Accessibility: Ancient History?

by fcahill

Something I find interesting about courthouses is accessibility.  There are obviously many forms of accessibility regarding the courthouse but one I would like to focus on at the moment is locational accessibility.  This could be a form of openness, but on a greater scale.

Going back in history, one thing that seemed to crop up most of the time was that the courthouse was in the center of town. Possibly in a square.  It generally didn’t popup in the middle of nowhere, or so many miles outside of town-it needed to be where most of the people were or congregated.  Even as towns became cities, the courthouse remained within the city and even today many courthouses are built within the city.  But it seems as though many are not.  As time has gone by, new courthouses are being built outside the city, to the point where many people have to take the time to drive, take the bus, or use some form of transportation to get to it. (Clarification: as people because suburban-dwellers they relied on the car for everything, so even to get downtown they had to drive, so I’m not focusing on them).  So, up until recently, it seems as though the courthouse was a centrally located place in town that was easy enough to get to, OR (as many people have mentioned personally) it was passed while walking in the city each day.

This being the case, our courthouse is not exactly centrally located.  Many people drive by it on their way to work or home or shopping.  But it is a very busy road and would be difficult to cross.  Hence, some thoughts. How is this site going to be accessible?  How are we going to make it so that anybody who is curious enough to venture in our direction can, without endangering themselves because they have to walk on roads? Cross big roads? Bike in heavy traffic?  Is it possible to make it more safe as a designer? I’m not talking about making sure there is enough parking for people once they arrive or have enough bike racks or a close bus stop.  So if we are thinking about making this a mixed-use facility, we want people to venture over; can we make them feel comfortable doing so?

Advanced Criminal Law and You

by caroothers

The Courthouse is really the expression of the justice system in a democracy.  It has to be very open, and yet has to be secure … The idea of openness representing freedom in democracy [is] really an important part of the concept.

–  Gyo Obata

The modern day courthouse is the result of a steady evolution in civic architecture that has spanned the timeline of civilized societies. Throughout this evolution there are common similarities between the civic architectures of each age.  The courthouses of the Ancient Greeks, Early Americans, and the Modern Society have developed through style, program, and from, however, the common typology of civic architecture today can be traced back to the beginnings of society.

The courthouse was developed with the Greek Democracy.  The government representative of the people (the Boule) met in the Bouletarian to preform the functions of a government and bring people to trial.  The structure was designed as a piece of the greater Agora.  The original government complex developed out of the necessity to bring the government of the people, to the people.

The Bouletarian was a clever mix of forms, of a solid foundation of representatives and an open connection to those people that are represented.  The openness of the courtyard within the building walls allowed the democratic process to always be open to the society.  The judgement of an individual is done by their peers under the broad scope of society.  The elements of architecture that composed the Bouletarian were so basic and fundamental, that they were adopted by the American Government to represent the foundation of a stable, strong government.  The use of the basic elements of structure (column, beam, pediment) symbolize the theory of the American Democracy today.  It is a simple system that is just, strong, and fundamental for an evolving society.

The Early American Courthouses developed as a central axis of the American Landscape.  Each town developed a cultural hub that surrounded the courthouse.  It was here that the largest metropolises were formed, and the smallest towns were maintained.  The courthouse was central to the development of the United States.  The early courthouses were placed in the center of developments, separated from other buildings, and typically taking up their own city block.  This placement allowed for the access of public lands by the people, which developed the initial commercial and residential zones which surround the downtown.  It is this courthouse architype that is so engrained in every American’s mind.  The installation of the one room courthouse, much like the Greek Bouletarian, held fate of an individual as decided by a jury of their peers.  The towns came together in these courthouses to not only hold trial, but to conduct govenment business, hold meetings, and  social functions.  This one room held more of the societical benefits than any other building in the town.  It stood alone and separated within the framework of the town as a representation of the process of law, and a symbol of authority.  The solid, gabled roof structure sat high above the ground, to show that no one is above the law.  It was a presence of a greater power, visually separated, yet open to the people it served.  The symbol of the building holds all the power in the land, yet would be powerless without the people it stands above.  It is the ultimate symbol of our founding democracy.  You are the law, but you are not above it.

Within architectural standards, this structure has only recently become challenged.  The modern courthouse pushes past the idea of a courthouse as a separate part of the urban fabric.  The public use of the building has become much more on the forefront of the design process.  Bringing the disconnected public back to the courthouse, for reasons other than court proceedings.  The new wave of courthouse design has moved from the monolithic and classical forms to the use of more modern materials within more modern typologies.  Large Glass Facades, Stone Veneer, and Huge Atriums are all standards that are starting to emerge in modern day design.  These forms and ideas have greatly changed the perception of the building within the public landscape.  No longer are people looking to the government as being above socity, the modern civic courthouse is looking back to Ancient Greece and the Agora to promote the civic functions of a society together, and to draw the people in.  The modern courthouses have developed a need for openness, the feeling that the building is accessible by the public has been thrusted to the forefront of the current design principles.  This architectural move allows for the courthouse to show that it is a part of the vernacular; it is not something that should be feared and misunderstood.  The courthouse effects the people as much as, if not more, any other branch in the American Democracy.  People should want to be involved.  It has not been until recently that this programic and formal feature has been dictating the design process.

The Greeks kept their system open to the public from the inside, to remind the representatives who they represent.  However, like the Historical concept of a courthouse, the building has been architecturally closed off from the society it serves.  That recent change in design is for the better, and it will only continue to push the way the American Court System evolves in the future.

The precedent studies looked into the diagramatic formalities of each building (one from the Classical Greek design, one Historical American Reference, and one Modern Design).  The Diagrams of Site, Entrance, Solid/Void, Program, Ciruclation, and Structure highlight how the courthouse has evolved and changed with the ever changing intracacies of Democracy.  It is a simple comparison of different buildings to find out where the similarities are, and why they may have developed that way.  The final precedent is a study on a modern addition to a historical courthouse.  The connectivity of the two different forms and the play between old and new highlighted a common typology between two drastically different forms.  This concept helped the building to keep its roots yet move to the future in a way that differs from our programatic requirements, but still poses an interesting solution.

It is this evolution of design in which I have become interested.  This same programatic structure has spanned over two thousand years, and the forms have changed drastically, however that is only of late.  The most interested phenomenon about this evolution is that the design of the courthouse has been relatively unchanged for most of its existence.  It is the recent changes that have had the most effect on the fundamental form of the building.  I am looking to discover that link between the past and the future.  How can the courthouse move forward in design with a modern form, yet hark back simple roots of classical democracy?

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Some Wisdom from Thurgood Marshall

by workbymichelletodd

Due to struggling with the task of turning site synthesis into something artistic, I figured inspiration may good be a place to start. Until our site visit tomorrow, I decided to avoid further analysis of the site and instead try to find some more inspiration relating to courthouses and who is a better source to pull from than Thurgood Marshall himself. I originated my search with the phrase “courthouse quotes” just to see what was out there that would spark my interest. The quote below surfaced itself and I found it very appropriate and encouraged thought:

“Mere access to the courthouse doors does not by itself assure a proper functioning of the adversary process.”
-Thurgood Marshall

I read this quote and realized that an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court has realized that there is an issue in the previous decades of  culture and design of courthouses. The design of courthouses, prior to the GSA movement to improve the vernacular, was simply derelict. While the courthouse functioned in terms of providing a structure to hold court, it was not providing a means for the process of law to be fully expressed.

This, then in turn made me think of what all is involved in the process of law. Is it simply just trying a case or is there more beneath the surface definition of law?

I then had some sort of an epiphone or more of an enlightenment. Law isn’t just about the legal aspect, but about the cultural networkings that rely on the civic nature of law. People are what drive law and the need for law. The culture of a certain community drive the meaning of law to them which, can be reflected in the “adversary process” as mentioned by Mr. Marshall. The process of which he speaks refers to conflicting views. But, that is what’s great about our legal system. The conflicting views have been established by the people and for the people. The courthouses that were designed for 40 years were decrepit and inefficient at expressing the beautiful symbiotic relationship between culture and law; how people in the community rely on civility. This should be reflected into courthouses today and because of this series of thought, is now an objective of mine. Not only should the doors of the courthouse open, but they should open whole-heartedly to the community, becoming forum of expression and gathering as well as upholding law and the justice that preserves the sanctity of communities.

upholding the law and community

“It should be …

by studiocourthouse

“It should be our object to meet the test of Pericles’ evocation to the Athenians… We do not imitate – for we are a model to others. Federal architecture should embody the finest contemporary American architectural thought.”

– Patrick Moynihan, US Senator