Wake Co. Justice Center

[jnzllwgr]

As a building of its style, it an excellent specimen and --your subjective tastes aside-- should be able to be appreciated within that context.

[Captain Awesome]

but when you use generic terms like "boring", "utilitarian" or "grey" to describe the Garland Jones building,

[ericurbanite]

You seem to have an appreciation for the functional characteristics of the building and I respect that, but from a purely personal point of view, I find the building ugly and dated. You can take a pair of bell bottoms made with the highest amount of skill and of the best fabrics, but at the end of the day, it's still a pair of bell bottoms.

[Justin6882]

What's wrong with bell bottoms?

[jnzllwgr]

What's wrong with bell bottoms?

[ChiefJoJo]

Has anyone heard any response to their inquiries?

... in the case of the 1970s courthouse, it has some very objective failings, for one in that it makes the street its beotch, and two in that it completely ignores and neglects to participate in its context.

[orulz]

I got a very comprehensive response yesterday from Phil Stout at Wake County detailing the county's justification for eliminating the Lawyers Building and the Garland Jones building.

Thanks for your email inquiry regarding the plans for the new Wake County

Justice Center. As you are probably aware Wake County is required by

State law to provide judicial facilities for the Tenth Judicial District of

North Carolina. Judicial facility needs are increasing as Wake County's

population growth continues. State and local planners predict this growth

to continue. The population of Wake County is expected to reach

approximately 1.5 million people around 2030. These significant growth

projections require us to plan for continued expansion of judicial

facilities and assure they function very well and are energy efficient to

keep operational costs as low as possible. The buildings must be

constructed of durable, long lasting materials and incorporate specific

life safety systems and effective security features. The new Justice

Center, planned for completion by early spring 2013, is being designed to

meet these requirements.

The vision and some of the important goals that have been established for

the new Justice Center are listed below:

-- Graceful; Stately and judicial appearance

-- A clear destination or landmark

-- Durability and longevity; Timeless/permanent

-- Create pleasing exterior space; fit into urban fabric

-- Healthy, sustainable and energy efficient

-- Natural light-filled; Welcoming

-- An integrated, functional atrium space; Open, inviting stairways

-- Clear organization and easy way-finding

-- Timely and convenient vertical circulation movement

The building program for the project includes two levels of underground

parking, extension of an existing tunnel under Salisbury Street to connect

the new Justice Center to the existing courthouse, 22 criminal courtrooms,

judicial support spaces (i.e., clerk of court, district attorney, public

defender, judges, etc.), various public records (Register of Deeds, County

Real Estate/Tax Records, GIS, etc.), other county administrative functions

and various holding areas for approximately 150-200 inmates (spaces to

secure them on their court dates). This is a very complex building to plan

and design, particularly because of functional, operational and

security/safety requirements.

When the 2004 master plan for judicial facilities was being developed a

number of options were considered for siting a new Justice Center. It was

determined that the best location was on the northern half of the city

block bounded by Martin Street on the north, Salisbury Street and McDowell

Street. Adjacency, including connection to the existing Public Safety

Center (includes main jail) and the tunnel leading to the existing

courthouse, was determined to be essential to the efficient and safe

operation of a new criminal courthouse.

It is not cost effective or practical to incorporate the Judicial Services

Building or Garland Jones Building into the new Justice Center and meet the

functional and operational requirements for the project. Some of the key

reasons are listed below:

-- The existing building systems (mechanical, electrical, roofing, windows,

etc.) are at, or nearing, the end of their useful life

-- The existing buildings were not designed or constructed to modern energy

efficiency standards

-- It is not practical to construct two levels of underground parking

beneath the existing buildings

-- It would be extremely difficult, costly, and possibly impractical to

construct the required tunnel extension from the existing tunnel under

Salisbury Street because this extension would be underneath the old

Judicial Services Building

-- Structural systems and floor levels (column spacing and floor-to-floor

dimensions) in existing buildings are not appropriate for the functions and

spaces planned for the east end of the Justice Center

-- There is insufficient floor area on most floors of the two buildings to

meet functional, adjacency or efficiency needs of the programs planned for

the new Justice Center, thereby impacting customer service and operational

costs

-- Numerous building code issues would have to be dealt with that would

further complicate design of life safety systems of the new Justice Center

-- Old elevator systems in the two old buildings are inadequate for

increased traffic associated with court functions planned for east end of

the Justice Center

-- The buildings contain varying levels of asbestos containing materials

and lead-based paint; Significant demolition of the Garland Jones Building

would be required to remove asbestos for any renovation if the building

could have been re-used

-- Existing windows do not meet "blast safety" or security requirements

previously established for the lower three floors of the Justice Center.

-- The combination of initial capital and long term operational and

maintenance costs associated with design, construction and operation of the

new Justice Center as currently programmed would be increased if these two

buildings are not demolished

It is believed that achieving the previously stated goals and requirements

for this major civic building in the capital city and county of the State

of North Carolina can most cost effectively be achieved on the designated

site by removing the existing structures.

Wake County is sensitive to truly significant and historic buildings in

Raleigh. This is clearly demonstrated by the large number of older

buildings in the community that are owned by the County and still being

used to provide services to citizens. Wake County currently provides

services from 14 facilities (approximately 900,000 sq.ft.) that were

designed/built at least 40 years ago. These figures "exclude" the Garland

Jones Building, Judicial Services Building and adjacent parking deck. This

total does not include numerous historically significant school buildings

under the ownership of the Wake County Public School System.

In addition over the past 20 years Wake County has received numerous

commendations through the City of Raleigh's annual "Sir Walter Raleigh

Award" for preservation, rehabilitation, and improvements to important

historic structures and sites.

Phillip D. Stout

Director, Facilities Design & Construction

[askmisterbrown]

Thanks for looking into this, orulz. You are absolutely right; their thinking is flawed in not considering your Option 3, the best option. I also take issue with Stout's phrase "truly significant and historic buildings." In a city the size of Raleigh, one would expect hundreds if not thousands of "truly significant and historic buildings." Indeed, in a city of our size, one would expect to see blocks upon blocks of them, as one can see in Richmond or Louisville or Pittsburgh. Stout implies that there is only a handful of "truly significant and historic buildings" and the rest can go.

[ericurbanite]

does anyone have any conceptual renderings of the new Justice Center?? I know I have seen them but can't remember where!

[Jones_]

Well, Mr Stout tried and it was a good try. I don't have the time to disect this just yet, but it will make a nice base submittal to newspaper editors. As a starter, the requirement that the 10th Judicial District be served does not entail things like housing deeds and other public records. You could easily (continue to) house public records in these buildings, so the opening punch does not lead to a true need for demolition. The goal of fitting into the urban fabric is laughable...keeping public records accessable from the street in Lawyers and GJ is an excellent street function (vs an imposing security laden monolith). I wonder who the architect is....

[rooster8]

I'm pretty much resigned to the fact that they're biting the dust. I just hope the replacement is a worthy addition to the streetscape. The new Mecklenburg County courthouse looks pretty nice. That could be a good model for them to look at.

[unique1rdu]

I don't know if this was already posted. If so sorry. It is a rendering of the new Justice Center building here.

[Jones_]

For all my negative comments, it is a nice looking building. Corner presentation is nice, lots of windows with classic lintels. Big improvement on the current courthouse. Still stand by my preference to keep the old girls though.

[phoenixnc]

I think it's pretty ugly... this could be a landmark public building, but of course, it's Wake County, so it's not going to be anything exciting. The present buildings look so much better.

[dmccall]

I don't know if this was already posted. If so sorry. It is a rendering of the new Justice Center building here

[cophead567]

I assume that we are standing here looking SW?? If so, the green (grass) in the foreground is misleading.

[rooster8]

Reminds of the Ellington, a proposed hotel in Asheville.

[ChiefJoJo]

I assume that we are standing here looking SW?? If so, the green (grass) in the foreground is misleading.

[orulz]

If these are two renderings of the same design... I think the bottom rendering shows the Salisbury Street elevation, while the top rendering shows the building as it would look from Nash Square. The gray block behind the new courthouse in the 3d rendering is the existing courthouse building on the other side of Salisbury, not the jail.

[ChiefJoJo]

If these are two renderings of the same design... I think the bottom rendering shows the Salisbury Street elevation, while the top rendering shows the building as it would look from Nash Square. The gray block behind the new courthouse in the 3d rendering is the existing courthouse building on the other side of Salisbury, not the jail.

[dmccall]

Ahhh. Thanks. You are right. I thought the street descending on the right side was too exaggerated to be McDowell, but it is.

[capitalapts]

boooooorrrrrrrring. just as expected. sigh.

plus, it looks a lot better in the renderings than it will in real life.

[Justin6882]

Looks a bit like the old part of wake med to me.

[Rascal]

Looks better than I expected. It seems to take some cues from the main county office building - the old one on Fayetteville Street. And I'm glad they went with a strong presence on the Nash Square corner (if that is what we're looking at). This will be diagonally across the square from the new City building so it would be a nice bookend.

[DPK]

Let's be honest here because there are a lot of negative comments. You guys aren't going to like anything that they put on this site because it's going to get rid of the existing buildings on said site. I'm not trying to be mean or accusatory here, but the proposed building really doesn't look that bad. It does have some artistic elements like the blue/green window shading, the different levels/setbacks so that it doesn't appear to be this massive block building on a corner, and the fluted elements that appear to run up the sides of the building on the upper setbacks.

This is a government building. It could be A LOT worse.