Newsletter Signup

Newsletter Signup

Moody Nolan, Predock, Goode Van Slyke Design

Location: BlogsCenter for Civil and Human Rights (Atlanta)- Exec Director's Blog    
Posted by: Doug Shipman
Thursday, March 12, 2009

The Moody Nolan, Predock, Goode Van Slyke team presented their design concept.  Here are two pictures illustrating the concept.  The CCHR team looks forward to comments posted about this concept under this post.  Please also see the other 4 finalists' concepts in other blog entries and provide comments on each respective design.

 
Permalink |  Trackback
Comments (26)   Add Comment
By Jerry Gonzalez on
Thursday, March 05, 2009
Looks cool, open and inviting. Interesting design and would generate interest.
By T. Scott on
Thursday, March 05, 2009
Very interesting design. I enjoyed and appreciated your interior spaces, but would have liked to see some architectural elements above ground linked to those below.
By Gregg Rice on
Thursday, March 05, 2009
I love low-impact, green designs and open gathering spaces, and this proposal provides both. If this were simply a downtown government building this design would be perfect. However I think this design makes our special center 'disappear' too much. It shouldn't be a behemouth, or a screaming eyesore, but this design lacks any recognition that this is an important civil and human rights center. I would not choose this one first.
By M. Stewart on
Friday, March 06, 2009
Moody Nolan with Antoine Predock - Very good presentation and design overall. I am a bit concerned about this approach "consuming" and eating up the ellipse. All of the hard work and landscape planning will be torn apart in their scheme. The green roof as an extension of the public space is a novel thought, but no clear boundary of the edges can lead one to think it is not safe. Also, the planting of the trees and flowers that are found in Georgia locally does not mean that they will survive in the Atlanta City Region specifically.<br> The building presents a very harsh edge to Ivan Allen Street. The soaring 80 ft wall they say, will be a very overbearing piece on the landscape. One can see the similar results of such a move in the works of John Portman in Los Angeles. With his walls turning their back onto the street. This tall plane of wall created here will be a hard place to relate to and be next to while being a pedestrian or being in a car due to scale.<br> I am not sure that visitors will know that a) this is a public center and museum they can enter b) that there is a building under that green lawn roof and c) that this building is about Civil and Human Rights. It does not present a pedestrian with information about its purpose. I am not so sure people will venture into the carved cave opening that is created in the hill.<br> Lastly, the exhibit space is very interesting in design. But it appears from first glance that the programming is not fully met. This may be a scale and relationship issue. But to me, it seemed that not all of the exhibit space and programming was there.
By S. Derry on
Friday, March 06, 2009
My favorite of the 5, it is obvious a lot of thought went into this design. I like the openess as opposed to some of the others that look like monuments. Also, I think it will peak the interest of pedestrians to explore the site. Well done!
By S. Derry on
Friday, March 06, 2009
My favorite of the 5, it is obvious a lot of thought went into this design. I like the openess as opposed to some of the others that look like monuments. Also, I think it will peak the interest of pedestrians to explore the site. Well done!
By JConn on
Friday, March 06, 2009
Without a doubt, the roof rocks! However, I think the abundance of green space becomes impractical as it fails to define its purpose, short of offering a free park for lunch breaks. It demonstrates the opposite end of the spectrum as the Huff + Gooden design, and I fear the interior of the building will not be as open and welcoming. Visitors enjoy expansive windows and skylights. The entrance reminds me of a cave and seems intimidating, but it may be an effective tool as it draws in visitors looking for MARTA.
By Akennas on
Friday, March 06, 2009
A real disappointment coming from Antoine Predock, whose work I usually love. This is not the Center for Hobbit Rights, but the way this thing buries itself into the slope (and an artificial slope, at that - how tall is that wall on Ivan Allen, about 70'-80' straight up? Yikes! Maybe they could put a rock climbing wall on it...), you'd think it was meant for the Shire. A distant 3rd of 5.
By Dian E on
Friday, March 06, 2009
I am really impressed by the openness and lack of traditional building in this design. I love the creativity, the various heights, the green roof. I wonder how it would feel on the inside...hopefully, equally open.
By Nancy Gaddy on
Friday, March 06, 2009
I thought this was the most unique and unusual of the five design presentations. It is not the standard glass and steel or glass and granite, monumental structure typical of many contemporary museum or arts center designs. In many ways, it is not the most visually stunning or aesthetically pleasing of the five designs presented. However, its use of the topography and grounds, and unconventional yet organic approach with regard to incorporating green space and natural elements to both exterior and interior, make this the most inviting, well thought through and “cutting-edge” of all the concepts presented. Unlike some of the other designs presented, this one may not make the most dramatic “first impression” on Atlanta’s skyline, but could ultimately be one of our region’s most striking, significant and sustainable architectural icons
By A. Karen on
Saturday, March 07, 2009
This is absolutely a very interesting design. It's uniqueness speaks<br>volumes in a subtle but grandiose way. The high wall on the street serves as a constant reminder to all who pass by of the signigicance of this structure, yet the entrance sets such a warm, inviting and awesome tone. All the way around, it a real stand out..
By Linda Carnes on
Saturday, March 07, 2009
This is wonderfully creative and I love the green space dominance. However, I am cautious about perfect maintenance of the landsace exterior, especially in the harsh Atlanta summers. Anything but constant perfection in the look of the landscape exterior will compromise the space. Also, I do not like the dungeon feel of the entrance. This building should express a soaring historic legacy within an inviting contemporary context. As much as I appreciate the creative intent, I cannot recommend this design for our purpose here.
By km c-t on
Sunday, March 08, 2009
Out of all the designs, this was the most unique. I belive when looking at the "creative concept" this has the most potential to be something extra-ordinary and special. However, I believe it needs some reworking of both interior and exterior spaces. This needs to be taken to the next level in order to make it a true symbol of the structures purpose, overall concept and design intent.
By Julian Pena on
Monday, March 09, 2009
I appreciate the attempt of being "green" and the open space. Unfortunately, I feel there is too much green emphasis. On the contrary of the previous comments, I do not think this idea actually took too much thought.
By www.fellowstyle.com on
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
this concept will definitely draw a crowd... it's buzz worthy and groundbreaking (no pun intended.) the design is innovative and it utilizes the THINK GREEN direction of our society. this is the new age, the new direction of the global community and it captures that. additionally, the space is inviting to life, specifically human life and that is the entire purpose of the Center for Civil and Human Rights.
By Chad Spurlin on
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
The Moody Nolan/Predock proposal captured my imagination at the end of the first day of juries. The Predock design calls to question the meaning of buildings, architecture, and landscape, yet the more I dwelled on the subject: the idea of blurring architecture and landscape the less I was confident it is the right direction for the CCHR, Atlanta, or architecture-at-large. The proposal does little to physically represent the mission of the center or provide a landmark structure for the city of Atlanta. For a city its size, Atlanta has very few quality, modern architectural jewels (Breuer's central library comes to mind) and I fear that with this proposal all Atlanta and the center will have is an amazing hill. Yes, this proposal demands we think "green," but all the proposals promote sustainability and it would bne more powerful to experience a "green build" that isn't literally green. I'm almost tempted to challenge all the designers to create a sustainable building without a green roof! (Although, it will be a wonder place to enjoy a lunch.)
By Bernard Costantino on
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
Great concept. I recommend this team.
By anonymous on
Thursday, March 12, 2009
are you kidding me? looks like the shire...
By Keith on
Thursday, March 12, 2009
A bad Yokohama Port Terminal in Atlanta? Nice images but the idea has been played out...
By Mark on
Sunday, March 15, 2009
The greenspace use is certainly inviting and creative. Certainly some safety precautions would need to be thought through. Perhaps a blend of elements of the architectural design of HOK and use of greenspace from the Moody Nolan design would be a good next step in the process.
By SPP on
Monday, March 16, 2009
Very interesting design. I saw more images of the design at Moody Nolan's website. I disagree that the building/entry appears cavernous. On the contrary, they have created a distinctly experiential building, an oasis that will leave a lasting impression on any visitor.
By K. Schweder on
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
Best of the 5 designs.....clearly states that the CCHR is not a building to be looked at....it's what's inside that counts. Atlanta should seize this opportunity and not accept just another large building showcasing another signature architects own design....this building is about the people, not the building! Hooray for this team stepping outside the same old, same old 'Box'!!
By LC on
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
The emphasis of this design is on green architecture, but the purpose/content of the building is lost. The design has not been tailored to this project.
By Janet Mindes on
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
I can't get a good enough sense of this design from the two images posted here. Thoughtful and green, but too bunker-like overall.
By anonymous on
Thursday, March 19, 2009
I like the design. I just hope you take full advantage of the wall. By possible quoting civil and human rights quotes on the wall. This would definitely make your work stand far above the others cause they do not have much past a form. LC what are you talking about? With the top not only being green it also has the ability to let people have a free and open sense of culture. Civil Rights is the rights of citizens to political and social freedom and equality, and what better way to do that but through nature? I mean we would all love to be confined in a cubical. wouldn't we?
By Steven G. on
Monday, March 23, 2009
I can't decide between this project and the Diller Scofido design. Like the Human Rights movement, these two designs represent a new direction in thought. The other designs are more conventional. I do think the "Wall" needs to develop further but I think they are capable of taking the design to the next level.

Your name:
Title:
Comment:
Security Code
Enter the code shown above in the box below
Add Comment Cancel 
Archives by Month
Blogs and Links
Home | About | Civil & Human Rights Around Georgia | News & Articles | Architecture | FAQ | Donations | Work With Us | Events | Feedback | Press Room | Contact Us | Login | Site Map
Copyright 2007 Center For Civil and Human Rights Partnership

Web Development and Design by: Bridgeline Digital