Pruitt Igoe

Pruitt Igoe was an urban housing project first occupied in 1954 which became an international failure for
to its povery, crime and racial segregation. In 1972, the entire complex was demolished with explosives.
Postmodern architectural historian Charles Jencks called its destruction "the day Modern architecture
died."

Pruitt Igoe was commissioned in response to a housing crisis in its location in the city of St Louis. The city
was overcrowded, with a lot of its residents living in 19 th century low rise tenements. As the richer white
residents left, the slums spread from the north and south and were rthreatning to engulf the city’s
cente. Acknowledging that a solution had to be reached to avoid a loss in value, the city authorities
seeked to redevelop the area near the city’s central business district for a new housing project- a high
rise, high density solution priomsing increased revenues, new public spces and retail areas. Pruitt igoe’s
tarhet market was young, middle class white and black tenants.

In 1950, the city commissioned Leinweber, Yamasaki & Hellmuth to design the project, named for St.
Louisans Wendell O. Pruitt, an African-American fighter pilot in World War II, and William L. Igoe, a
former US Congressman. Originally, the city planned two partitions: Captain W. O. Pruitt Homes for the
black residents, and William L. Igoe Apartments for whites having a total of 2870 apartments in 33 11
storey buildinhs.. Architectural Forum praised the Minoru Yamasaki proposal as "vertical neighborhoods
for poor people" and ‘poor man’s penthouses’. The apartments were quite small with undersized
apploances. "Skip-stop" elevators stopped only at the first, fourth, seventh, and tenth floors, forcing
residents to use stairs in an attempt to lessen congestion. The same "anchor floors" were equipped with
large communal corridors, laundry rooms, communal rooms and garbage chutes.[13]

Newman, p. 10, defensive space, Oscar newman

After a successful start, by the end of the 1960’s Pruitt igoe was almost vacant and had become a
decaying crime instead area wherein Yamasaki noted - "I never thought people were that destructive".
Irts decline was triggered by a lack of maintencance- elevator and facilities brraskodwns and poor
ventilation were recurring problem due to a lack of funding. Muggers took over the corridiors and
stairwells and there was a lack promised ricj pyblci space. Reports proliferated of property crime, gang
activity, drug dealing, prostitution and murder. Heaters, toilets, garbage incinerators and electricity all
malfunctioned, and at one point the faulty plumbing let loose floods of raw sewage through the
hallways.

Interestingly sorces not that pockets in the project which were noit as debnse – two families on a florr,
were not as preoblematic as the tenants took initiative or their safety and cleaniliness. As desnity rose
and facilities were common to hundreds, these spaces became a no mans land. As running cosrs were
run by rents from poor occupants, they were never enough. Raising rents led to resindet s paying three
quarters of teir income just in housing.

The city scrampbled to right the wrong, proposing reducing rise and denistyy to four stroerys and
enhancing horizontality, however that did not bring any results. Ultimately, in Jencks's words: "It was
finally put out of its misery. Boom, boom, boom."

https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2015/apr/22/pruitt-igoe-high-rise-urban-america-history-cities
Pruitt Igpes failure is usually cited as a critique of modernisn, but it wastruly a matter of bad timing.
Ironically, its failure also led to slump in funding fofr public housing which could have prevented the
increasing ghettoisatoon suring the 70’s and 80s.

the socio economic and poltical factors were huge actors in its failure. Exsiting racist framework meant
black immigrants from the overcrowded slums looked to Pruitt igoe as a chance for equa,lity. Sadly, this
coincided with white flght- the evacuartion of whites to the suburbs leading to a lack of tax income,
further jeoparduiisgn running costs and chances fro emplioyemnt.

https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2012/feb/26/pruitt-igoe-myth-film-review

In terms of architecture, the residents praised rhe quality of flats. No one calls it grim and inhuman, and
when it is compared to a prison it is because of the management regime, not the design. There is no
suggestion that a postmodernist treatment could have saved it. Perhaps if it had been lower rise, the
problems with lifts could have been avoided, and perhaps the wide-open spaces contributed to the
eventual lawlessness. Then again, there are perfectly successful social housing projects, in America and
elsewhere, that have both lifts and open spaces.

If it was vain of modernist architects to think they could change people for the better, there is also
vanity in their critics to think that design alone can change them for the worse. The effects of
architecture alone are significant as it can aid or hinder the larger forces that it serves like politics,
economics and presence or absence of prejudice.

http://www.defensiblespace.com/book/pages/page2.htm - pics