Richmond’s new federal courthouse opens next month

By Alan Cooper
Published: August 18, 2008

Proponents of downtown Richmond development had hoped that the new federal courthouse on East Broad Street would be, as one put it, “a world-class architectural statement.”

The building, which fills the block between Seventh and Eighth streets, might not meet that standard, but few could dispute that it fulfills the goal the General Services Administration set: to reflect of “the importance of the federal courts in society and the dignity, enterprise, vigor and stability of the American government.”

The U.S. District Court will move from its current location in the Lewis F. Powell Jr. Courthouse at 10th and Main Streets to the new $102 million project on Sept. 2. A formal ribbon-cutting ceremony is set for October.

Other occupants will be the Bankruptcy Court, the U.S. Trustees office, the U.S. attorney’s office, the federal public defender office, the U.S. Marshal Service and the GSA.

The building has 346,000 square feet in seven stories. The rectangular front of the structure gives way to curving lines on the northwest and southeast sides. The convex southeast portion overlooks a plaza with sightlines from the judges’ chambers on the top three floors down Grace Street between St. Peter Catholic Church and St. Paul’s Episcopal Church to Capitol Square.

The concave side to the northwest has a six-story atrium with a curved glass front that will be the most distinctive feature of the building, especially when lit at night. City officials had hoped that construction of the atrium would coincide with development of a performing arts center across Seventh Street. That project has been delayed, although it is finally underway.
“It is a magnificent building,” said Robert Wagner, supervising federal public defender in the Richmond office. “That atrium is really, really impressive.”

He said the move will be good for his office “because it gives us more space that we desperately need.”

Wagner described the new building as “all teched out,” with an abundance of flat television screens for litigants and jurors to observe documents, photos and other evidence.

Federal criminal trials in Richmond now often include sophisticated technology, but much of it has to be set up before and taken down after a trial, Wagner said. In the new building, it’s already available with the flip of a switch.

Still, Wagner said, “I’m going to miss the grandeur of the old courtrooms” in the Powell building.

Much improved security will be another important component of the new building. The design allows total separation of the public, judges and prisoners, a sharp contrast to the Powell building, where marshals frequently have to use public halls and elevators to escort prisoners.

The technology and security may get an early test because a capital murder trial is scheduled to start Sept. 8 before Judge Henry E. Hudson.

The building was designed by Robert A.M. Stern and Associates, with production engineering and construction administration by HLM-Heery. Stern, dean of the Yale School of Architecture, is among the country’s most prominent architects.

Thompkins Build-ers Inc. was named general contractor in November 2004 and ground was broken for the project in February 2005. With the support of U.S. Sen. John Warner, R-Va., who serves on a subcommittee that oversees courthouses, the Richmond project was placed ahead of other courthouses that had been in the pipeline longer.

Delays in federal funding postponed the start of the project for more than a year, however.

The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which had shared the Powell building with the U.S. District and Bankruptcy courts and related agencies, will be the sole occupant once the new building opens.

Tom Schrinel, deputy circuit executive, said the appellate court hopes to convert courtrooms and other district court space to chambers for circuit judges and rooms for other functions but will need congressional appropriations to do so.


© Copyright 2010 Virginia Lawyers Media. All Rights Reserved.

POST A COMMENT

Today's Top Opinion

Civil Procedure - Nonsuit Tolling Provision Saves Informed-Consent Claim
A med-mal plaintiff can include in her re-filed suit, her time-barred claims of failure to perform an alternative procedure and lack of informed consent, as the new claims arise out of the same transaction or occurrence and are saved by the six-month tolling provision, says an Alexandria U.S. District Court.
Dunston v. Huang (VLW 010-3-116) (12 pp.)

GET THE VLW DAILY ALERT

The Daily Alert from Virginia Lawyers Weekly brings you the latest legal news every morning in your e-mail. You’ll get headline news, a link to the day’s Top Opinion and more!

Click here for more info.

E-mail Sign Up:


Feeds/Web 2.0: