From the Director

Location: Blogs Center for Civil and Human Rights (Atlanta)- Exec Director's Blog
Posted by: Doug Shipman Monday, March 09, 2009
The Diller Scofidio + Renfro, Stanley Beaman and Sears 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 (42) Add Comment

By Gregg Rice on
Thursday, March 05, 2009

It's a little hard to get a sense of scale from the first, far-view, rendering. The walkway over the green space is a dramatic and pleasing approach. I believe having lots of green space for speeches, concerts, and perhaps outdoor films is an essential element for this center, so this design gets high marks for that. However, from these renderings II really have little sense of the actual building design. And that high overhanging (cantilevered?) roof seems too imposing. I can't really decipher what it is exactly. I can't rate this design without actually seeing better renderings of the building. Not a great first impression if that was the firm's choice.

By T. Scott on
Thursday, March 05, 2009

I really liked your concept o the past, present and future, but would have liked to see more connections between the three planes. The display area of the present (seen above) was very real and could be very interactive. Would be nice to consider a touch screen where you can create your own news by selecting a location. May have to consider some type of enclosure for winter though. The idea of the pull away trailer would be a great educational element for school. The project begged to be a bit more developed before presenting. Externally, it would be a very impacting design for downtown ATL. Thank you for your presentation.

By M. Stewart on
Friday, March 06, 2009

Diller Scofidio + Renfro - This was a very thoughtful presentation and approach to the design. The creation of public and urban space for the citizens of Atlanta to use as well as the visitors to the center is the greatest in this approach I believe. This is because they offer shade from the harsh summer sun with their overhang. But still allow light and open views, transparency, in the massing and form. The cantilever is very light and appears as a floating plane due to the angle cut into the upper roof. I am concerned with the disabled being able to access the site and ites features. There are no apparent ramps in the form for access to all of the levels. Also, it is not very clear where the elevators are and how to access them from the multiple levels inside the building and on the site outside of the building. The idea of the movable galleries that connect to the Sweet Auburn district is very good. However, the implementation of it physically would be very difficult. This is due to safety in the "gallery" bus device itself. People on board will need to be restrained or have seats for safety. And once again the accessibility of that for the disabled will make it hard. Plus, the designers commented on the fact the solar power would generate and fuel the vehicles. In Georgia we do not receive as mush direct sun as the desert for example. So I can see problems with the generation of the power of the vehicles. Also, taking visitors away from the site will require scheduling and will consume a lot of time. The travel to the Sweet Auburn area will occur through the streets of Atlanta and the traffic can cause delays and problems with the scheduling. Also, I dont think the kind of frequency would be achieved so that many visitors can experience this. This part of the scheme I think is best left out. Of course the design is in the early phases but I am worried about the lower exhibits being too dark. There should be some natural lighting in these lower spaces. Otherwise we will be relying on artificial lighting. This will and can be a waste of energy if there is a nice and sunny day. This I do not think goes will with the human rights and the stewardship of the Earth and environment. The materials of the building are of concern as well. They are all very high tech. These high tech materials make the building appear as something foreign. Alien. The designers mention use of stainless steel. This is going to easily take and show prints and dirt. It will have to be cleaned constantly in order to keep and orderly appearance. The solar panels on the entire roof facade are a great idea for generating power. But they are costly and the maintenance and replacement of them will be costly as well. They will need to be cleaned regularly to maintain peak performance. And I dont think that the weather will generate as much power and electric from them as we would like. The fact that led displays on other things are going to be located outside is problematic as well. The dust, pollen, wind blown rain, dew from moisture, and all other natural things will be readily available to contact those surfaces and screens. They will need to be cleaned regularly and weatherized in order to keep the electronics from shorting. Thus incurring replacement costs of the displays. The streaming of news and information is a novel thought. But to think that all of the news branches will all contribute or donate is a bit absurd. If these channels are used in a simple broadcast manner then that is fine. But to think that CNN, Fox News, BBC and others will donate money and have their competition in the same room... then I ask you to think again. Coca-Cola did not spend money on projects to have Pepsi proudly displayed right beside it....

Re: Diller Scofidio Renfro Design	By Concerned on Friday, March 06, 2009
Please post floor plans, sections, renderings from all angles, a brief description; otherwise don't bother posting anything at all. I don't think anyone can grasp the extent, ideas embodied in these projects with just 2 (unflattering) images.

By Dana T on
Friday, March 06, 2009

Diller Scofidio + Renfro presented a very mature project considering how early and young it is. Their concepts, understanding of the program, and interpretation of what the project needs to be were excitingly fresh and neither dumb nor farfetched. The design was not just specific to the site and program, but was very sympathetic to the city of Atlanta, her people, and the visitors to the area. In a city that is so inwardly focused, this design is a breath of fresh air that dares to invert the way we experience the right to public space. The architect’s concerns of the theme-park quality of the site are understandable; it is hard to add something so delicate in content to an environment dedicated to entertainment. Their design offers a way to deal with these concerns and was quite successful at doing so. The extension of the “urban plane” as the topography of the site dropped was a very simple way to deal with connecting the CCHR back to the common areas of the site but also kept some degree of separation. The common ground nearly occupied the entire entry level of the CCHR which is a bold statement, but nothing to be concerned about; as an urban space it should have to deal with the realities mentioned above (weather, natural light, etc.). As Liz Diller said, this was a free-zone yet offered bits of interference in the form of news feeds dealing with civil and human rights. If I were to comment on the image without understanding the concepts, I would agree that the design was somewhat hard to digest in these two images. I had to contemplate the importance of Civil and Human Rights, the Civil Rights Movement and its leaders, and how important and sacred this space really is before making judgment about how successful the design is. This is a beautiful space to deliver such sensitive information and does so while extending the CCHR beyond the borders of the site. I believe in this design and would be proud to have it in my city.

By Akennas on
Friday, March 06, 2009

I agree with "Concerned" - it is hard to make a reasoned judgment based on two renderings, especially these two. (Who selected them, anyway? There were much better ones to choose from.) DSR's presentation was outstanding, and their design easily the most exciting of the five. It has dynamism, character, and a great concept: the base is intentionally closed to emphasize the dark side of the human rights story, the top soars to point us to where we can go, and we enter in somewhere in between, where we live. It is a great metaphor, and I really, REALLY want this crowning jewel for Atlanta!

Re: Diller Scofidio Renfro Design	By JConn on Friday, March 06, 2009
From the first photo, this seems unlike anything I’ve ever seen before. The lawn and amphitheater below the walkways are awesome. Its purpose seems obvious and very inviting. I also like the openness and variety suggested by the second photo. In short, this extremely interesting concept achieves a unique perspective for the CCHR.

By Judy Cooley on
Friday, March 06, 2009

This is by far the "Crowning Jewel of Atlanta". The dark side of the human rights story belongs to all of us. The future can only be carefully chosen if you possess an accurate knowledge of the past. The DSR design dramatically presents an impression of the "dark side". However, the top lifts the human spirit. It lifts the human spirit high enough to see the future (on its current path) or solutions to make it better!

Re: Diller Scofidio Renfro Design	By KSFreeman on Friday, March 06, 2009
Based on the entire DS+R/SBS presentation, I'm intrigued to see more of this concept. Unfortunately, the selected images give but a small taste of the overall parti, which seems interesting and well conceptualized. Based on DS+R and SBS's previous works, I look forward to seeing more from this team.

By Scott C on
Friday, March 06, 2009

At this point floor plans and descriptions are just a mere small piece of the puzzle. At this time the designers are helping the Center create their 'brand'. The images are as important as the Coke, ATT and GA Pacific logos. Designing the facility is important in the branding process. Branding is important to our memory process. The design by Diller Scofidio and Renfro is superior to the others on the site. This design along with programming on the inside of the building will provide a lasting remembrance for all that enter and leave the facility. For me the design works in the following ways: 1 - elevated walkways lead me to the building while still capturing green space below; 2 - The large canopy offers a welcoming invitation to enter the facility; and 3 - it looks to be one of the most architecturally significant buildings in Downtown Atlanta. The mission of the center states: “This Center will explore the universal search for a secure human existence, in a way that inspires vigilance and leadership amongst generations.” The DSR design presented will capture the wonder of us all, capture the youth with its design and inspire us all with the content contained within. In my view the designers appear to be in sync with the vision of the Center in the following two elements listed in the key recommendations established by the center. Programming: “Living Center” – This design will provide a playground of memories – reflecting ponds, open air amphitheater, elevated walkways; Critical Success Factors: Allowing the message and content to drive design – This design is by far the most intriguing. The elements inside will remember the past and present. The design represents the future. This design will truly be a landmark in the city of Atlanta, both by design, programming and memories.

By RL on
Friday, March 06, 2009

I was able to sit through all five presentations, and liked bits and pieces of the first day's presentation, here's my take: The Huff + Gooden project is out for me, because the Ivan Allen plaza doesn't seem to work, and would be a dark uninteresting space; their design was not very tactile either. The monumental (MLK exhibit, entrance sculpture) components of the Stanley/ Polshek proposal was very intriguing and well thought out, however the facade was not very interesting. I like the idea of being able to interact with the entrance sculpture, similar to the cloud for eg. in Millennium Park in Chicago; the generous plaza lends itself to public gatherings. The Predock proposal was an interesting but overwhelming one. I think when you gather at a site like this you want to see the people and not be drowned with flowers, and a chunk of soil; the materiality was the most interesting though, especially on the street facades. Freelon's concept was good but their representation suffered from being preoccupied with a plan rendition; I would have really liked to see it show in elevation. The massing/facade was trendy and not very thoughtful, but the materiality was very rich. DSR/SBS' proposal had a lot of inventive ideas: rechargeable mobile galleries, the filigree bridge/ common ground lobby, "past/present/future concept, site trees integrated into lynching exhibit, etc. This team's sustainability principles were more diverse than the other teams one-hit "green roof" (Freelon's roof was not accessible) proposals. The ideas were rough but potent, and definitely the most sophisticated and visionary proposal. PS I was really surprising to see how finished some of the proposals were after only 2,3 weeks; although I did enjoy seeing the flythrough videos/renderings. It must feel good to be a 3D expert in this economy! Also this was the first time in 6yrs of being in the architecture field that I saw African-American Architects on stage, and they were all just brilliant - awesome presentations!

By CSB on
Friday, March 06, 2009

Thanks to RL's post I have a little better feel for this proposal and am very impressed with the past/present/future concept for the museum. The amount of greenspace looks great and the fact that they would be implementing such sustainability principle's would be remarkable for Atlanta. The bridge and common areas seem like they would be a nice addition and complementary to the area the museum would be in.

By dh on
Friday, March 06, 2009

What I am drawn to most about this submission is not well represented in the two images above. This team seems to understand the power of designing EXPERIENCE rather than OBJECT. I found the organizational concept of past, present and future not only appropriate for the Center, but actually perceivalbe to the general public who will be interacting with the building. Yes, the design is somewhat undeveloped. However with such a strong spatial concept, the magic felt in these schematic designs has a fighting chance to be realized in the final building.

By RH on
Friday, March 06, 2009

The DSR entry is by far my favorite. I attended the presentation and found the design concept of past/present/future to be overwhelmingly strong, relevant and understandable. The extension of the public park/plaza and the exterior LED screens that allow public interaction with the museum 24 hours a day is a brilliant stroke. The CCHR is not only about the struggles of African Americans in the USA; human and civil rights struggles occur every day all over the world. The DSR scheme clearly references and connects to the global struggles through the images of the world map in the plaza and the LED screens showing news from various countries. The design concept reaches beyond Atlanta and any single race. There is an enormous amount of potential as to the exhibits and activities that will and can happen in the seemingly large and open spaces provided by the design. In my opinion, the fact that the DSR scheme does not seem fully finalized and developed is an advantage. This scheme has great potential in that there are opportunities for exploration inherent in the design that would allow for the concept and experience of the museum to become deeper and greater than it is even in these initial stages whereas schemes presented by some other teams seem too final and seem to fall short on an experiential level. I was glad to hear DSR speak to the larger context of how the CCHR can interact with the city through the use of educational "media" buses that will take visitors to notable historic sites within Atlanta. In planning for the future success of the CCHR building, it is important to note that most museums and cultural centers eventually require expansion. I think DSR's use of the site allows for potential small expansions on the existing site while the "media" buses could provide a vehicle for taking visitors to an expansion that may be off-site in the future. In short, I think this design offers the greatest opportunity for an impressive and deep experience. My only concern about this design is budget. However, each and every architectural project involves budget and value engineering negotiations. I believe it is possible to achieve this design, perhaps with some revisions, within a reasonable budget, with the design's spirit intact. I hope the DSR scheme is chosen and that, regardless of which team is chosen, the bean-counters don't get in the way of realizing a truly worthy center for the CCHR.

Re: Diller Scofidio Renfro Design	By td on Friday, March 06, 2009
This entry is VERY impressive and gives an impression of soaring expansiveness that supports the sense of idealism that I equate with the history of the struggle for civil rights in this country and indeed around the world. Beautiful.

By MK on
Friday, March 06, 2009

This project had some innovative ideas, but it seemed their ideas were not however well thought out. As a global company, the amount of time was more than adequate. It almost seemed that this firm was preoccupied with their other projects, and the CCHR did get their full attention. The design seemed to dominate instead of cohabitate with its neighbors. I feel as if this building was designed in a vacuum without the city of Atlanta being a factor. The choice of highly reflective roof material is an eye sore for any 4 story and above neighbor. The inhabitants of these buildings will be blinded will trying to enjoy the park views. I was particularly disturbed by dungeonesque design of the civil rights heritage. In my mind it shows dishonor to hide away the efforts of the founders of the civil rights movement with no connection to the present or future. The idea the a subterranean gathering area around a natural and condensation collection pool is impractical to think this area allows for dry seating. Questions posed regarding the structure were only answered with, "the structure is problematic, but our engineers tell us it will work." That tells me only that they have not yet figured out the structure. It was as if a brainstorming session has been thrown at us, saying trust our reputaion to figure it out. I definitely will cast my vote among firms that have already invested the time and effort to give a thoughtful, meanful, design.

By BDenis on
Friday, March 06, 2009

I attended the presentations and found this design entry most innovative and appealing to their thought and approach of welcoming the park into the horizon line of the facility and is the only entry which connects the museum to some of the most historical embodied civil rights sites in Atlanta. I disagree with MK's comments and obviously they did not attend this entries presentation or they would have heard one of their team members ( I believe her name is Mable) speak of heritage and Atlanta's own connection from it's past to it's future. Their design does capture the connection between the past, present and future not only for Atlanta's history, but from and for the world. As far as structural concerns which were briefly covered in their presentation -I do believe this phase of design is suppose to be conceptual and not already built by the design teams own voice. The museum needs to be developed thoroughly with the inclusion of the communities, historians, families and museum groups that are the true voice for this facility. Having visited the ICA in Boston, which is a beautiful example of DSRD's innovative approach to a LEED designed museum project, I really hope to see something as extraordinary in the heart of Atlanta.

By KI on
Saturday, March 07, 2009

The "idea" that DSRD presented was the most compelling. I did not attend both days' , so I can only compare it against Freelon's project. In direct contrast to the other team's "building first, then context" , DSRD's approach to studying context and arriving at a much larger purpose (intuition is how they described it) was what hit the mark. The message that their idea will send out in the form of this design, is not one just of the traditional architectural"physicality" but one that appears to be entrenched in a forward thinking purpose of redefining the role of what museums can be. In today's world of 24-7 media and connectivity, this project could stand for something more than just another museum in another city. The mobile museum trailers that plug into the main design was a great example of how unique and inclusive a museum's purpose could become. The Center's close proximity to a large news media could lend the large open to public plaza that the design proposes, to become a much larger stage for the public in matters of Civil and Human Rights. Very inspiring and innovative. It would indeed bring Atlanta a lot of attention worldwide.

By Brooklyn on
Saturday, March 07, 2009

I like this firms work usually but it leaves a little to be desired. None of the competition entries show the best work of any of these firms and I believe the client needs to push for them to do better (without more fee). This at first looks imaginative but lacks the sort of voice that the Polshek scheme has. I would like to see a combination of lots of the ideas of several of the firms (the changing landscape, a public wall and the building volumes twisting together from the other entries but much more simplified) . This entry is interesting but just leaves a little to be desired. It is not a collective space as it should be and the other entries are working towards (like the great outdoor gathering space by Polshek) . This seems to be a very fractured and divided space.... it could be nice if worked through all the firms in a collaboration. This subject is too important to not get right.

Re: Diller Scofidio Renfro Design	By Linda Carnes on Saturday, March 07, 2009
Highly creative design, but fails to capture the historic legacy of the Civil Rights Movement - it is ambitiously contemporary devoid of any historic sensibility. Interesting, but not right for purposes of this building. <br><br>Doug, want to especially thank you for inviting public comment on these designs. Wonderful opportunity for the City.

By Carl Gill on
Sunday, March 08, 2009

The first view (even though from a far vantage point) seems to personify the ideal of the Civil Rights Movement expanding out to be more inclusive and also reaching out to the stars. While it is difficult to make assumptions about scale, given this vantage point, I feel comfortable with the overall project usage of space. The second view with the free standing monoliths is similar to one used in Montreal to show advancements toward the present day movement. Well done DSR and may this truly become the "Crowning Jewel of Atlanta".

Re: Diller Scofidio + Renfro, Stanley Beaman & Sears Design	By Julian Pena on Monday, March 09, 2009
It's hard to envision this building based on the images provided. Where's the entrance?

Re: Diller Scofidio + Renfro, Stanley Beaman & Sears Design	By JCook on Tuesday, March 10, 2009
This is my favorite design concept of the five being proposed as it appears to be the most innovative. In addition, the past, present and future theme has an appropriate tie. My only concern is whether or not the architecture might be a little too contemporary for this project?? <br><br>

Re: Diller Scofidio + Renfro, Stanley Beaman & Sears Design	By Sue Gill on Tuesday, March 10, 2009
This is a very innovation design concept. Well done DSR. Atlanta should be very proud if this is brought to fruition.

By Frances Hamilton on
Tuesday, March 10, 2009

This design is very alive as it puts our civil rights into the correct perspective: of those who risked and gave their lives for others to have this freedom (the galleries on the first level), that people struggling for their civil rights is on-going all over our planet (the open public plaza) and the meeting rooms on the highest level represent our future in a concrete form. I believe that all the levels should be connected by a light shaft which the presenters said was one of their concepts. Really loved this design!

By Chad Spurlin on
Wednesday, March 11, 2009

The Diller Scofidio + Renfro project was definitely the most inspiring of all the presentations. Which is saying a lot because all five teams had very powerful architectural concepts. However, the Diller project was the only one that truly seemed to grasp the goals of the CCHR in continuing the human rights movement and the understanding that civil rights is still a struggle today. I truly appreciated how the designers showed us their design process throughout the presentation rather than just trying to amaze us with a beautiful rendering and digital models (although they had that too). The process slides showed an understanding of the intent of the CCHR as more than a museum, the unique characteristics of the particular site, and role the city of Atlanta in civil & human rights. After learning how they make decisions, I am confident that they will develop their project with true sincerity and will listen & respond to community input. While the initial concept is the strongest of the five, I am actually excited to see how the building changes to reflect the comments on this site and the team's own critiques as the investigate further. I also want to commend Diller on being the only project that truly made a strong connection between Atlanta and the Civil Rights Movement. I moved to Atlanta from Mississippi after growing up in Alabama. My collective memory of places I've lived, Southern towns like Jackson and Montgomery seem to have a stronger connections to & reminders of the civil rights struggle. Mostly because Atlanta's culture & urban fabric are quick to erase evidence of its past in hopes holding its own as a modern, cosmopolitan city; whereas, places like Jackson, while looking to the future, are careful not to forget & learn from its past. It was only at Diller's presentation was I reminded how appropriate it is for Atlanta to be the home of the CCHR. Linking the center to Auburn Avenue with the traveling exhibits was a great gesture to Atlanta's past. Additionally, after the historian's presentation, I was moved by the strength & courage of Atlanta's citizens during the 1895 World Fair evident in the Negro building. I hold a new sense of awe walking the paths of Piedmont Park. It's only appropriate that Atlanta will build another grand building to for public discourse and action. All of the teams had powerful, deserving concepts and I am confident that each of the designers can create a place that Atlanta will be proud of, but I must admit, I will feel some initial disappointment if DS+R are not the architects selected to lead the way.

Re: Diller Scofidio + Renfro, Stanley Beaman & Sears Design	By D Farmer on Wednesday, March 11, 2009
This rendering leaves me with MANY MANY questions. However, I do like the ampitheatre feature of this design. This is my #2 or 3rd choice in designs. Best design provided by HOK et. al.

By J. Martin on
Wednesday, March 11, 2009

By far, this is the most innovative and thoughtful design proposal. From the underground gallery to the link to Auburn Avenue, this design offers the most promise of all the entries. The team's amazing design portfolio and built work should reassure any skeptics. If this team is selected, Altanta will have the one of the most inspired and welcoming Center for Civil and Human Rights to date. Having Mable Wilson, an accomplished architect, scholar and expert on African-American museums, as a design advisor will only add to the depth and thoughtfulness of the CCHR and ensure the Center's place in history.

By mrbk on
Wednesday, March 11, 2009

I really appreciate this entry, which acknowledges that architecture is not just about creating powerful forms. The entry by DSR/SBS brings a perceptive approach to design as they seek to create a sense of place that responds the cultural implications of the endeavor that is the CCHR. The concept of a common ground linking the past/present/future as an organizational strategy for the center also alludes to the influence of civil and human rights on all of us – rights that are imparted or violated. We are all shaped by the past. We toil within the present hoping for a glimpse of a future that will be brighter. The sensitivity of this project makes it apparent that DSR/SBS see this building as much more than form and materials, but as a space for interaction, for debate, for a focus on people – to honor those who have come before and celebrate those who will make their mark on the future. If the Southeast were lucky enough to acquire a design of this caliber it would be an enormous gift and a fantastic opportunity to illustrate how architecture can create a sense of place and shape our environment – for the better.

By M2 DeObaldia on
Wednesday, March 11, 2009

The mandate for the competition was to propose a Center for Civil and Human Rights that would engage the context of a unique site and topography, celebrate Atlanta’s pre-eminent role in the history of the Civil Rights Movement, and explore its potential in future generations to influence the ongoing struggle for civil and human rights around the world. Of all the schemes, this entry fully embodies this mandate within a fluid and porous building that blurs the boundaries between landscape, space and structure, at the same time that it creates a destination with a program that is compelling in its clarity and strength. Deftly avoiding the pitfall of delivering a monument to the past, the scheme comes alive in the enfolding of the urban/public space into the belly of the building, in the interlocking of section planes exploring past, present & future and in the exhibit/mobile information buses sending out lifelines into the urban fabric, to places in this city that were the lifeblood of the Civil Rights Movement in this country. To the degree that any work of architecture can influence the course of history and the ongoing struggle for civil and human rights around the globe, Diller Scofidio + Renfro and its partners have proposed a concept that fully exposes the roots of our collective past, exploring its impact on our present and future, and further creates spaces which serve to push, if not dissolve altogether, the boundaries that create disparity; boundaries of information, of knowledge and of natural resources which separate people from their present , their past and their environment, seriously compromising any possibility of a future. No other scheme weaves the strength of these ideas into its architecture as this one has. Eschewing slickness for a presentation that is grounded, direct, and fully willing to engage in the dialogue for the open-ended future of the Center, this is the scheme worthy of the competition’s mandate.

Re: Diller Scofidio + Renfro, Stanley Beaman & Sears Design	By anonymous on Thursday, March 12, 2009
many of these schemes see the museum as playground and/or park. the mission for the center seems to need a place of study/discussion/scholarship set into a flexible system.

By Lindal W. on
Friday, March 13, 2009

This scheme is bold, and embraces you with its first images. For a site that is sandwiched between Coke and the Aquarium, bold is what we need. As a resident of Atlanta for 25+ years this scheme grabs me, as well as the diverse population of metro Atlanta. It speaks directly to the past, present and future Atlanta – and the past, present and future of Human Rights. For Atlanta to grow from the burning of the Civil War, a hero’s legacy on Auburn Avenue, the crowning of the Olympics, and now the future – the DS+R scheme embraces it all. The building seems to touch down on the site, and open up the city’s point of view to the world. Thank you for focusing on and addressing the public space - not turning ‘inward’.

Re: Diller Scofidio + Renfro, Stanley Beaman & Sears Design	By L Miller on Friday, March 13, 2009
CCHR, if you allow Diller Scofidio + Renfro to work their magic on the site, you will always be glad you did. It was such a pleasure to listen to their thought process and see their ideas bring forth the concept. Atlanta will be all the brighter if they are selected Architects.<br>Thank you DS+R for your lush, bright thinking.

By Elle Woods on
Friday, March 13, 2009

I am not an architect , nor do I comprehend most of the architectural jargon from my fellow bloggers. Nevertheless, as a layperson who attended Wednesday’s presentations, I have a few thoughts… The overall presentation by DS+R/SBS left me wanting more. The design left me thinking ‘wow’ now that is something to be proud of in Atlanta. The building design makes me wonder how people come up with such incredible beautiful design work? The design presentation was warm, and presented with the appropriate sensitivity for a ‘public’ forum. The public court under the building canopy with the LCD presentations would be inspiring. I also appreciated seeing some of the archival photographs of key civil rights leaders in color. You have definitely done your home work on the target audience and user. I hope this design makes the cut, I consumed the entire meal with gratefulness.

Re: Diller Scofidio + Renfro, Stanley Beaman & Sears Design	By APulver on Friday, March 13, 2009
As someone who was unable to attend the presentations, but who has read and followed with interest, I, too, am disappointed in the few sketches available here. I am, however, drawn to the concept presented here by DS+R/SBS. It is dynamic and thoughtful and invites engagement. Based only on what is presented for each of the plans on this website, this concept would be my first choice.

By mmr on
Friday, March 13, 2009

This entry is truly an inspiration that could only enrich downtown Atlanta. It would be a great pleasure to have a building so innovative and thoughtful representing this powerful movement in our city. This design has evolved from a strong concept, which creates an organizational strategy that can further evolve as needed upon development. I think the best thing about this proposal is that it is possible to envision the potential developments that can only deepen the intentions and experience of the center. It is clear that this design is creating a place of reflection, education, and inspiration. This proposal speaks to the civil and human rights movement not only at a local level but equally at a global level. Through the idea of the LED screens on the plaza level the visitor and the public engage with issues throughout the world. Through the use of exhibition buses the center proactively extends into the community. This team has successfully created an environment that invites people to be a part of it.

Re: Diller Scofidio + Renfro, Stanley Beaman & Sears Design	By LC on Wednesday, March 18, 2009
1) Because the design gives stage to the present at ground level and the future on an upper level, it gives the impression that the past (civil rights history) is less important and is buried below ground. 2) I think the LED screens on the plaza level would be a constant technical maintenance issue.

Re: Diller Scofidio + Renfro, Stanley Beaman & Sears Design	By Janet Mindes on Wednesday, March 18, 2009
Interesting design. Again, hard to grasp enough from these images. But not signaling to me anything in particular about human rights.

Re: Diller Scofidio + Renfro, Stanley Beaman & Sears Design	By APS on Thursday, March 19, 2009
From the images provided, it seems this proposal is a magically floating plane? Poor choice of images unfortunately because the concept - from what I've heard - sounds interesting.

Re: Diller Scofidio + Renfro, Stanley Beaman & Sears Design	By lance carlson on Friday, March 20, 2009
this one wins....for me.

By ARB on
Monday, March 23, 2009

Clearly the DSR proposal is the most cutting edge and is the only one which grasps the totality of the concept (ie, Civil AND Human rights). This project goes beyond that on which most Atlantans stagnate and embraces a world-wide struggle that includes all disadvanged peoples. I hope that this is the project submittal that is accepted. At the same time, I think all of the schemes struggled with the site. The site is totally wrong for a building that has a serious mission. The site is a collection of entertainment pavillions much like a World's Fair. The CCHR is not of a similar type and does not belong on this site which I suspect is proposed because it is a gift of The Coca Cola Company. The struggle for all teams was apparent in the many diagrams with lines drawn attempting to make connections to all sorts of areas (Auburn Ave., The King Center, The Atlanta University Complex). In the maze of streets that define Atlanta's evolution from footpaths and train lines, no real connection can be made to any of these other areas. Curiously, no one even breathed the name of Jimmy Carter who is the other Nobel Laureate and whose mantra has always been Human Rights. The most logical of all sites would be at the physical intersection of the East-West axis of Freedom Park and the North/South Axis of the King National Historical Site. This would place the center over the Freedom Parkway on the eastside of downtown and would truly be a jewel location with absolute connections to the principles of Civil AND Human Rights. Think about it.

Re: Diller Scofidio + Renfro, Stanley Beaman & Sears Design	By CDemmers on Monday, March 23, 2009
This is by far the most inspiring and elegant design -- just what Atlanta needs. In harmony with the surrounding area and a perfect setting for a forward-thinking human rights museum!

Your name:
Title:
Comment:

Security Code Enter the code shown above in the box below
Add Comment Cancel

Diller Scofidio + Renfro, Stanley Beaman & Sears Design