EVOLUTION OF THE COURTHOUSE'S ROLE
Traditionally, the main function of administration of justice inside the walls of a courthouse was to allow courts to submit judgments, whether to end civil disagreements or to ensure application of the penal and criminal laws.
The courthouse was then a privileged place for the judges, lawyers and court officers, which work there daily. The citizen happened to mainly access the courthouse to obtain justice.
During the last decade, the justice extended and diversified its activities to better respond to the evolution of the social and economic developments. Therefore, the courthouse became a place of judicial services not only to the litigants, but also to all citizens.
Today, the citizen goes to the courthouse to marry civilly, to register partnership declarations or to make a voluntary deposit. It is a place where the citizen deals with family affairs, probation, and youth issues due to the presence of the Youth Court.
Increasingly, the citizen considers the courthouse not only as the place where to defend its rights, but also as the place to learn about them. Consequently, the courthouse needs to appear as a welcoming place the citizen can belong and relate to.
As the judicial institutions already had to adapt to new requirements over the last years, they must now tend to future perspectives. The accelerating pace of social, economic and technologic evolutions direct the actual improvement of judicial institutions.
Some indicators as the progressive diversion of certain courts, a tentative to standardize the judicial proceedings, already indicates new mode of action in the judicial institutions. New technology as computer sciences, useful for a better transmission of information, and microfilming and viewing legal documents already arrived in some courthouses. Clearly, justice wishes to benefit of the technological developments.
Since our judicial institutions must inevitably participate to the collective existence and adapt to progress, the physical setting that host them, namely, the courthouse, must provide for all the conditions making possible its evolution.
LOCATION IN THE CITY
The future courthouse of Québec will be built in the lower city, east of the St-Roch neighbourhood and in the former courthouse train station area.
This site is located at the junction of major automobile traffic artery, namely the Dufferin-Montmorency highway, the Boulevard Charest-rue St-Paul,and the Boulevard Des Capucins. Also, the building will be nearby the intermodal station municipal project.
This project will also contribute to enhance and develop the banks of the St-Charles River and the surrounding lands. Formerly reserved for industrial vocation, those lands are now mainly dedicated to housing. The Louise Bassin and the St-Laurent River could also act as a visual interest centre for the site.
OVERVIEW OF THE FUNCTIONAL NEEDS
The future Courthouse should be integrated to the urban grid of the neighbourhood in which it will be built. The accesses and outdoor spaces should contribute to create an inviting project.
Part of the parking destined to the building's occupants will be located in the underground spaces; the other part and the parking reserved for the public will be designed on ground, nearby the main building.
The planning of internal circulations will consider the needs of the many activities and the diversified clientele that flows through the courthouse. Thus, it is expected to design five types of circulations:
- A public circulation that will mainly serve the hearing rooms and the courts' services, such as registries.
- A restricted circulation primarily reserved for the magistracy, which will connect the judges' offices and the hearing rooms. This controlled circulation will also serve the juror, the courts' staff and, occasionally, the lawyers and visitors.
- A secured circulation used by the defendants and their guards. This circulation will connect the reinforced prison vehicle portals to the adult detention facilities, to the adjacent detentions satellites and to the hearing rooms of the penal courts.
- A secured juvenile circulation used by the youths and their guards to connect the vehicles' portal to the juvenile detention rooms.
- A service circulation dedicated to the operating specific needs of the building.
(From competition program)
(Unofficial automated translation)
INTRODUCTION
The great quality of the projects, submitted to the Jury's appreciation during the last ten days, deserves to be noted. A complex program of needs, very stringent requirements and relatively short deadlines did not prevent the competitors to achieve valuable and diversified projects that succeeded to hold attention.
After a thorough analysis of all submissions, and without neglecting theirs respective particularities, it appears to the whole Jury that three of those projects were considered with a significantly strong interest. Therefore, the selection of the winning scheme required attention and rigour.
GENERAL REMARKS REGARDING THE FIVE PROJECTS
1. Brief's respect
Generally, the five teams made a serious effort to conciliate the different objectives and requirements of the competition. However, it is to be noted that each competitors did not obtain the same success. Every team relatively respected the space breakdown, although some submissions significantly exceeded the prescribed total of areas. Also, we noted a very varying quality of the projects regarding the functional organisation of spaces. The main weaknesses related to the zoning, the interconnections and the exits and accesses organisation. However, we can admit that a serious effort to respond to the Courthouse's needs was generally made. In two submissions, this effort is reflected by clarity in the design considered to be exceptional regarding the requested complexity of the functions and the circulations. At last, the Jury did not note any significant derogation to the essential prerequisites established in the competition rules that could have impact its decision.
2. Integration to the environment
According to the competition brief, since the achievement of the Courthouse must initiate the former station sector's revitalization, the integration to environment became a major goal. The competitors interpreted this objective in a way that reflects the diversity of development perspectives in the sector. Some opted for a more firm and independent scheme, although some sought for a scale-respecting scheme, in agreement with the components of the actual and predictable context. Therefore, we can see either traditionally urban setting on the street, or significantly isolated building.
Generally, the architectural vocabulary of the different projects reflected the current modern construction trends: predominance of the glass or horizontal glazing. However, in some case, we noted certain reminders of the context's traditional architecture, particularly in the composition of certain rooftops.
For most of the submissions, the automobile and pedestrian circulation as well as the relations of spaces with the context were treated with great care. However, it is to be noted that each solutions did not achieved the same quality in the Jury's opinion. Thus, the weaknesses of certain submissions concerned the conflicts between pedestrian and automobiles or the unsatisfying connections with the city streets. Regarding the site planning, some used the site potentials to priories the pedestrians by promoting the opening of the St-Charles River's approaches.
In line with the competition brief's goals, the Jury focused on how the different projects exploited the potential visual outlooks as well as the way the projects would be perceive from different points of view in the city. The Jury noted that some projects clearly cared about presenting a sympathetic presence to the locals resident.
3. Human atmosphere and artworks' integration
Appreciating the human atmosphere of a project involves the synthesis of two complementary aspects: first, the interior and exterior architectural quality (aesthetic of spaces, reception, relations, volumetric organisation, envelope and treatment); second, the spaces' animation by artworks, considered to be the ultimate prolongation of architectural concept.
The Jury noted that this synthesis has been particularly well realized in the two submissions where the atrium's quality adds to the diversity and the continuity of ambiances. It is also in these two cases that the clerical personnel's rooms where designed with the greatest care.
Regarding this synthesis of human atmosphere, another project accentuates the reception role by the quality of an interior mall and its associated spaces. Also, another project created this synthesis by a more monumental treatment.
Plus, each competitor treated the artworks' integration to the project with close attention, and with a great diversity of approaches. However, the Jury appreciated the submissions that appealed to multiple artistic disciplines and that well exploited the potentials of centers of interest by a strategic artworks' location.
4. Technical considerations (construction and systems)
Generally, the projects answered well to the objectives of safe construction, durability and habitability. No significant problem has been noted regarding the execution facility of the different projects. However, it was noted that some details could require specific treatment in their execution. Also, some submissions, particularly in mechanic, were considered to be weak.
5. Costs
After verification by the consultants working with the Jury, it was noted that the submissions presented budget estimates way under the budget prescribed by the ministry, except in two cases. However, the two submissions did not exceed the budget enough to cause their rejection.
6. Schedules
In majority of the submissions, the constructions schedules were noted to be realistic and well executed. In other cases, the competitors foresighted an insufficient period of time, whether for the plans and estimates preparation, whether for the construction of the project.
CONCLUSION
Following the experience of this competition's Jury, it would be interesting to communicate one last thought to the ministry. The competition procedure certainly provides a serious research occasion regarding the projects' quality in the most diverse ways. To some extend, if the competition brief is well established, this formula facilitate originality and innovation while avoiding falling into over spectacular designs.
In this sense, we believe that the competitors of the actual competition worked in that frame of mind, and deserve the expression of our appreciation
(From jury report)
(Unofficial automated translation)
-
Dimakopoulos, Magnan & Associés / Chabot, Gilbert, Jarnuskiewcz, Mainguy / Larose, Laliberté, Pétrucci (Winner)
-
Archard & Boivin / Bégin & Rodrigue / Lemay & Leclerc
-
De Montigny, Dion, Métivier, Gagnon / David, Boulva, Cleve / Blouin, Blouin & Associés
-
Jodoin, Lamarre, Pratte & Associés / Arcop & Associés / Doran & Dubé
-
Gauthier, Guite, Roy / St-Gelois, Tremblay, Bélanger
| Jury president |
Jean Ouellet, Architecte
|
| Jury | Maurice Desnoyers, Architecte |
| | Jacques Fortier, secrétaire du ministère |
| | Gilles Gascon, Ingénieur |
| | Guy Guérin-Lajoie, Architecte |
| | Eva H. Vecsei, Architecte |
| | Paul Laflamme, Avocat |
| | Jacques Lafrance, Ingénieur |
| | Robert Lefebvre, Architecte |
| | Louis Marceau, Ingénieur |
| | Claude Panet Beaubien (Fils), Architecte et Ingénieur |
| | Jean Rousseau, Directeur du Service d'Urbanisme |
| | Jean Taillon, Ingénieur |
| | Gabrielle Vallée, Juge à la Cour supérieure |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
-- March 1979: Competition launching
19 April 1979: Closure of the submission stage
25 April 1979: Choosing of the competitors
08 august 1979: Deadline for submission of projects proposal
23 august 1979: Jury's recommendation
27 august 1979: Vice-president's attestation
06 September 1979: Unveiling of the winning model
01 November 1979: Signature of professional service contracts
(From competition documentation)
(Unofficial automated translation)
Compte-rendu et attestation du jury, 1979, Ministère des Travaux publics et de l'Approvisionnement
Jean Ouellet, Recommandation du Jury concernant la tenue d'un concours en vue de la construction du Palais de Justice de Québec, 1979, Ministère des Travaux publics et de l'Approvisionnement
Jean Ouellet, Dévoilement de la maquette gagnante, 1979, Ministère des Travaux publics et de l'Approvisionnement
Bernard Angers, Communiqué au sous-ministre concernant la documentation du concours, 1979
- Liste des membres du jury
- Liste des membres du comité technique
- Photographies
- Organigramme
- Plan
- Tableau des superficies
- Règlement
- Critères d'évaluation des projets
- Rapport du jury (global)
- Communiqué
- Communiqué
- Communiqué
- Communiqué
- Programme
