Author architecture is not a style. It is an approach to design where every decision — spatial, material, structural — is made from an argued position rather than a default assumption. In courtyard design, this distinction matters precisely because courtyards are often designed by default: the space left between buildings, paved with whatever was specified for the interior, shaded with a pergola selected from a catalog.
At MÉTODO, courtyard design starts from the section, not the product catalog.
The Process Before the Style
El proceso antes que el estilo. In courtyard design, this means that before any material is selected, shade structure sized, or water feature positioned, we answer three questions:
- How does the courtyard relate to the interior rooms it serves — in floor level, in sight lines, in acoustic connection?
- What climate problem does the courtyard need to solve — heat gain, ventilation, daylighting to an adjacent dark room?
- What material logic applies to this site — what materials are locally available, how do they age in this climate, how do they relate to the existing building?
Only after these questions are answered does the design work begin. The answers constrain the design space and prevent arbitrary decisions from entering under the guise of "style."
This is the core of the authored approach: constraint before expression. A courtyard that emerges from clear answers to these questions will have a character that belongs to the place and the brief. A courtyard that starts from style references — "I want it to feel like this Pinterest board" — may photograph well but will not perform as a spatial instrument for the 30 years it will be used daily.
The Section as Analytical Tool
La sección como relato — the section tells the story that the plan cannot. For courtyard design, the section is the primary analytical tool in two ways:
Solar analysis: the section shows where the sun is at different times of day and year. Which walls receive direct sun and store heat? What is the shadow coverage at noon in June versus noon in December? A plan tells you the geometry; a section tells you the climate performance.
Spatial relationship: the section shows the height relationship between the courtyard floor, the interior floor, and the room ceiling above the opening to the courtyard. A courtyard that sits 30 centimeters below the interior floor has a different spatial quality than one that is flush with it. A courtyard with high surrounding walls reads differently than one with low walls and sky in all directions. These are section conditions, not plan conditions.
We develop the courtyard section at 1:50 scale during schematic design, before any material is specified, before any shade structure is drawn. The section is the first design document for every courtyard project.
Material Selection as Design Argument
Material selection in author architecture is an argument, not a preference. For a courtyard in Mexico City, we can argue for volcanic stone paving because: local availability, freeze-thaw performance in CDMX's temperate climate is adequate, material is consistent with the geological identity of the basin, and it ages in a way that requires no maintenance beyond periodic sweeping.
We can argue against marble paving in a Mexico City courtyard: non-local, high polishing maintenance requirement in public or semi-public use, slippery when wet, and reads as expensive-but-generic rather than specific to place.
The argument is not absolute — there are CDMX courtyard projects where marble is the right answer. But there should be an argument, not an assumption.
For Denver and Colorado mountain projects, the material argument shifts. What ages well in freeze-thaw? What is locally available in the Rocky Mountain region? What reads as belonging to the high desert mountain context rather than imported from a Mexico City or European design vocabulary? Granite, Colorado sandstone, weathering steel, and Douglas fir have strong local arguments. Tropical hardwood pergolas and volcanic cantera do not — they belong somewhere else.
The Matrix of Options
The matriz de opciones — the comparison matrix — is a specific tool we use in courtyard design to make key decisions transparent and comparative rather than sequential and opaque.
For a typical residential courtyard, we prepare a matrix at design development stage for two to three key decisions:
- Shade structure: three options (pergola at 40 percent lattice, solid overhang at 30 percent coverage, retractable sail shade) each shown in section at 1:50 scale with shadow projection at noon in June
- Water feature position and type: three options (centered basin, linear channel at perimeter, wall cascade) each shown in plan with dimensions and drainage path
- Paving material: two to three options with sample photographs, maintenance schedule, and unit cost comparison
The matrix allows the client to see the actual consequence of each choice — in spatial quality, in maintenance, in cost — rather than selecting from descriptions. Decisions made with visual, dimensional context are better decisions.
Próximos pasos
The authored approach to courtyard design requires more design time at the front of the project and results in fewer field questions, lower change-order frequency, and a built result that performs as designed.
Conoce el método de MÉTODO and how this design process applies to every residential and cultural project in our practice.