Poll: Why Do You Think The Pruitt-Igoe Site Has Remained Vacant For 40 Years?
The first implosion of a high rise at Pruitt-Igoe took place on March 16, 1972. The final building was demolished on four months later on July 15, 1972 — forty years ago today.
After months of preparation, the first building was demolished with an implosion at 3 p.m., on March 16, 1972. The second one went down April 22, 1972. After more implosions on July 15, the first stage of demolition was over. As the government scrapped rehabilitation plans, the rest of the Pruitt–Igoe blocks were imploded during the following three years; and the site was finally cleared in 1976 with the demolition of the last block. (Wikipedia)
Four years to clear the site after the last building was demolished!
Pruitt-Igoe’s 33 buildings were only occupied for 18 years (1954-1972) with the last few of that in such poor condition a rent strike was held by residents in 1969. A school was built on part of the site in the early 1990s but otherwise the site remains vacant and overgrown.
The poll this week wants to know why you think the site has remained vacant for four decades. The poll is in the upper right sidebar.
— Steve Patterson
…for the same reason that there’s probably very little current interest among developers in Homs, Syria.
There’s this cliche, “What are the three most important things in real estate? Location, location, location!” This, unfortunately, is perceived to be an undesirable location – it’s that simple. There are three likely explanations. One, the city thinks the land is worth more than the private sector does. Two, the city has done little (nothing?) to “move the needle”, to make the property more attractive for redevelopment. And three, some people would rather wait for “better” or “best” instead of settling for “something” or “anything”.
First point, the “golden rule” – he (or she) who has the gold rules – until someone or some entity is willing to spend money here, ain’t nuthin’ gonna happen, period.
Second point – this is a large, contiguous parcel, complete with utilities and infrastructure. The city has made investments / built stuff since the old buildings were demolished, but has not really focused on this site as an option. We’re building a new rec. center in O’Fallon Park – why not here? We’ve talked about a need for a new animal shelter – why not here? The city’s Streets Department is on a prime parcel at Hampton & I-44 – why not relocate them up here and market their current site for retail? If we end up building the Rams a new stadium, why not here? And, on the private-sector side, is this part of McKee’s proposal? Should it be? What about a casino? A racetrack? Paintball site? Urban farm? New Town St. Louis? Auto auction? Hopeville? The list is potentially endless.
Finally, the third point – is something, anything, better than nothing? Should we wait for demand to catch up with supply, to “do it right”? Or, should we concede that we’re likely looking at decades of not much major happening “north of Delmar”, and lower our sights to generic chains and “market rate”, “affordable” housing units? Would a QuikTrip or an Aldi’s, now, be better than waiting for a Trader Joe’s or a Whole Foods? Would a mobile home park, now, be better than waiting multi-story, mixed use structures? And, are we stuck in paralysis by analysis? Are we doing too much studying and talking, and not doing enough doing?
What is the role of Pruitt Igoe in a redeveloped city? City government certainly doesn’t know. There are no overall concepts for the planning of the city. What are the principles of city planning that would best allow mass transit to mesh with the city plan? What markets and public spaces can be created by gathering transit and density? Basically everything is left to chance, without public discussion. This leads situations like Paul McKee and the City without a coherent plan for his massive project. Could this project negatively impact the future of mass transit in the city? Most certainly it can and will.
Pruitt Igoe is merely another causality of a city managed into decline. A decline that continues. It can only be two things, either the people running things (the corporate government) don’t know what the hell they are doing or they are as corrupt as the night is long.
Nothing has worked because they have done nothing.
>>Four years to clear the site after the last building was demolished!
I don’t think that statement is correct. If you read your Wikipedia quote it seems to say the last buildings were destroyed in ~1975 and the site was completely clear by 76.
Also, I vaguely remember something from “The Pruitt-Igoe Myth” that one (or maybe two or three) buildings remained for some number of years, not for residential use… I dunno, I could be wrong on that one…
The central problem is one of city government leadership. We as a nation are at a crossroads with global warming and energy related issues. Yet with sites like Pruitt Igoe the connective tissue of transit is ignored. There are definite parallels to TOD and the lack of development at Pruitt Igoe and similar sites.
St. Louis has an unique opportunity to rethink transit and how it is implemented with the wide open spaces of Pruitt Igoe and large chunks of the near Northside. It is not happening. It would be useful for the city to look at the many cities around the world and see how they design transit to free their citizens from the automobile. (A city design where transit and the auto compliment each other)
JZ mentioned many business ideas for the site, another is the Pruitt Igoe becomes a transportation node, in other words a site where the traveler to Pruitt Igoe can advance to many parts of the city and region. Maybe this type of solution is not possible at this site, but if transit, and (along with it walking and bicycles) are not a major part of a discussion regarding Pruitt Igoe then it is impossible to formulate solutions for the site. That is how it has been for 40 years.
In fact the disposition mass transit on the Northside should be a mainstream discussion in the Post-Dispatch and the various corporate media partners in TV and radio. In addition to Pruitt Igoe, it has been at least 2 yrs since McKee took over the Northside. I guess none of this is a concern for our “leaders”.
In the end sites like Pruitt Igoe will be in part formed by an understanding of how to build the city and transit system that compliments urban design. This may mean density, a commitment to a transit system would also mean a walkable environment to directly compliment transit. Thus ideas about Pruitt Igoe take shape.
In the end, the discussions surrounding the creation of an effective transit system also become attractive for investment. An effective transit framework, actual and projected, will encourage development. The City has no purpose, or idea behind it, Pruitt Igoe has no purpose, or idea behind it, TOD has no idea or purpose behind it. The pattern is clear. A broad discussion of concepts and approaches dovetailed to what the citizens think the city should look like in 20 years will help solve the Pruitt Igoe dilemma.
Why develop here when you can in a greenfield?
As JZ71 said, “this is a large, contiguous parcel, complete with utilities and infrastructure”
Of course, the greenfield is likely to be in a lower crime, possibly lower bureaucracy area.