I have worked to refine a rendering technique that can be used to accurately portray this structure as a public space filled with light. The pin-up will be to gauge how these renderings and diagrams work together with my models and floor plans through presentation. I am looking to combine these elements and designs in a specific way to portray my building as an open courthouse through place and metaphor.
My current design efforts have taken a bifurcated track lately, focusing simultaneously on the site and the exterior envelope of the building. Sitewise, I have been trying to develop a parametric hardscape design, seeking to define the placement of the diamond-shaped pavers by a series of paths through the site. This ties in nicely with the final requirements for our Computational Methods class, and so I will continue to work on this until the end of the semester.
By sketching over a photo of my mid-term model, I am also trying to flesh out ideas of building skin at a finer level of detail than I had achieved by mid-semester. I am currently pursuing a cladding scheme for the courtroom volumes that wraps a facade peppered with long narrow windows. Perforated weathering steel (COR-TEN) or copper panels completely screen these apertures, mitigating sunlight from all directions. This also will create a monolithic appearance for the volumes, while still providing natural light and views. This goes back to some of my very first concept studies for screening the courtroom. Looking back at another (diagrammatic) model, I am continuing to try to establish lookouts/elevated public space, in addition to folding the building into the landscape.
Now that it has set in that we only have 22 days until our final review (including Thanksgiving), it has become very evident that what issues remain in my design need to be resolved. The majority of my process has been allocated to designing the courtsets and how they function as individual volumes while also providing a sense of cohesiveness. However, because most of my time was dedicated to resolving issues associated with that aspect, my entry volume had been neglected and it had become that it was stagnant and safe. The entry volume was not captivating or dynamic like the rest of my design and in result was weakening the overall presence of my building. So, for the past week I have been looking at ways to clad the volume and punch openings to make it read more dynamic. While that provided improvement, it did not provide solution. With this in mind, I went into the weekend ready to attack this entry volume head on, determined to find a solution that worked with the concept of my building, while reading as a prominent entrance. I went through 5 iterations of working with facade details and after that 5th iteration, I came up with an entirely new design for the entry volume. Once I came up with this solution, I worked with the model on the site so that I can begin to address the landscape around the courthouse.
Building in site
When speaking of design, many think of the process for approaching design. While process is referred to as an entity, it is often not spoken of in finite divisions of process. At this point of the semester the portion of process where the design was originated and was rapidly changed has transitioned into the phase of refinement. I have finally approached a plan that I am confident in and so now it is about making the spaces designed that much better so that the project can be a strong example of my design capabilities. At this point in the project, I have introduced an atrium to house my central stair and have began to think of materials to fortify the symbolism behind my building as well has create a cohesive, yet expressive exterior that reflects the functionality of the interior. In reflection it has seemed that the beginning phases of design, such as conceptual thinking, are easier because it is very evident where improvement is needed. As the project is progressing, I am finding that I am becoming attached to certain aspects and gradually I am realizing that this can be detrimental to the progress of the project. Sometimes it is critical to step back and re-analyze what defines the project and really fortify those aspects.
For this past Friday’s mid-term review I focused on developing the plans and focusing on the functions of each space. This was a progression from my many earlier conceptual models and diagrams, and it was crucial at this stage to intimately understand the program and to advance the parti.
Simultaneously, I needed to examine the exterior form of the building, investigating how the interior can be read. A 1/32″ = 1′-0″ scale model began to explore concepts of solid/void, light/dark, as well as relation to the landscape and materiality. These last areas, through helpful critique, have become my springboard towards the next phase, namely integration into the site and material investigation.
This past Friday was a critical point for the process of this project; it was the day of the mid-review. Up to this point I have gone through numerous iterations of pushing and pulling volumes in the attempt to create a building that appeared more dynamic than static, considering that my main objectives of this building are to convey some of the nature of law as well as promote walkability within the community. I have come to the conclusion over the past few weeks that law is a entity that pushes and pulls within itself. It is always responding to different conditions within the principles of the judicial system. I decided to focus on walkability within my project to promote ease for the local residents to engage with their community and be able to interact with a critical underpinning of community, which is law and the judicial process. From those two concepts, I have been pushing to create a building that spoke with a similar nature.
As always, it is a good idea to occasionally have reviews from people who are not so involved with the project. This allows for opinions to be expressed from a different vantage than you may personally see with your project. In the process of this project I have pushed to create a building that has different plans for each level and each level responds to the prior so that the building looks different from every angle. However, from the review of the critics, it seems that I need to control and refine my concept. While the basis to my idea is good, I need to bring my ideas together and design a building rather than design 4 separate floors that create 4-1 story buildings stacked together. This advice has opened my eyes to the necessity of really expressing the common elements in plan through exterior strategies. I really need to dive into my plan and strengthen elements to work together so that their is recognizable familiarity from the exterior, which will make the building have a more comfortable environment within context and with the visitors.
While I have concluded on a desired massing, the struggle now lies within figuring out a programmatic sequence that will allow for comfort and ease within the building as well as create a massing that is similar to what I desire. Because the volumes of each floor are push and pulled, the circulation becomes complex. The logical way to start planning was to create a central core of circulation that includes the elevator, as well as bathrooms, so that each floor has one central node about which the courtrooms are planned. This core begins to function a vertical axis about which the building is planned. The second key aspect that becomes even more complex because of my desired massing is the separation of circulation for the in-custody defendant transport and public circulation. Because these two paths should never cross, they must be developed as their own entities, which makes the programming more difficult.
Around fall break, I started to think about how to delineate an entry sequence for the courthouse. Up to this point, I had been drawing the lobby as a large space without any program, doors, or other articulation worked into it. Because I want my flex space to be a publicly accessible cafe (visitors wouldn’t have to go through security), the cafe and its various support spaces would be located in the lobby. The issue I faced was how to make an entry space with a kitchen, restrooms, and dining area in the lobby along with security screening stations and queuing areas, as well as vertical circulation for the courthouse. I looked at the walls I had been drawing as dividers between a secure atrium and the cafe in my previous plan iterations, and I realized that the “poche” of these walls could be thickened to contain the service spaces of the lobby/cafe (kitchen, restrooms, circulation). The thickness of these “walls” turned spaces also created a human scale threshold to tuck the security screening station into, so that it wasn’t the first obvious thing a user would see upon entering the courthouse or cafe.
First Floor plan with articulated entry/atrium spaces
Entry/Approach sketches
As I worked on the lobby space, I continued to refine and develop the rest of the courthouse as well. I reexamined the courtroom in section and thought about how people in the alternate dispute resolution spaces (public) could start to see into the courtrooms from above. Likewise, I continued to develop the building form, refining the curvature of the roof and ceilings of the courthouse spaces.
Section through courtroom with view from ADR
Sketches – Judge’s bench in elevation, Roof form
As I mentioned in my last post, some design concerns I took away from Mecklenberg County Courthouse included introducing natural light without glare (so the shades aren’t perpetually drawn) and creating a kind of side space for observers to “sneak out” of the courtroom without disturbing others. With these and other issues in mind, I reexamined my courtset design.
Model of Courtset with Vertical Fins
I began by breaking each courtroom’s side walls, which are adjacent to courtyards. Originally, I had introduced the courtyards in order to bring daylight and outdoor views to the “interior” jury deliberation spaces. Therefore, when I started to open the side walls of the courtrooms, I used a series of angled, vertical fins to block views from the courtroom into the jury room and vice versa. Using fins also allowed me to introduce softened, reflected light into the courtroom, rather than the kind of direct light that was constantly shut out of Mecklenberg County Courthouse. After modeling this scheme, I realized that changing the location of the glass envelope in realtion to these fins also presented an opportunity to create a visual barrier between spectator seating and side entry aisles, preventing people from causing too much of a disruption as they come and go during court proceedings.
Courtroom with Side Entry Aisles
In addition to reevaluating my courtsets this week, I have begun to look at how the jury assembly spaces and circulation might fit into the overall building layout. I find the duality of the jury’s position in court to be of particular interest. That is, the jury must always be a simultaneously public and private entity. The jury must be public in the sense that its members, constitutionally, are the “peers” of the defendant and private in the sense that the jury cannot come into contact with the judge, defense, prosecution, or any other party that might try to influence their decision, resulting in a mistrial.
With this duality in mind, I have positioned the jury assembly spaces in the kind of residual floor level that exists “in-between” the courtroom levels. I have designed my courtrooms in section to be double-height on the south, public side and curve down to single-height on the north, private side. The “in-between” space where I have decided to place the jury is literally sandwiched by judges’ and staff’s single-height spaces (on the courtroom levels) in section and adjacent to the courtrooms above and below in plan. The jury itself is an intersection of public and private, and by positioning the jury in this residual, “in-between” space, I’ve discovered another spatial way to intertwine public and private in the courthouse as a whole.
Jury Assembly and ADR sandwiched between private levels
I have been focusing on relationships of program, circulation, and site. At the entry one passes through security and into a large lobby with access to services, child waiting, and the career center. A central circulation core pierces up from the main level, gesturing towards uptown and the center city skyline. An atrium connects all floors, providing a visual and aural connection to each level. Separating the courtroom volumes creates an intermediate exterior terrace space, with views to the city center and also the nearby community. The courthouses are stacked and staggered, each with their corresponding judge’s chambers, and shared jury deliberation between them.
[space + justice] 
