is extremely difficult and costly to stop. In order to preserve Frank Lloyd Wright’s Unity Temple in Oak Park, Illinois, for instance, most of the concrete had to be reapplied one side at a time so as to replace all the rusted rebar, requiring the structure to be held up by temporary supports. In effect, the restoration necessitated the piecemeal replacement of the almost the entire structure, a feat which cost a whopping $25 million for a single church.

 

A 1967 photograph of Unity Temple in Oak Park, Ill. from the Library of Congress

A 1967 photograph of Unity Temple in Oak Park, Ill. from the Library of Congress

Though the challenges facing the Law Building could likely be addressed for less than that sum, the difficulties associated with concrete preservation will probably lead to the sacrifice of hundreds of aesthetically and historically significant modernist buildings in coming decades. Furthermore, the decision to demolish rather than rehabilitate aging Brutalist buildings is relatively common because until recently it was easy to forget that these concrete structures were once loved and seen as beautiful. According to an associate dean at the School of Law, the building’s architect was so pleased with his design that (allegedly) “he used to set up a folding chair out front and just stare at it some days.” Nevertheless, the Press Herald’s recent coverage of the building’s woes fails to include a single contemporary voice who values the structure as a piece of Portland’s modernist heritage.

The recognition that modernist buildings are valuable and warrant the same kind of attention and protection directed at other historic structures is growing. Over the past few decades, several international organizations have arisen to promote the preservation of the world’s modernist heritage. Activists have adeptly utilized the internet and social media to introduce Brutalism and other modernist subgenres to a new generation and rally the public around preservation. In 2015, the SOS Brutalism project was launched, including a global, publicly available database of Brutalist buildings. Maine only possesses one listing on SOS Brutalism—the Law Building—and soon it will have none.

Efforts to preserve modernist concrete buildings represent an ironic turning point in the preservation movement. In many cases, the structures currently under threat are the same ones which arose from the wholescale decimation of earlier historic sites in the mid-20th century, a process which kicked off the preservation movement in the first place. Scollay Square, a lively European-style city plaza located in downtown Boston, was bulldozed in the 1960s to make way for the Government Center complex including the new Boston City Hall. The decision was almost immediately upheld as an archetypical example of urban renewal’s harmful excesses. The Boston City Hall increasingly came to be seen as a regrettable mistake. In the 2000s, however, when the city considered selling the property to developers, preservation activists and members of the community stood in support of the concrete giant. Redevelopment gradually faded from the city’s agenda, and City Hall was saved.

 

2350791131_ScollaySq.jpg
Contrast Boston’s Scollay Square in the late 19th century (left) with this 1968 image of  Government Center.

Contrast Boston’s Scollay Square in the late 19th century (left) with this 1968 image of Government Center.

Similarly, the Law Building replaced a row of quaint Victorian single-family homes along Deering Avenue. If they had survived to the present day, it is very possible that they would be protected under a historic preservation ordinance. Nevertheless, this is not what occurred, and we find ourselves in a similar circumstance to the 1960s when the Law Building was first being conceived. In the rush to move on from our past, we are at risk of depriving our descendants of their architectural heritage. If any lesson should be taken from the urbanism of the mid-20th century, it is that tastes change. One person’s eyesore is another’s gem. If the Law Building is truly beyond saving, as it might well be, it is imperative that we as a public at least pay it the homage it deserves. Who knows? Maybe one day we will remember it like we remember Portland’s Union Station—a venerable victim of regrettably shortsighted times.

IMG_0609[1].JPG

Archer Thomas is a recent graduate of Bowdoin College, having majored in history and minored in government and legal Studies. Growing up in Buxton, Archer has loved Portland and appreciated Greater Portland Landmarks’ work from a young age. Architectural history and urbanism have been passions of his for a long time, with his undergraduate thesis having focused on the historical and theoretical relationship between Brutalist and postmodern architecture. He is also a 2021 Thomas J. Watson Fellow and will embark on a year of learning about urban rail infrastructure around the world as soon as State Department travel advisories allow. Afterwards, he hopes to enroll in a graduate program in historical preservation, architectural history, or architecture.