[space + justice]

The adventures of a UNCC architecture studio exploring the contemporary American courthouse.

The Final Pinup

by fcahill

It’s hard to believe the semester is over for studio.  I have really enjoyed reading about everybody’s progress on the blog and it has definitely been an interesting experience to post my own stuff up-instead of just pinning up.  Below are my final drawings and model from last Wednesday.  The review went well and I was pleased with the feedback I received-it was both positive and constructive.

View of Skatepark and Stair

View of Skatepark and Stair

View of Main Entrance and Skatepark

View of Main Entrance and Skatepark

Courtroom

Courtroom

View from Suttle Avenue

View from Suttle Avenue

1st Floor + Site

1st Floor + Site

Building + Site Section Cut

Building + Site Section Cut

My Presentation Board

My Presentation Board

Board + Models

Board + Models

South Entrance

South Entrance

Site Model

Site Model

Peer-Review

by fcahill

For the peer-review I focused on what views I would focus on for the final review, materials for the building and showed the skatepark research I had done in order to decided what kind of skatepark (size, materials, location) to put in the site and how it would relate to the courthouse.  The perspectives focus on the view of the building and how it relates to the site versus material.  I included to ‘model’ perspectives that I plan on rendering similarly.

After the review, it was decided that the skatepark needs to be included in the perspectives but sections would not help my presentation because my building rotates so much it would not make anything clearer.  I also decided that my model needs to be more than a massing model but more a representation of the building and site and how they work together.

My plans are in the process of changing (after talking with Chrissy) and how my program dictated my form too much so they are not included.  The next few steps will be the finalization of my plans (with furniture, wall thickness and windows) and then I will begin to figure how to build my model and what types of materials I will be using.

Progress with Movement

by fcahill

These past two weeks I focused on refining my plans with the feedback I received at my mid-review.  This also meant working in section and elevation.  I began by addressing the courtroom (and breaking the box) and then moved to the support spaces and in-custody movement.  From there I finalized a site location and building form.

I am currently trying to figure how the building works with the landscape and the surrounding connections and influences of Bryant Park and Greenway through site development and material.  My next step is researching skateparks and seeing how that can help influence the site as it is a pivotal part of my overall design (as my flex-space) in making the courthouse a destination.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Mid-Review Progress

by fcahill

For the mid-review last week, I was able to take stock of where I have come with my design and can now move forward with the feedback from the review.

From the beginning, I have been focusing on the building form and how that can represent as well as function as a ‘movement’ metaphor; for the public who comes to the courthouse as well as the system itself.  I presented alot of process from my beginning thoughts on movement, how it could translate to the court-set and then the courtroom design itself.  From those sketches, I jumped into the built form in conjunction with floor plans.  This was a very challenging part of the design because the 3 different circulations (public, private and in-custody) needed to be kept separate but still be economic in square footage. I was able to come to a solution by treating the courthouse as a Municipal courthouse (which it is) and not as a federal courthouse, where the separation of the private and public circulations are much more strict and necessary.  With the circulation, the biggest issue was the in-custody movement because with the rotation and setback of the courtset on each floor, if something worked on the 4th floor, it may not work on the 1st floor; I finally realized that I would have to have the criminal and magistrate courtrooms on the floors 1 and 2 in order to make it work.

I like where my form is at the moment, but with the feedback from Friday, I have a number of ideas that I want to try out and see where they lead.  This will also help in streamlining my plans because I feel that much of my support spaces can be better worked into the scheme of the building.

Finding that Balance

by fcahill

One of the first things I wanted to figure out was the courtroom design as I felt much of the form of the building would stem from that.  As my main metaphor that I’m trying to realize within the building is the idea of movement I felt it was important for that to come through in the courtrooms.  I played with curves and straight planes to try and find a balance between the two…I knew that they would be pivotal in helping bring people into and out of the courtroom but what then?  I feel that the courtroom design below finds a nice balance between the two while keeping the particular lines of sight and circulation clear and understood.

From there I moved to the form of the building, beginning in model form, but I ended up working in Rhino as it took waaaaay to long to building each courtroom-but the exercise did help in realizing how they might work together as pairs or as individuals as well as what they potentially looked like stacked directly or with some horizontal rotation.  The first two (on the middle row) play with the paired relation of the courtroom while the third delves closer into the elevation and some play with materials.

Finally, the sketches were a play in plans, elevations and sections as to how the courtrooms would look.  Interestingly, it becomes very planar even though I am cutting/viewing the curves so while there are curves they must be ‘experienced’ as you move through the spaces, which continues the idea of getting in (to the courtroom) and then getting out (and on with your life).

To Curve or Not

by fcahill

This week I moved from the courtroom set and delved into the program and looked at how to work the circulation of the private (judge), the public (us), and the in-custody defendant.  I began the week with a tower approach but as I understood the program more and how I wanted the circulation to work it morphed into more of a bar design.  Through sketches and models I began to work with the necessary space-relationships to see how the ideas of open and continuous movement worked/didn’t work through my models and sketches.

These begin look at the paired courtset plan from last week’s model.

The courtset begins to look at private v public and the spatial relationship between 2 courtrooms.

The paired courtrooms try to focus on ‘movement’ and a separation of private v public.

A separation of private and public is reached but is there still the idea of ‘movement’ present?

What’s Behind That Door?

by fcahill

My court visit started with difficulty.  I’m not sure if it is something inherent in cities and their one-way streets, but it was quite difficult to figure where I needed to go to get to the courthouse; I kept ‘just’ missing it due to one way streets and ‘no turns.’  I ended up parking next to the bus depot, which gave me a good idea of how people who would need to use public transportation would get to the courthouse.  Once I was finally past the security, it just a matter of deciding which court to start with.  This proved harder and easier than I expected.  Easier because I was able to walk into whichever courtroom I wanted, but harder because, even though to docket was posted outside each door, I had no idea what to expect on the other side of the door.  The first time,  going into criminal court, I was relieved to find myself in a buffer area where I had to go though another door to get into the actual courtroom.  The doors themselves were very imposing; extra-wide and pretty heavy, it definitely made an impression as I made my way into each courtroom.

The first court I visited was criminal court.  This was the most busy of the courts I visited, with people walking in and out on the both the private and ‘in-custody’ circulation sides.  The courtroom was mostly square, with the door ‘in-custody’ defendants used at a slight angle away from the public, and facing the judge.  This court was quite overwhelming as my first courtroom on a number of levels: the public benches were mostly full so I had to look to find a place before sitting, there were many attorneys sitting around waiting for their case to come before the judge (I was initially thrown off because some were sitting in the jury box), the typing of the court clerk was quite loud and constant as case after case was being presented, and finally I had major difficulty understanding the judge and hearing whoever was speaking from the counselors’  tables as they were facing away from the public, standing (because the cases were being moved through so quickly), and not speaking into the microphones.  Along with that, people were moving in and out on the public side, talking, and someone’s phone even went off-the bailiff just asked him to step outside.

On the opposite end of the criminal court was the family courtroom.  The procession up to it was quite different and gave an overall different feel before I even stepped into the courtroom.  I had to go to the top floor of the courthouse and when I stepped onto the floor it was much quieter   There was carpet in the main hall/circulation that kept things quiet, there were fewer people milling about, there were benches along some of the walls that allowed for someone to sit and not be seen and there was artwork on the walls.  While it was quieter, it was not unwelcoming.  The images and paint colors on the walls were fun to look at and interesting, but there was still that sense of “what’s behind the door?” that felt more consequential due to it being family court and knowing that emotions were potentially running high on the other side of the door.  The case I saw was a very low key case, but very interesting as the father was self-representing while the mother had a lawyer.  They were figuring out child custody and I got to see witnesses being questioned by both the father and the mother’s lawyer: it was very interesting to see how each did it differently and how, as the father kept leading the witnesses with his questions, the lawyer kept asking the judge to stop him.  It was very interesting to the see how we got different pictures of the witnesses by how they were questioned and what picture was formed by the type and direction of the questions.  This courtroom was octagonal so the public was more ‘involved’ in the case just by line of sight and because the witnesses were being called from the public seating.

Finally, I visited a civil courtroom-muuuuuch smaller (even the ceiling was lower)-and watched proceedings for renter’s who broke their lease agreement.  This was interesting because the judge had a lot of attitude and seemed quite brusque, but at the same time, when a young man had been unable to pay his rent due to outside issues and his landlord still would not take his rent, she gave him advice and hope (which was more moving as she had been very removed from all the other cases).

All in all it was a very interesting day, it changed my romantic ideas of court and reaffirmed some others but one thing that really stood out was the use of daylight inthe courtroom-or lack of it.  Each courtroom I visited had a pretty large window that either looked outside or in the case of the civil court which was on the lower level, the blinds were pulled and most people probably didn’t even notice it.  It gave the courtroom a timeless feel as we had no idea where the sun was, but as a designer, I was just very disheartened and disappointed.

Is It Possible To Freeze Movement?

by fcahill

I began this past week still looking at the individual courtrooms but progressed to looking at the court set as a whole within the site.  I continued to focus on ‘movement through built-form’ and fluidity by expanding to a slightly more flushed out concept model.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Facilitating Movement

by fcahill

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

The courthouse works as a machine that moves people through the judicial system in order for them to get on with their lives.  Therefore, the building should be able to help facilitate that movement and not be stagnant.  At the same time, there are multiple streams of movement throughout the building that work at different paces and must not intersect: the public realm is fast-paced and has destinations along the way (courtrooms) and while the private realm is also fast-paced it has it’s own set of paths and destinations depending on whether it is the judge, jury or litigant.

This design begins to look at different ways of facilitating that movement focusing on the courtroom set through sketches and models.

Speed of Encounter

by fcahill

With this site analysis, I looked at how the site was experienced by different modes of transportation: car, bike, and walking.  I started by looking at how one can arrive at the site with current access roads as well as looking at the proposed area changes of the Bryant Park Development (BPD) as current and accessible.

I first looked at the roads that surround our immediate site for pedestrian, bike and car access and broke it down from most to least accessible for pedestrians and cyclists.  This also included the Greenway as a way that would provide access to the site (which BPD proposed) as an additional way that cyclists and pedestrians could access easily from surround areas.Charlotte has also implemented a bike-share for the city and I located the bike stations, the roads with bike lanes and roads that should have bike lanes in the uptown and surrounding area.  The two closest bus routes that would bring people to the site are the Airport Bus Route and the Freedom Drive Bus Route which 7 days of the week.

At this point, I went and visited the site and experimented with how a building and site are seen when driving, bicycling or walking past.  For each pass, I noted the distance, the speed and the time it took me to get from point A to point B.  I used the Charlotte School of Law along Suttle Drive as a my test building.  While driving I noticed much less of what was surrounding me, especially because the building in question was close to the road whereas when I was walking I noticed not only the building but it’s surroundings, the views from all directions and how much I hoped there was shade along the way.

Design a site like this with WordPress.com
Get started