JFR JUSTICE FACILITIES15 REVIEW

AIA JFRJUSTICE FACILITIES15 REVIEW

The American Institute of Architects Academy of Architecture for Justice Washington, D.C. Copyright 2015 The American Institute of Architects All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America

The project information in this book has been provided by the architecture firms represented in the book. The American Institute of Architects (AIA) has no reason to believe the information is not accurate, but the AIA does not warrant, and assumes no liability for, the accuracy or completeness of the information. It is the responsibility of users to verify the information with the appropriate architecture firm or other sources.

The American Institute of Architects 1735 New York Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20006

2015 Academy of Architecture for Justice Leadership Group Lorenzo M. Lopez, AIA, chair Mark Krapez, Intl. Assoc. AIA Erin Persky, Assoc. AIA Linda Bernauer, AIA, past chair Catherine Chan, AIA, past chair

AIA Staff Terri Stewart, CAE, senior vice president, Knowledge and Practice Douglas Paul, senior director, Knowledge Communities and Resources Kathleen Simpson, CAE, director, Knowledge Communities Elizabeth S. Wolverton, senior manager, Honors and Awards Emma Tucker, specialist, Knowledge Communities

Design: designfarm Editor: Janet Rumbarger

Cover photos, top to bottom: Elgin County Courthouse, NORR Ltd; Superior Court of California, County of San Bernardino (photo by Bruce Damonte, ©SOM); South County Justice Center, Superior Court of Tulare County (photo by Assassi Productions, ©CO Architects) CONTENTS

Jury Members...... iv

Jury Comments...... vii

Citations East Mesa Public Safety Complex...... 2 Superior Court of California, County of San Bernardino...... 6 South County Justice Center, Superior Court of Tulare County...... 10

Correctional and Detention Facilities Stanislaus County Juvenile Commitment Facility...... 16

Court Facilities Superior Court of California, Calaveras County Courthouse...... 20 Catonsville District Courthouse...... 22 Elgin County Courthouse...... 24 Everett Municipal Court...... 26

Index of Architects...... 31

Joel Davidson, AIA, NCARB, JURY MEMBERS LEED® BD+C AECOM New York City

Joel Davidson is vice president, justice lead, U.S. East, for AECOM, a full-service architectural/engineering firm. He has more than 25 years of JURY CHAIR experience as an architect and is Peter Berton, OAA, MRAIC registered to practice in 10 states. Ventin Group Architects Toronto Through his focus on justice facilities in the east for all of the

Peter Berton is a partner in the Americas, he has cultivated relationships in the correctional Ventin Group Architects in Toronto. market sector for strategic alliance on key projects. He directs a He graduated in 1979 from Carleton national network of professionals who bring a normative approach University in Ottawa and then worked to correctional design. Together, they provide clients with award- with renowned Canadian architect winning, operationally efficient, cost-effective, and secure Ron Thom. Since joining the Ventin buildings that serve the needs of stakeholders as well as enhance Group in 1993, Mr. Berton has built a solid reputation for the design the surrounding community. of all types of institutional projects, including a series of courthouse He has also worked at STV/Silver & Ziskind Architects; Hellmuth, consolidation projects as well as courthouse planning projects. Obata and Kassabaum (HOK); and CGL/ Ricci Greene Associates.

He was partner in charge of the Welland Consolidated Courthouse, At these firms, he worked primarily on large institutional projects, the Chatham Consolidated Courthouse, the Brockville Consolidated where he learned the best practices of large corporations. His Courthouse, and the Cobourg Courthouse. He has also worked experiences on these projects taught him how to listen to clients extensively on the historic Toronto Old City Hall, the busiest and transform their aspirations into award-winning projects. courthouse in Canada. He has participated in numerous planning Mr. Davidson earned a B. Arch. from Pratt Institute. He is LEED studies for the Ontario Ministry of the Attorney General, including certified and holds an NCARB certificate. In addition, he is a the Security Design Guidelines for Ontario Courthouses and the graduate of the architecture program at Brooklyn Technical long-term Forecasting Study for Ontario Courthouses. Mr. Berton High School. His professional affiliations include the AIA and the is currently working on a courthouse evaluation study in the West American Correctional Association, and he serves on the board of Bank for two new courthouses at Hebron and Tulkarem. Community Solutions Inc.

Melissa Farling, FAIA, LEED® AP HDR Architecture Phoenix JFR15 iv Melissa Farling, managing principal of HDR Architecture in Phoenix, actively investigates the effects of architecture on behavior. She is cochair of the national AIA Academy of Architecture for Justice’s Research Committee and an active member of the AIA Phoenix Metro Advisory Council, the AAJ Sustainable Justice Committee, and the Advisory Council for the Academy of Neuroscience for Architecture. She was one of the principal investigators on a study funded by the

National Institute of Corrections to examine how views of nature She received her JD degree from the Appalachian School of Law in affect stress in a jail intake area. She is also a contributing author 2010 and her BA in political science from Alcorn State University in to “Sustainable Justice 2030: Green Guide to Justice.” 2004. Ms. Johnson is a member of the Young Lawyers Division of the Mississippi Bar Association, the Mississippi Court Administrators Her experience has focused on large-scale public projects, Association (Nominating Committee, 2013–2014), and the National including, most recently, the Mariposa Land Port of Entry in Association for Court Management (Rural Director, 2013–2016). Nogales, Arizona, and the Arizona Center for Law and Society in Phoenix. She is a frequent presenter on evidence-based design and is a contributing author to several publications focused on Andrea P. Leers, FAIA research and design applications. Ms. Farling is a registered Leers Weinzapfel Associates Boston architect in Arizona. She holds a B. Arch. from the University of North Carolina at Charlotte and B. Arch. and M. Arch. degrees from Andrea Leers is principal and the University of Arizona. cofounder, with Jane Weinzapfel, of Leers Weinzapfel Associates, a Boston-based practice whose work Shakeba Johnson Seventh Chancery Court District lies at the intersection of architecture, of Mississippi urban design, and infrastructure Greenwood, Mississippi and is notable for its inventiveness

Shakeba Johnson is the court in dramatically complex projects. administrator and staff attorney She is an internationally recognized leader in urban and campus for Chancellor W. M. Sanders design and in building for civic institutions. in the Seventh Chancery Court The firm’s award-winning projects include the Paul S. Russell, District of Mississippi. As the court MD Museum of Medical History and Innovation at Massachusetts administrator, she is responsible for General Hospital, the expansion of the Harvard Science Center, maintaining judges’ trial dockets, the University of Pennsylvania Gateway Complex, and the U.S. implementing case-flow management, and supervising and Courthouse in Orlando. Leers Weinzapfel Associates has received coordinating support staff. She coordinates courtroom availability more than 85 design awards and was honored in 2007 with the AIA and serves as a liaison to court, bar, and law enforcement agencies Firm Award, the highest honor the AIA bestows on an architecture and the public. As the staff attorney, she examines case records and firm and the first and only woman-led firm to be so chosen. In 2014 presents legal interpretations and opinions, prepares summaries the firm was recognized as one of the top 50 design firms in the of the facts of each case, reviews pretrial motions and summary U.S. by ARCHITECT magazine. A monograph on the firm’s work, judgments, and edits documents according to judges’ directions. Made to Measure: the Work of Leers Weinzapfel Associates, was published in 2011 by Princeton Architectural Press. Ms. Johnson was admitted to the Mississippi state bar in 2010. She v is admitted to practice in all Mississippi state courts, federal district Ms. Leers is former director of the Master in Urban Design JURY MEMBERS courts, and the U.S. Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit. She is also Program at the Harvard Graduate School of Design, where she a certified court administrator for the state of Mississippi. was Professor in Practice of Architecture and Urban Design from 2001 to 2011. Previously she taught at Yale University’s School of Architecture, the University of Pennsylvania Graduate School of Fine Arts, the University of Virginia School of Architecture, and the Tokyo Institute of Technology; from 2011 to 2014 she was Chair Professor at the National Chiao Tung University. In 2007 she was invited to be Chaire des Amériques at the Sorbonne (Université de Paris). In 1997, she was a visiting artist at the American Academy in Rome, and her many national grants include an NEA/Japan U.S. Friendship Commission Design Arts Fellowship in 1982. She lectures widely throughout the United States and abroad. She holds an undergraduate degree in art history from Wellesley College and an M. Arch. from the University of Pennsylvania Graduate School of Fine Arts.

continued next page JFR15 vi JURY MEMBERS Year bytheSouthCarolina JailAdministratorsAssociation. professional awards, includingthe2012JailAdministratorof for theNationalInstituteofCorrections. Hehasreceived several of stateandnationalconferences andservedasaconsultant corrections-related legislation.Hehaspresented atanumber Prison RapeEliminationAct,FCCregulations, andotherimportant of theAmericanJailAssociation, where hehasworkedonthe attained ACAaccreditation. Mr. Lucasiscurrently thepresident long beenaccredited byCALEAandNCCHC,in2013thejail servicestootherlocalagencies.Thecountyhas well assupport lawenforcementa 2,100-bedjail,andfullprimary capabilities,as with 950employees,anannualbudgetofnearly$70million, Charleston Countyisthelargestsheriff’s officeinSouthCarolina, administrator. he waspromoted totherankofchiefdeputyandbecamejail major, overseeingtheAdministrativeServicesDivision.In2005 County Sheriff’s Office. Five yearslater he waspromoted to officerfortheCharleston in 1997becamethepublicinformation CONTINUED Beaufort CountySheriff’sBeaufort Officeand began hiscareer in1983withthe by wayoftheU.S.MarineCorps.He Louisville, hecametoSouthCarolina law enforcement. Originallyfrom is a30-yearveteranofthestate’s Charleston County, South Carolina, Mitch Lucas,assistantsheriff of Charleston, SouthCarolina Charleston CountySheriff’s Office Mitch Lucas

department. Richland Hills,andapolicefacilityevaluationfortheElPaso and 198,000-square-foot cityhallandpublicsafetyfacilityinNorth construction ofanewpolicesubstationinIrving,ananimalshelter from Texas. the University of North His experience includes the Dallas BaptistUniversityandamaster’s degree incriminaljustice Chief Perdueandsciencedegree holdsabachelorofarts from andneighborhoodservicesdepartment. department, firePublic SafetyServices,whichoverseesthepolicedepartment, 2008 he was named public safety director Richland Hills of North community services, training, tactical, and special operations. In policing, includingpatrol, affairs, criminalinvestigations,internal During his career he has been involved in nearly all aspects of in2005. RichlandHillsPoliceDepartment of policetheNorth in 2000. He was appointed chief position of assistant chief of police moved uptheranks,assuming in1982and Police Department a patrol officerwiththeIrving(Texas) enforcement. Hebeganhiscareer as 33 years of experience in law Jimmy Perdue hasmore than North RichlandHills,Texas North RichlandHillsPoliceDepartment Jimmy Perdue vii JURY COMMENTS

“

A dominant theme in the A dominant theme in the review seemed jury’s to be that of clarity. “ Even though there were fewer submissions, the jury was extremely the jury fewer submissions, was extremely were there Even though worthy of that were only those projects recommending selective in is perfect, we that no project While the jurypublication. recognized A dominant made it stand out. one had aspects that felt that each Each of that of clarity. seemed to be review theme in the jury’s rational a expressing approach, has a legible design the projects the departure point of the design. Justice and simple idea as to and programmatically, complex extremely are nature by facilities is an indicator clear vision into a larger unravel these complexities of success. time and are for the first there facility are Most visitors to a justice minimize their apprehension, To anxiety. likely experiencing some understand and synoptically to intuitively able be should visitors published project how to navigate the building upon arrival. Each central orientation spaces to most with demonstrates this clarity, which a visitor may always refer. able be To of success. the only gauges not are clarity Function and an overall composition and create to sort out the complex program and human scale, texture, delight and provides that inspires The jury placed comfort that is exemplary. is to achieve a product JFR in that category. each of the buildings in this year’s entries mentioned sustainable Although each of this year’s them. on dependent typically not was theme central the practices, that continue it would be desirable to see projects In the future and sustainability, to develop practices in energy reduction, innovative ideas. MRAIC OAA, Berton, Peter 2015 Jury Chair

THE VIEW FROM THE CHAIR THE VIEW FROM

Only one correctional facility project was published this year. was published this year. facility project Only one correctional St. Louis, a key theme was that in AAJ conference At last year’s investigating alternatives to the rate of recidivism, of reducing facilities. The idea and building fewer corrections incarceration, rather was that new facilities should encourage rehabilitation and this year’s humane environments, than punishment, in more recall Some of us that approach. reflects submission corrections of the Ohio Department director of Gary Mohr, the opening remarks in St. Louis: at his address and Corrections, of Rehabilitation Fewer entries were selected for publication this year than in selected for publication this year Fewer entries were were and five merit projects citations years: three previous why published. It is unclear selected, for a total of eight projects but it may be the result was a dearththere of publications this year, and of a project of the time lag between the funding and approval started in late 2008, and its date of commissioning. The recession would have halted many universal funding reductions the resulting may be what for several years. This echo of the recession projects years submitted in previous now experiencing. Projects we are 2009 and completed in likely planned and funded before were trend to see whether this the years following. It will be interesting continues in 2016. It was a pleasure and an honor to be part of this year’s Justice be part and an honor to of this year’s It was a pleasure or as advisor on competitions as a juror Serving Facilities Review. in unexpected is always a learning experience and results a law enforcement architects, of three enlightenment. The team and a courts specialist, administrator specialist, a corrections juror Each submissions. the of evaluation balanced a produced valuable and each provided of view, his or her own point offered to see it was refreshing on the jury, insight. For the architects the of a building from the success regard how nonarchitects standpoint. user’s building any more aren’t “I have bad news for you architects—we on prisons.” Perhaps this evolving outlook is now having an effect the number of new projects. JURY COMMENTS COMMENTS JURY

CITATIONS JFR15 10 Las Cruces,New Mexico Mexico vernacular. architecture isappropriate totheregion, reflecting theNew blends wellwithitscontextandtopography, andthe Thedesign’sdepartments. clean,strong, linearmassing and conference area are availableforcommonusebyboth and fire stationinamultiusecomplex.Thepubliclobby The designersfacedthe challenge of combiningapolice JURY’S STATEMENT [LAW ENFORCEMENT] SAFETY COMPLEX EAST MESAPUBLIC 3 CITATIONS “

Mission statements about the operational philosophy of the Mission statements about the operational the design. LCPD is determined to increase agencies drove a community policing collaboration with the community within visitors designed to make framework, so the site and facility were feel welcome. design integrates complex technologies and The open architecture to functions with flexible modular environments balances current embrace the need for continual change and innovation. In keeping with the “landmark” status associated with law enforcement this new facility will stand as a symbol of professional architecture, permanence, and and dedication to public protection integrity, service.

certified on undeveloped complex is located ®

The new LEED ARCHITECT’S STATEMENT ARCHITECT’S STATEMENT

Bureau of Land Management land (approximately 350 acres) on 350 acres) of Land Management land (approximately Bureau the eastern Las Cruces, New Mexico. The facility edge of the city of departments police and fire for the city’s space shared will provide for and services and will house equipment, personnel, programs, both. In addition, the complex will support and enhance a variety of user operations and also complement the context and infrastructure The neighborhoods. of the BLM site master plan and surrounding the city with a state-of-the- was to provide intention of the project art decentralized command headquarters East for the fast-growing also equipped to become a forward Quadrant. The facilities are the public- main station and/or if the downtown command station safety answering point should become inoperable.

complex technologies and balances current functions functions complex technologies and balances current environments. with flexible modular The open architecture design integrates The open architecture design integrates “ JFR15 4 Staff: 76(55sworn,21nonsworn) population:35,000 Service Capacity Estimated completionJune2016 Under construction Status ofProject Public bondissue Funding Design-bid-build TypeProject Delivery Building cost/GSF:$232.31 Total constructioncost:$10,580,000 Building cost:$8,940,000 Site developmentcost:$1,640,000 Actual Construction Costs 26,937.85/0/26,937.85 New/Renovated/Total NAA 38,482/0/38,482 New/Renovated/Total GSF Area ofBuilding 6.5 Acres 283,821 SF Site Area New Type ofConstruction Multiuse (policeandfiredepartments) Type ofFacility DATA City ofLasCruces OWNER 5 CITATIONS CREDITS Planning, Design Architect/Programming, RMKM Architecture P.C. Albuquerque Executive Architect Williams Design Group, Inc. Las Cruces, New Mexico JFR15 2 appreciated thesimple,rationalapproach. building is well positioned on the site to exploit views, and the jury connects thetwomassesandcontinuestoupperfloors.The screening inthelowerbuilding.Acentral orientationspace The building’s strong publicfaceprovides amplespaceforsecurity against oneanother, resulting inastrikingarchitectural composition. The sculpturaldesignconsistsoftwodistinctlinearmassessliding JURY’S STATEMENT [COURT] COUNTY OFSANBERNARDINO SUPERIOR COURT OFCALIFORNIA, San Bernardino, California 7 CITATIONS Gold ®

“ The building is The building is well positioned on the site to exploit views, and the jury appreciated the simple, rational approach. “ certification. The project consists of two building elements: an 11-story building elements: an consists of two courtroom The project that podium three-story skyline and a linear, on the tower visible the scale of an adjacent to correlates edge and holds the street entrance—a three-story main historic courthouse. The building’s between the openness of as the threshold public lobby—serves courtrooms 35 court.the of security the and city the building’s The Each tower level tower. stacked in an efficient 200-foot-tall are occurring behind with public circulation contains four courtrooms, north. spaces a glass facade on the The complex also features for court and administration, self-help, jury services, child care, operations and holding. sheriff’s proximity close in and seismicity high of region a within Located to active earthquake and San faults, including the San Jacinto faults, the building is the first and tallest base-isolated Andreas courthouse in California. The highest level of consideration was its to elevate structure given to the design and construction of the long-term resiliency. orientation, shading, considered The design solution carefully that the building will material selection, and landscaping so LEED received thrive in its desert The project environment. ARCHITECT’S STATEMENT ARCHITECT’S STATEMENT in San to occur As the most significant single building project the urban fabric, Bernardino in decades, the Justice Center unifies public a visible landmark for the city while engaging the creating the efficiency improves The new building space. vibrant open with of the courts been by consolidating functions that had previously The the county. throughout buildings 12 different across spread but development in the city, facility is not just a model for future in the first phase of new courts as the largest project in California, judicial for the design of large-scale it establishes a new direction the state. facilities across JFR15 8 family, probate,juvenile Type ofcourts:Criminal,doublejury, traffic, Number ofcourts:35 population:2.1million(2014estimate) Service Capacity Completed 2014 Status ofProject Lease-revenue bonds Funding CM atrisk TypeProject Delivery Withheld byrequestofowner Construction Costs 229,000/0/229,000 (estimated) New/Renovated/Total NAA 383,745/0/383,745 SF New/Renovated/Total SF Area ofBuilding 7.07 Acres 308,098 SF Site Area New Type ofConstruction Court Type ofFacility DATA Judicial CouncilofCalifornia,StateCalifornia OWNER 9 CITATIONS Skidmore, Owings & Merrill © CREDITS Architect & Merrill LLP Skidmore, Owings San Francisco Structural/MEP Engineer LLP Skidmore, Owings & Merrill Civil Engineer Psomas & Associates Landscape Design Leader Studio Tom Contractor Construction Manager/General Rudolph and Sletten Graphic Design LLP Skidmore, Owings & Merrill Sustainability Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP Energy Modeling Architectural Energy Corporation Cost Estimating Davis Langdon Transportation Vertical Edgett Williams Consulting Group Inc. Geotechnical GeoPentech Lighting Horton Lees Brogden Lighting Design Security Kroll Security Holding & Detention Inc. PSA-Dewberry, Acoustics Shen Milsom & Wilke, Inc Code Analysis Rolf Jensen & Associates Photography Bruce Damonte, N 0 25 50 100 200 MEADOWBROOK PARK MEADOWBROOK HISTORIC COURTHOUSE & COURTHOUSE HISTORIC ANNEX NEW SAN BERNARDINO COURTHOUSE BERNARDINO SAN NEW 303 W. 3RD STREET FACILITY STREET 3RD W. 303 JFR15 10 [COURT] SUPERIOR COURT OFTULARECOUNTY SOUTH COUNTYJUSTICECENTER, planned, thoughtful,andinnovativeconcept. courtrooms create anintimateatmosphere. Overall,thisisawell- easily navigated.Daylightingandslightlyvaultedceilingsinthe Thebuildinginteriorsare court. bright,transparent, in theentry and with theinnovativeoutdoorwalk-uppublicservicecountersprovided appropriate wasimpressed standoff sequence.Thejury andentry provides apublicamenitybutalsosecure approach withan This buildingcreates whichnotonly astrongcourt, outdoorentry JURY’S STATEMENT CaliforniaPorterville,

11 CITATIONS

“

The design responded The design responded to a desire for the new courthouse to be open and welcoming to the community. ARCHITECT’S STATEMENT ARCHITECT’S The opportunity build a new courthouse to an underserved in socialthe Californiain county address to team design the allowed challenges of a small, rural town. Manydemographics and economic visitors to the courthouse their primary will not speak English as not be familiar with the U.S. justice system.language, and many will near other two blocks east of Main Street, The building site is located districts, and directly government buildings, close to residential easy access to provides The location routes. adjacent to local bus growth. courtthe future accommodate will site the and public, the for In addition, the court for the city will serve as an economic driver of Portervillethe struggling because it will attract businesses to downtown area. for the new courthouse to to a desire The design responded Large expanses of be open and welcoming to the community. daylight into theglass in public and private spaces bring natural Each landscape. building and connect users with the surrounding reduces is flooded with daylight, which not only of the courtrooms and anxiety in stressful energy consumption but also eases tension situations. planning, Principles of “sustainable justice” guided the programming, a courthouse that is thoroughly and design phases to ensure a building is organized around The integrated with the community. Glass walls connect the exterior courtyard courtyard. large, covered with internal corridors, allowing visitors to use the courtyard as a the building their way through while navigating point of reference without the use of signage. “ JFR15 12 civil, hearing,ceremonial Type ofcourts:Criminal,family, juvenile, Number ofcourts:9 population:200,000 Service Capacity Completed 2013 Status ofProject Public bondissue Funding CM atrisk TypeProject Delivery Building cost/GSF:$545/GSF Total constructioncost:$56,600,000 Building cost:$49,800,000 Site developmentcost:$6,800,000 Actual Construction Costs 68,770/0/68,770 New/Renovated/Total NAA 96,532/0/96,532 GSF New/Renovated/Total GSF Area ofBuilding 7.2 Acres 313,362 SF Site Area New Type ofConstruction Court Type ofFacility DATA Judicial CouncilofCalifornia OWNER

13 CITATIONS CREDITS Architect CO Architects Los Angeles Civil Engineer KPFF Consulting Engineers Structural Engineer Forell/Elsesser Engineer Mechanical/Electrical/Plumbing IBE Consulting Engineers Landscape Design Whitin Design Works General Contractor Sundt Construction Court Consultant Jay Fabstein & Associates Cost Consultant Davis Langdon Surveyor Mountain Pacific Surveying Geotechnical BSK Associates Security Guidepost Solutions Lighting Horton Lees Brogden Telecom/IT TEECOM Acoustics AES Acoustical Engineering Services Sustainability Davis Langdon Code Rolf Jensen & Associates Hardware Finish Hardware Technology

CORRECTIONAL AND DETENTION FACILITIES JFR15 16 Sebring, Florida thermally efficientmaterialstokeepoperationalcostsdown, thermally in California’s Central Valley, where extreme temperatures require and asecure recreation yard. Inresponse tothefacility’s location instructionalclassroom,culinary program rooms, administration, gymnasium, acampusvisitationarea, afull-servicekitchen, unit forgirls.Thefacilityalsocontainsclassrooms, amultipurpose including 30-bedand15-bedunitsforboysahousing rehabilitation facilityfeaturesminors, 60bedsforcourt-committed a commitmentfacilityforminors.Thenew47,207-square-foot without Stanislaus CountywasoneofthefewcountiesinCalifornia ARCHITECT’S STATEMENT creating afacilityappropriate tothejuvenilepopulation. more thanthatofajail.Theresulting designreflects thegoalsof and residents, andtheentrancereflects theimageofahighschool and spaces accommodate both staffA series of outdoor courts humanecampus. building butalsoevokesthefeelofaninformal, type. Thisplannotonlyallowsabundantdaylighttopenetratethe plan defiestherigorous planningusuallyemployedinthisbuilding and itdoesnotmimicanadultdetentionfacility. Theorganicsite of thisbuilding—thatis,itwasclearlymeanttoservejuveniles, wasimpressedThe jury withtheinnovativeconceptforimage JURY’S STATEMENT STANISLAUS COUNTYJUVENILECOMMITMENTFACILITY Modesto, California

a senseofcommunitypride. through well-defined access points and landscaping, establishing site hasastrong communityconnection,welcomingthepublic resulted in a safe, secure environment for youth rehabilitation. The established anewmodelforthestate.Thesesimpledesigngoals an extensiveeducationalprogram intoitsnewfacilityandhas With the emphasis on rehabilitation, the county has incorporated andmaterialstexturespatterns, appropriate fortheactivities. Each defined zone reduces the institutional feeling through colors, visitation, facilityadministration,andanewcommercial kitchen. vocational training,indoorandoutdoorrecreation, contact minimal supervision.Functionalzonesincludehousing,education, justice facility, allowsminorstomovebetweenactivitieswith This corridor, whichisalsoconnectedtotheadjacentjuvenile functional zonesconnectedbyasecure corridor wasdeveloped. of anacademiccampus.To this,theconceptofdistinct support with thevocationalandeducationalprograms created thefeeling the environment evokesasenseofcalm.Theintegrationhousing reduce thestress ofdetentionandemphasizerehabilitation. Inside, the facilityandinsteadcreate amoreenvironment normalized to One ofthecounty’s goalswastominimizetheinstitutionalfeelof efficient materials. a keydesigngoalwastousedurable,low-maintenance,thermally 17 CORRECTIONAL AND DETENTION FACILITIES continued on page 29 CREDITS Architect Lionakis Sacramento, California Structural Engineer Lionakis Mechanical/Plumbing Engineer & Associates Turley Electrical Engineer Ken Rubitsky & Associates Civil Engineer Associated Engineering Landscape Architecture KLA, Inc. Sustainability Lionakis OWNER County of Stanislaus, California DATA of Facility Type Juvenile of Construction Type New Site Area 205,820 SF Acres 4.72 Area of Building GSF New/Renovated/Total 47,207/0/47,207 NAA New/Renovated/Total 42,640/0/42,640 Construction Costs Actual Site development cost: $2,550,000 Building cost: $12,930,000 construction cost: $15,480,000 Total Building cost/SF: $274.00 Project Delivery Type Design-bid-build Funding SB81 state release revenue bond Status of Project Completed 2013 Capacity Number of rated beds: 60 Number of general population beds: 60 Number of cells: 33

COURT FACILITIES JFR15JFR1 20 unconventional setting. planning in an courthouse embraces the functionality of modern The resulting architecture solutionthat isacontemporary horizontal expression, andanincreased leveloftransparency. wereand verticality replaced with asymmetricalcompositions, traditional elementsofcivicarchitecture suchassymmetry, density, with thedelicateoakwoodlandsandslopingtopography, themore influenced bythenaturalsettinginwhichit resides. To harmonize wasdeeply The designofthenewCalaverasCountycourthouse ARCHITECT’S STATEMENT context. layout. Theoverhangingroof creates initsrugged astrikingform organized around the great hall, provides a rational and functional and clerestory, illuminating the dais. The plan, with four courtrooms introduced intothecourtroomsthrough acomplexcross-section serving asanorientationspaceforvisitors.Indirect daylightis This is a strong architectural concept with a central great hall JURY’S STATEMENT SUPERIOR COURT OFCALIFORNIA,CALAVERAS COUNTYCOURTHOUSE San Andreas, California

creating civicspaces. important the goals of balancing security and openness while simultaneously transparency andconnectionbetweeninsideoutspeaksto to convene at both the first and second floors. In all, the level of in aliteralsensewithtwoprivatebalconiesthatallowthestaff light from above. The connection to the outdoors is extended Great Hall,themainorganizinginteriorelement,bringsinfiltered rooftop clerestories andindividualskylights.Alargeskylightinthe outdoors andnaturallight.Courtroomshaveborrowed lightfrom spaces, courtrooms,andofficeareas havesomeconnectiontothe transparency andopennessthroughout thefacility. Allpublic Security measures, whileever present, are balancedwith symbolic ofthemountainsbeyondhorizon. the courtroomvolumesare expressed againstadatumofmetal, floorjuxtaposedagainstthebase.At roofline with thecourt upper level of the building is ordered, and balanced orthogonal, system.The networkofthecourt thefoundationandsupport form officesaresupport housedonthefirstlevel.Thesecomponents assembly, jury floors emanate.Theclerkofcourt, andcourt in itsmateriality, itbecomesthewellspringfrom whichtheupper changes, free flowingandorganicbut weighted andgrounded anchoring thebuildingonsite.Mitigatingextreme grade The baseofthebuildingreferences traditionaldesignelementsby 21 COURT FACILITIES

continued on page 29 civil, hearings CREDITS Architect DLR Group Sacramento, California Civil Engineer Rodgers Wood Mechanical Engineer Capital Engineering Electrical Engineer The Engineering Enterprise Structural Engineer Buehler & Buehler Acoustical Engineer Acoustical Engineering Consultants OWNER Office State of California Administrative DATA of Facility Type Court of Construction Type New Site Area 270,072 SF Acres 6.2 Area of Building GSF New/Renovated/Total 44,621/0/44,621 GSF NAA New/Renovated/Total 31,040/0/31,040 GSF Construction Costs Actual Site development cost: $3,739,333 Building cost: $21,347,827 construction cost: $25,087,160 Total Building cost/GSF: $492.96 Project Delivery Type Design-bid-build Funding General funds Status of Project Completed 2014 Capacity Service population: 44,727 Number of courts: 4 of courts: Criminal/high security, Type of the Courts JFR15 22 CATONSVILLE DISTRICTCOURTHOUSE Sebring, Florida Maryland’s first green courthouse. sustainable design,as setting, itisdefinedbyitshigh-performance tropes civicbuildinginitsundistinguished toidentifythisimportant cues of a downtown context. Rather than resort to familiar historic a newtypeofcivicbuilding,onewithoutthetraditionalurban Baltimore Beltwayandamajorinterstate connector. Itrepresents located alonganemergingedgecityattheintersectionof willserveasuburbanpopulation This newDistrictCourthouse ARCHITECT’S STATEMENT areas, transparent façade,anddaylitinteriorspaces. management system,agreen roof visiblefrom indoorwaiting defining focus,includingsuchfeatureswater as anaturalstorm andorientationspace.Sustainabilityistheproject’scentral entry unremarkable suburbancontext.Itsfunctional planfeatures a The buildingcreates adistinctivepublicpresence inanotherwise JURY’S STATEMENT Catonsville, Maryland freeway exposure toreflect thegreen plantingsatthebase. of thebuildingsoastoreduce its massandisangledalongthe upper twostoriesare cladwithaglasswallthatdrapesthebulk canopy. Thebaseofthebuildingiscladinlocalnaturalstone. wing; its undulating glass exterior is shaded by a wide two-story tothebuildingforstaffEntry andthepublicisthrough alobbyinthe ofwalkwaysthrough court raingardensentry andwetlands. square acourthouse asdefined parking garagehelpstoform wingextendingtotheparkinggaragesouth.The two-story for clearwayfindingandeasyorientationasafour-story barwitha docket ofminorcriminalandcivilcases.Thebuildingisorganized trials,thebuildingwillhandleabusy withoutjury As alowercourt, outside courtroomsonthefloorsabove. rise wing,which provides acalming visual amenitytothosewaiting Bay. Akeyelementofthisstrategyincludesagreen roof onthelow- rainwater atthesitetohelprestore thedownstream Chesapeake watermanagementtechniquesthatwilldetainandcleanall storm features. Thelandscapeisdeveloped with advancednatural civiccontextwithastrategythatemphasizesitsenvironmentalformal adaptstoitswooded,naturalsettingandlackof The courthouse 23 COURT FACILITIES continued on page 29 CREDITS Architect RicciGreene Associates City New York Architect Joint Venture Bushey Feight Morin Architects Hagerstown, MD Civil Engineer Carroll Engineering, Inc. Geotechnical Engineer Associates, Inc. T.L.B. Mechanical/Electrical Engineer Gipe Associates, Inc. Plumbing Engineer Diversified Engineering, Inc. Security Engineer Professional Systems Engineering, LLC Structural Engineer Hope Furrer Associates, Inc. Landscape Architect Mayhan Rykiel Associates OWNER State of Maryland Department of General Services DATA of Facility Type Court of Construction Type New Site Area 261,321 SF Acres 5.9991 Area of Building GSF New/Renovated/Total 128,798/0/128,798 GSF NAA New/Renovated/Total 92,805/0/92,805 Construction Costs Withheld at request of owner Project Delivery Type Design-bid-build Funding Public bond Status of Project Estimated completion December 2017 Capacity Service population: 150,000 Number of courts: 7 (+2 hearing rooms) of courts: civil, domestic, juvenile, traffic, Type lower criminal, nonjury JFR15 24 St.Ontario Thomas, ELGIN COUNTYCOURTHOUSE the existing courthouse andregistrybuildingalongwithanaddition the existingcourthouse justicefacility.modernized Thisnewcomplexincludesrestoration of beautiful landmarkbuildings,are atthecore ofthisexpandedand buildings,both andLandRegistry The historicElginCourthouse ARCHITECT’S STATEMENT within thehistoriccontext. original building.Thedesignmaintainsthree levelsofcirculation open area betweenthenewandoldtomaintain thelegibilityof mimicking thestyleoforiginal.Thefloorplanallowsforpublic structure through itsmassing,scale,anduseofmaterialwithout at thefront ofthesite.Thenewbuildingalsorespects thehistoric the sitebehindoriginalbuilding,whichmaintainsitsprominence structure, yetitrespects theoriginalbytakingasubordinate role on The additionismore thanthree timesthesizeofhistoric delivered usingthedesign-build-finance-maintain (DBFM)method. Ontario.Theproject insouthwestern was courthouse 19th-century facilitytoahistoric This isaskillfuladditionofnewcourthouse JURY’S STATEMENT historical artifacts. Thebuildingreceivedhistorical artifacts. LEED site, one large panel in the main atrium, as well as a display case of led totheinclusionofaprogram ofheritageplaquesaround the engagement withthesite’s wasanearlydesigngoal,which history cladding, terrazzo, and wood paneling. Enhancing the public’s including richfinishmaterialssuchaszinc,limestone,andbrick though distinct,takesitscuesfromheritagebuildings, theformal links thethree levelsoftheaddition. Thedesignoftheaddition, through therestored andarriveinanatriumspacethat courthouse, Visitors enterthrough theoriginalheritagevestibule,continue service facilities. levels; an underground level includes parking, detention, and eight courtroomsandthree conference settlementrooms inthree of1852wasexpandedin1898.Itfeaturesheritage courthouse similar to the way in which the first flanking the original courthouse, is developedastwosymmetricalwingssteppedbackfrom and to meettherequirements justicefacility. ofamodern Theaddition of theoriginalstructures butincorporatesall ofthesystemsneeded three timeslargerthantheoriginal.Itretains thedignifiedcharacter ® Goldcertification. 25 COURT FACILITIES

continued on page 29 CREDITS Architect NORR Ltd Toronto Heritage Conservation Architect Fournier Gersovitz Moss Drolet and Associates Architects Toronto Civil Engineer Development Engineering Mechanical Engineer Hidi Rae Consulting Engineers Inc. Structural Engineer Stephenson Engineering Electrical, Communication, and IT Mulvey+Banani International Inc. Landscape Architect Robin Key Landscape Architecture Audiovisual Sight N Sound Design Inc. OWNER Province of Ontario DATA of Facility Type Court of Construction Type Renovation and new construction Site Area 22,630.8 SF Acres 2.3 Area of Building SF New/Renovated/Total 138,442/31,097/169,539 SF NAA New/Renovated/Total 94,977/21,286/116,252 Construction Costs Withheld by request of owner Project Delivery Type Alternative Financing Government of Ontario’s and Procurement, DBFM model Funding Private financing Status of Project Completed 2014 Capacity Service population: 95,000 Number of courts: 8 of courts: Civil, domestic, juvenile, criminal Type JFR15 26 Sebring, Florida Everett, Washington EVERETT MUNICIPAL COURT setting it apart fromsetting itapart othercommercial buildingsinthearea. The design element,establishingthecivicnature ofthebuildingand surrounding SnohomishCounty. lobbyisthecentral Aglassentry withthehistoricbuildingsofcityand new buildingharmonize Thecolors,textures,characteristicsofthe courts. andmasonry courtyard encouragesapublic connection to thefunction of the conceptualized asthegatewaytocitycampus,anditspublic andcultureand honoringthehistory ofthecity. Thefacilitywas inEverett,government Washington, celebratingtheNorthwest hasrevitalizedThe newmunicipalcourt theimageofcity ARCHITECT’S STATEMENT urban fabric. building’s clear, distinctive publicfaceblendswellwiththeexisting and functionalplaniswellexpressed inthree dimensions,andthe The simple, rational, façade andpublic connection tothecourts. built toinfillaround andcreates theexistingcourt, atransparent locatedinEverett’sThe newcourt, existingmunicipalprecinct, was JURY’S STATEMENT a worthy long-term investmentwithpublicmonies. long-term a worthy operations, andcivicpresence reflects thecity’s intenttomake city’s goalforsustainability. The focusonsustainability, efficient As thefirstLEED provide aservice-orientedposture tothepublic. records actions.Theclerk’s andcourt servicewindowsinthelobby clerkspacesefficientlyhandlethedailylargevolumeof The court vestibules, interviewrooms, andelectronic courtroomtechnology. The courtrooms feature sound the courts. high ceilings, entry provide secure areas forthepublic,inmates,andstaff toaccess operations.Separatezones the lobbytocommunicateaboutcourt in inciviclifebyproviding forartwork of thecourts opportunities courtyard. Theglassfacadealsodemonstratestheengagement The publiclobbyandwaitingspacesfacethecalminglandscaped philosophy. merged therequirements forsafetywiththeoverall design focus ontransparency inandthrough thebuildingsuccessfully ® Silver building in Everett, the courthouse metthe SilverbuildinginEverett, thecourthouse

27 COURT FACILITIES

CREDITS Architect DLR Group Seattle OWNER City of Everett, Washington DATA of Facility Type Court of Construction Type New Site Area 22,118 SF Acres .5 Area of Building SF New/Renovated/Total 25,000/0/25,000 SF NAA New/Renovated/Total 22,296/0/22,296 Construction Costs Actual Site development cost: $382,000 Building cost: $5,693,250 construction cost: $6,075,250 Total Building cost/GSF: $227.73 Project Delivery Type Design-bid-build Funding General funds Status of Project Completed 2013 Capacity Service population: 105,370 Number of courts: 2 of courts: Municipals Type Structural/MEP Engineer DLR Group Civil Engineer David Evans & Associates

29 CONTENTSCREDITS ELGIN COUNTY COURTHOUSE continued from page 25 CATONSVILLE DISTRICT COURTHOUSE CATONSVILLE continued from page 23 Façade Consultant Vidaris LEED Consultant Terralogos Cost Estimator Forella Group, LLC Codes Larden Muniak Consulting Elevating Devices Consulting ServicesAyling Acoustics, Noise, and Vibration Swallow Acoustic Consultants Ltd continued

continued from page 21 Landscape Architect Rodgers Wood Contractor McCarthy Construction Construction Manager URS Corporation Commissioning Authority Glumac SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, OF CALIFORNIA, SUPERIOR COURT COUNTY COURTHOUSE CALAVERAS continued from page 17 Specifications Lionakis Security Inc. Engineers, AVS Cost Estimating Reliable Cost Engineering Group Kitchen/Food Service The Marshall Associates General Contractor Roebbelen Construction STANISLAUS COUNTY JUVENILE COUNTY JUVENILE STANISLAUS COMMITMENT FACILITY CREDITS CREDITS

31 CONTENTSINDEX 2 6 2 10 20 26 24 16 24 22 ....22 ....22 ......

ARCHITECTS OF INDEX CO Architects County...... Superior Court of Tulare South County Justice Center, Bushey Feight Morin Architects ...... Catonsville District Courthouse.... DLR Group ...... Superior Court of California, Calaveras County Courthouse Everett Municipal Court...... Fournier Gersovitz Moss Drolet and Associates Architects Elgin County Courthouse (heritage conservation architect). Lionakis Stanislaus County Juvenile Commitment Facility...... NORR Ltd Elgin County Courthouse...... RicciGreene Associates Catonsville District Courthouse...... RMKM Architecture East Mesa Public Safety Complex (programming, planning, design)...... Skidmore, Owings and Merrill LLP ...... Superior Court of California, County of San Bernardino Williams Design Group ...... East Mesa Public Safety Complex (executive architect)

THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS