Tapatalk

Pruitt Igoe Now

Pruitt Igoe Now

479
Full MemberFull Member
479

PostJul 09, 2011#1

Pruitt Igoe Now Competition



Pruitt Igoe Now is an ideas competition launched by a non-profit organization of the same name, located in St. Louis, Missouri, USA. The subject is the 57-acre site of the long-mythologized Pruitt and Igoe housing projects -- a site whose future is intertwined with emerging ideas about urban abandonment, the legacy of modernism, brownfield redevelopment and land use strategies for shrinking cities. This competition seeks the ideas of the creative community worldwide: we invite individuals and teams of professional, academic, and student architects, landscape architects, urban planners, designers, writers, historians, and artists of every discipline to re-imagine the site and the relationship between those acres to the rest of the city.

March 2012 will mark the 40th anniversary of the demolition of the first of the Pruitt-Igoe high-rises, designed by architects, Helmuth, Yamasaki and Leinweber, who have long been blamed for the troubled legacy of these towers--problems that are now known to be the result of complex political and economic circumstances. Although later maligned by historians, the Pruitt and Igoe housing projects were the embodiment of modern architectural ideals for public housing, and as powerfully symbolic of St. Louis' urban renewal as the Gateway Arch would become. For forty years, the site of this complex has been largely untouched, and today the site is an overgrown brownfield forest. As countless other social housing projects across the country are torn down, and rebuilt in the idiom of new urbanism, the site of Pruitt-Igoe remains untouched. What is Pruitt-Igoe now? Can this site be liberated from a turbulent and mythologized past through re-imagination?

This call seeks bold ideas that re-invigorate the abandoned site: ideas from sources as diverse in media and background as possible. This competition imagines the site of Pruitt-Igoe as a frontier: the threshold between North St. Louis, which is showing signs of stabilization after decades of decline, and the new design for the Jefferson National Expansion Memorial by Michael Van Valkenburgh Associates.

Our jurors will select the first, second and third most inspiring proposals and award them $1,000, $750 and $500 respectively. A broad selection of entries will receive honorable mention and inclusion in an online gallery. In April 2012, a symposium on urban dwelling and creative intervention will be held at Portland State University; the advisory committee plans to curate all proposals, and exhibit these at the symposium. The advisory committee also plans to curate select competition submissions into a traveling exhibition that will tour beginning in Summer 2012, starting in St. Louis. The initial setting for display will be publicly accessible and either on or near the Pruitt-Igoe site itself.

More information: http://www.pruittigoenow.org

209
Junior MemberJunior Member
209

PostJul 18, 2012#2

Last month, Pruitt-Igoe Now announced three winners, from 31 finalists (and nearly 350 entrants) in the competition.

And next week, those winners and finalists will be presented at a public exhibition in Old North St. Louis, complete with screening and a Q&A with the finalists. It'll take place Wednesday, July 25, from 6 to 9 at the offices of Old North St. Louis Restoration Group, 2700 N. 14th Street. The presentations will be hung there through the end of August.

Organizers hope it'll be the first of several showings of the presentations, which imagined new uses for the 33-acre site. The winning entry - "St. Louis Ecological Production Line" - would turn the site into a hub for tree and plant nurseries and aquaculture, with the goal of using other vacant land across the city to form a "green corridor."

For now, it's just an idea.
more

788
Super MemberSuper Member
788

PostJul 18, 2012#3

Is this competition just meant to spur discussion or is there money to build something?

11K
Life MemberLife Member
11K

PostJul 18, 2012#4

^ discussion. The property is owned by the City of St. Louis and Paul McKee currently has a $200K hold for two years to market it. He would then pay $1M or so if he was able to land a tenant/develop it.

145
Junior MemberJunior Member
145

PostSep 10, 2012#5


4,489
Super ModeratorSuper Moderator
4,489

PostDec 29, 2012#6

I really like this idea for Pruitt-Igoe. It's like "New Town" St. Louis, but it's more fitting within a real urban setting. The area and layout is inspired by Soulard.

I don't think there needs to be such uniformity of faux-historic architecture, but I do understand the idea of making the area densely populated. I think the architecture is respectful of St. Louis' heritage and kind of pays homage to the structures that used to dot the area.

If the surrounding areas can be stabilized, this idea seems as if it could be a good sell and draw for buyers. The energy of this project would spill into surrounding neighborhoods as well as into downtown.


An overall view of the neighborhood










A closer view of the Market Plaza, Market Hall/Community Center, and Playground


Looking towards the Market Hall/Community Center down James Cool Papa Bell Ave.

11K
Life MemberLife Member
11K

PostDec 29, 2012#7

Cool - hadn't seen this.

537
Senior MemberSenior Member
537

PostDec 29, 2012#8

can we all sign a letter saying, 'Mr. Mckee you have screwed up on the Northside project a lot. Develop Pruitt Igoe similar to this plan, in an open and transparent manner and it'll restore some faith. -the vanguard'

12K
Life MemberLife Member
12K

PostDec 30, 2012#9

Good find, Arch. Thanks for posting.

I'm surprised there hasn't been more response to his blog/idea. I'd love to spread this around, but I'm not much with social media.

25
New MemberNew Member
25

PostDec 30, 2012#10

This is so cool. Awesome idea. I think the one thing that is so often forgotten when discussing Pruitt Igoe is that the whole project replaced entire city blocks. Reconnecting the grid and building new homes and businesses is a fantastic idea that truly respects what the site once was.

11K
Life MemberLife Member
11K

PostDec 30, 2012#11

framer wrote:Good find, Arch. Thanks for posting.

I'm surprised there hasn't been more response to his blog/idea. I'd love to spread this around, but I'm not much with social media.
I've emailed the author to see if it can be posted on the nextSTL blog.

1,064
Expert MemberExpert Member
1,064

PostDec 30, 2012#12

I want to like this and maybe I will. How much cooler would it be though if the design was unapologetically of the 21st century? I've grown to appreciate the great craftsmanship of the brick city - there is no doubt the men who designed and built the city's architecture had skills to burn - but must STL remain endlessly stuck in this loop of reverence and longing for a return to its past? Big picture: Pruitt Igoe and the surrounding area are the closest thing to a true blank slate STL has - is faux historical infill, which will almost certainly be of lesser build quality, really the thing to do?

11K
Life MemberLife Member
11K

PostDec 30, 2012#13

^ Good points. I don't know that this proposal isn't 21st Century. I mean, perhaps it's a new plan for an old American city. The homage to the past works for many European cities. It's not the plan's details that I particularly like, but the level of detail and effort show how much creativity and energy there is in St. Louis for projects like this. Our elected leaders should open their minds to more than just big box development and demolition.

3
New MemberNew Member
3

PostDec 31, 2012#14

Hello, Next STL, I'm new here! Arch city emailed me and let me know you were discussing the Pruitt Igoe project that I designed in graduate school, so I though I would join in the discussion! It's been interesting reading your thoughts! I though I would start out by discussing a criticism that onecity brought up, which is that the project should be of it's time (representing the zeitgeist).

First, I think most projects (but perhaps not all), should be more representative of their place than of their time. Most of the architecture I see in Arch. Record today could be anywhere, and it seems that cities all across the globe are slowly growing to look more alike, losing their distinctiveness, and I think that's sad. Most new architecture seems to be entirely about the individual architect's identity and making something new, and not about the identity of the place. In a large development such as the one I proposed, I think most of the architecture should say "I'm from St. Louis, so I emulate the traditions of St. Louis." Within that context, several of the buildings could be more "of their time," representing more of an individualistic architectural expression. Avant garde always seems to be best when set against a backdrop of well done traditional buildings anyways. A large collection of individualistic/avant garde architecture is just a cacophony.

Second, even architects that tend to be more Modern don't always follow the idea that architecture should be of it's time (in practice). David Chipperfield's new addition to the STL Art Museum certainly seems to be more representative of 1960 than 2012 (http://www.architectmagazine.com/Images ... 172591.jpg). It looks like it could even be based on 1930's Mies. Is Chipperfield wrong for doing this? If so, is he any worse than an architect who designs, say, an Art Deco building today, since it's precedents are also from the 30's? I don't think most people (non-architects) care about architectural taboos, but do care about beauty, a sense of place, and quality. Just a thought:)

710
Senior MemberSenior Member
710

PostDec 31, 2012#15

I'd kind of like to see a mix of "modern" infill:

http://www.torontolife.com/daily/wp-con ... _intro.jpg


http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_pkSs7HLGaeQ/T ... 5B1%5D.jpg

and some historicism mashed together, as if the northside rapture had never happened, or at least ended up so badly. i feel we should be aiming for toronto, not paris.

1,465
Veteran MemberVeteran Member
1,465

PostDec 31, 2012#16

The plans look beautiful. Goes to show when faux historic is done right it can be very effective in creating a sense of place. Until we are able to attract high quality modern infill, I would rather have something like this to reinforce Saint Louis's period architectural presence.

1,064
Expert MemberExpert Member
1,064

PostDec 31, 2012#17



^These. If we're going to have historic infill, focus on craftsmans and bungalows. Until you have lived in endless blocks of them, you do not know how wonderful and varied they are. These are the kinds of houses we need around Pruitt Igoe and in St. Louis. They don't scream suburbs OR ancient inner city. They're fabulous inside, fabulous outside, and with a wide variety of styles having been built from 1900 to 1940 (a period that is *sorely* lacking in the metro - Kwood and Webster have the closest thing to this and the majority of those houses are kind of eh IMO). Bungalows, baby. On 45w x 160d lots backing an alley.

2,940
Life MemberLife Member
2,940

PostDec 31, 2012#18

samthelima wrote:Hello, Next STL, I'm new here! Arch city emailed me and let me know you were discussing the Pruitt Igoe project that I designed in graduate school, so I though I would join in the discussion! It's been interesting reading your thoughts!
Samuel: Welcome to this fun little site. Got to say, your idea fascinates me in that it would turn the giant wasteland mess that is Pruitt-Igoe into what looks like an idyllic college campus.

I have one question: How much do you think it would cost to make this a reality?
For discussion's sake, let's take away land acquisition costs.

Open question; if anyone has a qualified guesstimate, fire away. Thanks

11K
Life MemberLife Member
11K

PostJan 01, 2013#19

^ ftr land cost would be $1M and a few more for cleanup.

3
New MemberNew Member
3

PostJan 01, 2013#20

onecity wrote:

^These. If we're going to have historic infill, focus on craftsmans and bungalows. Until you have lived in endless blocks of them, you do not know how wonderful and varied they are. These are the kinds of houses we need around Pruitt Igoe and in St. Louis. They don't scream suburbs OR ancient inner city. They're fabulous inside, fabulous outside, and with a wide variety of styles having been built from 1900 to 1940 (a period that is *sorely* lacking in the metro - Kwood and Webster have the closest thing to this and the majority of those houses are kind of eh IMO). Bungalows, baby. On 45w x 160d lots backing an alley.
That would be great! As long as a mix of uses and a small amount of higher density was introduced, medium density could work very well on the site. This type of housing would also work well in a network of streets and blocks; you could easily take my master plan, make the lots wider in a significant portion of it, and add detached single-family housing. I own a 1921 craftsman in a neighborhood of craftsman houses, and I agree, it is wonderful!

1,320
Veteran MemberVeteran Member
1,320

PostJan 01, 2013#21

I love bungalows, but Northside is screaming for greater density.

Sam, I'm loving your plan. Does anyone know if folks at McEagle have seen it? Like him or not, McKee is a man who appreciates bold vision when he sees it.

3
New MemberNew Member
3

PostJan 01, 2013#22

Presbyterian, I don't believe McEagle has seen it. I attempted to contact McKee while I was working on the project, but was always unsuccessful. If someone has the connections to present it to him, that would be awesome!

1,320
Veteran MemberVeteran Member
1,320

PostJan 01, 2013#23

I don't have a good McEagle connection. Anybody out there have a friend of a friend who knows somebody?

11K
Life MemberLife Member
11K

PostJan 01, 2013#24

^ Yep - I'll send it their way and get it on the blog soon, as well. It's unfortunate to say the least that the city isn't leading with a vision of reinvestment and regeneration. What is the city had a density goal or an updated zoning plan?

1,064
Expert MemberExpert Member
1,064

PostJan 01, 2013#25

I love bungalows, but Northside is screaming for greater density.

Sam, I'm loving your plan. Does anyone know if folks at McEagle have seen it? Like him or not, McKee is a man who appreciates bold vision when he sees it.
Northside needs density, but you need housing stock (and lots) that are attractive and useful to families. 45ft wide x 160 (7200 sq ft lots) is roughly 15 houses per side of an 1/8 mi city block, which is dense but not cram packed. Build homes the same s.f. as in TGS and Shaw so they are attractive to today's middle class and are size/amenity competitive with offerings in the 'burbs. It would be about 30% less dense than Shaw/Tower Grove. These are smaller lots than Kwood lots, but slightly larger than RH (Moorlands) lots. Multiply that by 1 sq mi, and you've got roughly 30 x 8 x 16 x 2.8 residents in that mile (about 10,000 to 11,000), assuming there are no denser properties, multistory rentals, etc. That is almost twice as dense as STL is today, and a very healthy target.

Read more posts (10 remaining)