A FAILURE OF MODERNISM

‘Excavating’ Pruitt-Igoe

Dr. Mark David Major, AICP, CNU-A
Savannah College of Art and Design
(904) 404-6138
mmajor@scad.edu

ABSTRACT
The paper investigates the Pruitt-Igoe Public Housing Complex in St. Louis, Missouri USA. A
large literature implicates several factors in its decline, which public authorities famously
demolished in 1972. Often, it cites design and planning as contributory factors without
specifying how or why. Building on archival records and previous research, we analyse the
‘spatial archaeology’ of Pruitt-Igoe using space syntax. The purpose is to better understand
how design and planning contributed to its social malaise. It concludes: 1) provision of space
(i.e. quantity) became a liability as declining occupancy generated a ‘broken interface’
between adults and children; and, 2) the pilotis of the residential towers mediated formal
access and spatial distribution in a layout characterised by ‘intelligible dysfunction,’ which
facilitated opportunity and escape for criminal activities. Both fed the perception and reality of
social malaise at Pruitt-Igoe.

KEYWORDS
design, Modernism, planning, public policy, social housing

1. INTRODUCTION
Pruitt-Igoe is a frequently cited example for the failures of Modernism (Newman, 1973; Jencks,
1977; Weisman, 1994; Hall, 2004; Ramroth, 2007). It was social housing constructed with 2,870
apartments for 13,000 people (228 people/acre or 565 people/hectare) in thirty-three 11-story
buildings with a housing density of 50 dwelling units (du) per acre (125 du/hectare) on 57 acres
(23 hectares) in north St. Louis, Missouri (Figure 1).1 Demolished by the St. Louis Public
Housing Authority (PHA) in 1972, controversy has swirled over the last half-century about
several factors involved in the demise of Pruitt-Igoe. A succinct but bewildering list includes (in
alphabetical order): architecture, construction, crime, demographics, design, economy,
employment, familial sociology, maintenance, management, migration, planning, policing,
policy, population, poverty, quality assurance, racism, regulations, suburbanisation, ‘White

1
Social or public housing is affordable housing constructed and managed by government (local, State or Federal in
the USA) for the most economically vulnerable in society, i.e. lower- and lower-middle income. ‘Housing project’ or
‘the projects’ are American colloquial terms for social housing.

Dr. Mark David Major, AICP, CNU-A

A Failure of Modernism

a8):7<X-$&6*$b,6)6:$>%,6<:,G9"R[$D?F`[$V)"G)6:7&G-$D??F[$V")=<,8-$D??D[$a"9)*")I7=$9<$&8-$T@DD[$
()*!+,%-%.#'&-$T@DDB#T-$E$$
$
.<$ <79$ =&G9$ <)G9-$ I,GLJ<)6:$ 7&=$ 96&M89*$ 9O<96=)(9$ G&LL)6:$ ,;$ =,I)&849I,6,G)I$ *&<&$
)6I8J*)6:$ <RL9=$ ,;$ I")G9-$ )#9#$ L",L9"<R$ MJ":8&"R$ &6*$ (&6*&8)=G-$ L9"=,6&8$&==&J8<$ &6*$ ",MM9"R-$
9<I#$ K7)=$ 89*$ <,$ &$ 8&":9$ 8)<9"&<J"9$ &M,J<$ I")G9$ &6*$ <79$ MJ)8<$ 96()",6G96<$ )6$ &*(&6I)6:$ ,J"$
'6,Q89*:9$ &M,J<$ =,I)&8$ G&8&)=9-$ )6I8J*)6:$ =L&I9$ =R6<&O$ "9=9&"I7$ ,;$ L,=<4Q&"$ =,I)&8$ 7,J=)6:$
>29QG&6-$ D?SE-$ N)88)9"-$ D?FC[$ N&6=,6$ &6*$ N)88)9"-$ D?FS[$ N)88)9"-$ D??C[$ 57J$ &6*$ N)88)9"-$ D??F-$
%&+,"$ 9<$ &8-$ D???[$ ^&G",<7-$ T@@S[$ N)88)9"$ &6*$ 5&7M&b-$ T@@FB#$ .$ '9R$ I,6I8J=),6$ )=$ <79$ MJ)8<$
96()",6G96<$I&66,<$I&J=9$I")G9#$/<$I&6$,68R$I"9&<9$<79$L"9I,6*)<),6=$;,"$Q79"9$&$I")G9$G):7<$
,IIJ"$&=$=<&<)=<)I&8$L",M&M)8)<R-$6,<$96()",6G96<&8$*9<9"G)6)=G#$5,G9<)G9=-$)<$7&LL96=#$U<79"$
<)G9=-$)<$*,9=$6,<#$K79$,J<I,G9$*9L96*=$,6$7JG&6$&I<),6#$$

!"#$%&' ()' 1"J)<<4/:,9$&;<9"$D?CE$MJ<$M9;,"9$D?ST#$K79$e&J:7&6$1JM8)I$N,J=)6:$0,GL89O$>,L969*$D?`S4`FB$Q&=$<79$

;,J"$M"&6I7)6:$=<"JI<J"9=$)6$<79$;,"9:",J6*$>5,J"I9Y$3#5#$d9,8,:)I&8$5J"(9RB#$$

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
T
$W]7)<9$ a8):7<X$ G9&6=$ 8&":94=I&89$ G):"&<),6$ ,;$ L9,L89$ ,;$ (&"),J=$ cJ",L9&6$ &6I9=<")9=$ ;",G$ "&I)&88R$ G)O9*$ J"M&6$
<7
"9:),6=$<,$G,"9$"&I)&88R$7,G,:969,J=$=JMJ"M&6$,"$9OJ"M&6$"9:),6=#$K79$,"):)6=$,;$<79$<9"G$)6$<79$G)*4T@ $I96<J"R$
&"9$J6I89&"#$/*00#1.23*4'&*0!5#,&#%-106$I)<9=$;)"=<$J=&:9$)6$D?CS#$
E
$cJI8)*9&6$ &6*$ 9OI8J=),6&"R$ b,6)6:$ &"9$ <79$ =&G9$ <7)6:#$ WcJI8)*9&6$ b,6)6:X$ )=$ &$ <9"G$ M&=9*$ ,6$ <79$ D?TC$ 3#5#$
5JL"9G9$0,J"<$*9I)=),6$)6$7#$$18*!%9!+:,$#;<!=)#%!>?!@.4$*0!A*1$&6!B%?-$Q7)I7$9=<&M8)=79*$b,6)6:$&=$&$I,6=<)<J<),6&8$
9O9"I)=9$,;$L,8)I9$L,Q9"#$K79$*9")(&<)(9$&==,I)&<),6$Q)<7$.6I)96<$d"99'$G&<79G&<)I)&6$cJI8)*$Q&=$&6$J6;,"<J6&<9$
I,)6I)*96I9-$Q7)I7$)GMJ9*$b,6)6:$Q)<7$;&8=9$I,66,<&<),6=$,;$=I)96<);)I$L"9I)=),6#$cOI8J=),6&"R$b,6)6:$)=$<79$G,"9$
&IIJ"&<9$<9"G#$

!"#$0&"'$!&()*$0&+,"-$./01-$0234.$
.$5&)67"8$,9$0,*8":);<$
$
When it comes to crime, people can blur perception and opportunity. Effective management
and formal/natural policing can mediate to varying degrees. By natural policing, we mean
‘eyes on the street’ in everyday space use - people in movement and static use, front doors and
porches, etc. - as defined by Jacobs (1961) and others (Hanson and Hillier, 1987; Whyte, 1988;
Duany et al, 2000). Formal policing includes security guards, police patrols, closed-circuit
television (CCTV) or video surveillance, and so forth. The former is more effective than the
latter in prevention and resources (Jacobs, 1961; Gehl, 1971; Hanson and Hillier, 1987; Whyte,
1988). A leading indicator and reflective of social malaise, a perception might arise even if
there is little evidence for particular crimes. Finally, perception and opportunity can
sometimes merge to foster the most dangerous conditions. It does not always occur but
‘worst-case scenarios’ afflicted some post-war social housing. Generally, crime patterns
(multiple incidents on average, not individual acts) occur based on three spatial variables: 1)
less-used spaces quiet enough for a crime to occur undisturbed; but 2) possess enough people
and things (such as dwellings) to ensure a reliable supply of targets; and, 3) proximate to high-
used spaces to facilitate escape. In space syntax terms, this means somewhat segregated
spaces somewhat near to integrated spaces but not necessarily adjacent in Cartesian terms.
Hillier and Sahbaz (2008) also found residential burglaries related to the number of du/street
segment – and, by implication, front doors – when controlling for the street network using
space syntax. It is about the risk/reward nature of crime for opportunity, action, and escape.
Another key discovery was evidence of a ‘broken interface’ between adults and children (2-to-
1 or lower) characterised some spaces in post-war social housing. Modernist design and
planning disrupted the typical ratio (12-to-1 or higher) found in traditional, street-oriented
urbanism (Major et al, 1999). This was not an accident. Space was supposed to operate in this
manner by creating protected green spaces and separating uses. Large numbers of
unsupervised children (especially teenagers) perpetrated petty vandalism such as graffiti and
broken lighting.4 Unused space became abused space. However, the perception of social
malaise did not necessarily match reality. Most reported crimes were property vandalism,
noise complaints, and domestic disputes (Major et al, 1999). This perception can exacerbate
the situation. Fearing for personal safety, people minimalise space use and further erode the
ratio of adults-to-children. It may reach a ‘tipping point’ where perception becomes a self-

4
Disabled exterior and interior lighting becomes a frequent complaint of adults about personal safety.

Dr. Mark David Major, AICP, CNU-A

A Failure of Modernism

;J8;)88)6:$ L",L79IR#$ 19"I9L<),6$ &6*$ ,LL,"<J6)<R$ G9":9$ <,$ I"9&<9$ <79$ 7&"=79=<$ I,6*)<),6=#$
.MJ=9*$=L&I9$M9I,G9=$*&6:9",J=#$
$
!)*$ <7)=$ 7&LL96$ &<$ 1"J)<<4/:,9g$ K79"9$ )=$ =J::9=<)(9$ 9()*96I9#$ a,"G9"$ "9=)*96<=$ =99G9*$ <,$
*9=I")M9$<7"99$*)=<)6I<$=L&<)&8$9OL9")96I9=Y$$
$
DB$d969"&88R-$L,=)<)(9$&M,J<$8);9$)6=)*9$<79$&L&"<G96<=-$9=L9I)&88R$M9;,"9$D?CF[$$
TB$/6)<)&88R-$L,=)<)(9$&M,J<$<79$I,"")*,"=_I,GGJ6&8$&"9&=$&6*$69:&<)(9$&M,J<$<79$
=<&)"Q988=_989(&<,"=$)6$"9=)*96<)&8$<,Q9"=$MJ<$M,<7$9(,8(9$)6<,$69:&<)(9=$Q)<7$*9;9""9*$
G&)6<96&6I9_=,I)&8$G&8&)=9[$&6*-$$
EB$P&":98R$=)896<$&M,J<$:",J6*$89(98-$9O<9"),"$=L&I9=$)6$<79$D?`@=$MJ<$,(9"Q798G)6:8R$
69:&<)(9$*J")6:$<79$D?C@=#$
$
K79)"$<9=<)G,6R$)6*)I&<9=$<79"9$Q9"9$G&6R$J6=JL9"()=9*$I7)8*"96$)6$1"J)<<4/:,9#$K79R$*)=IJ==$
*9(98,L)6:$<79)"$,Q6$I,*9$,;$I,6*JI<$f$;"9ZJ96<8R$J=)6:$<79$L7"&=9$WM9$&$G&6X$f$;,"$8);9$&<$<79$
:",J6*$89(98#$K79R$6,<)I9*$=<&"'$I,6<"&=<=$)6=)*9$&6*$,J<=)*9$,;$<79$L",+9I<-$9(96$);$,68R$&I",==$
<79$=<"99<$>a"9)*")I7=$9<$&8-$T@DDB#$ K79$6JGM9"$,;$J6=JL9"()=9*$I7)8*"96$)6$<79$M&I':",J6*$,;$
&"I7)(&8$;,,<&:9$&<$1"J)<<4/:,9$)=$=<&"<8)6:-$9=L9I)&88R$*J")6:$<79$D?C@=$>!"#$%&'*B#`$0,889I<)(98R-$
<7)=$ )=$ I)"IJG=<&6<)&8$ 9()*96I9$ ;,"$ &$ M",'96$ )6<9";&I9$ M9<Q996$ &*J8<=$ &6*$ I7)8*"96#$ !)*$ <79$
8&R,J<$ L,==9==$ <79$ <"&)<=$ 69I9==&"R$ <,$ :969"&<9$ =JI7$ &$ M",'96$ )6<9";&I9g$ /;$ =,-$ Q7R$ *)*$ )<$
)6)<)&88R$ =99G$ J6)GL,"<&6<$
MJ<$ 8&<9"$ GJI7$ G,"9$ =,$ <,$
<79$"9=)*96<=g$$
$
5L&I9$ =R6<&O$ )=$ Q988$ =J)<9*$
<,$ &6=Q9"$ =JI7$ ZJ9=<),6=#$
N,Q9(9"-$ 6,$ ,69$ =99G=$ <,$
7&(9$ &6&8Rb9*$ 1"J)<<4/:,9$
,(9"$ <79$ 8&=<$ ;,J"$ *9I&*9=#$
!"#$%&' *)' 36=JL9"()=9*$ I7)8*"96$ L8&R$ ,6$ &6$ &M&6*,69*$ I&"$ )6$ 1"J)<<4/:,9$
K79"9$ &"9$ &$ ;9Q$ "9&=,6=#$ *J")6:$<79$8&<9$D?C@=$>5,J"I9Y$a"9)*")I7=$9<$&8-$T@DDB#$'

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
`
$c(96$ &II,J6<)6:$ ;,"$ <79$ &<<"&I<,"$ 9;;9I<$ ,;$ I&G9"&=-$ )#9#$ &*J8<$ L7,<,:"&L79"=$ &6*$ I&G9"&G96$ *9L&"<9*$ MJ<$
I7)8*"96$"9G&)69*$M97)6*$&<$1"J)<<4/:,9#$

!"#$0&"'$!&()*$0&+,"-$./01-$0234.$
.$5&)67"8$,9$0,*8":);<$
$
First, it no longer exists. By definition, investigating Pruitt-Igoe is an exercise in spatial
archaeology. We can model but cannot validate using hard data in the form of numbers or
graphs. We have to rely on soft data, which is human intelligence based on opinions,
suggestions, and interpretations. There are archival records about its design, construction,
management, and operation and the recorded testimony of former residents, public officials,
and experts. This represents a deep reservoir of material for a forensic study. Nonetheless, any
conclusions are speculative. Second, the logic of the layout seems apparent. Form and space
composed at right angles in the parallel/perpendicular relationships of a regular grid. A
problematic layout is not obvious so it is all-too-easy to casually dismiss planning as a factor.
Third, any researcher is willingly wading into a distinctive American cesspool of racism and
ideology sufficient to scare most people away, especially non-Americans. Perhaps it is
unsurprising researchers have avoided the controversies of this particular project. Our purpose
is straightforward. Can space syntax add anything of value to our knowledge about Pruitt-
Igoe? The objective is: 1) precisely identify the physical factors, if any, which might have
contributed to social malaise; and, 2) better link the physical and non-physical factors in telling
its story.

2. BEFORE PRUITT-IGOE
Deformation of offset regular grids was the principal planning method in the St. Louis urban
pattern before World War II (Major, 2015a). East-west rail lines initially fragmented the urban
fabric into north and south St. Louis, later accentuated by other developments such as the
interstate highways (Figure 3). St. Louis was the eighth most populous American city
(856,796) in 1950. Like many, it experienced an influx of economically vulnerable populations
to the city center from 1910-1970. Agriculture mechanisation led poorer (mostly Southern)
Americans to migrate to manufacturing cities for employment opportunities. Black Americans
escaping segregationist policies (i.e. separate but equal) in the American South were the most
significant component in this Great Migration. By 1950, Whites composed 82% of the city
population with many Blacks (17.9%) living in north St. Louis (Gordon, 2009).

Zoning became constitutional in 1926, which codified many Modernist principles. People
quickly realised the financial windfalls of converting inexpensive agriculture tracts into
valuable urban land uses at city peripheries, especially with road infrastructure catering to the

Dr. Mark David Major, AICP, CNU-A

A Failure of Modernism

&J<,G,M)89#$ K79$ D?A?$
2&<),6&8$ N,J=)6:$ .I<$ &6*$
D?`C$ a9*9"&84.)*$ N):7Q&R$
.I<$ =L9*$ <7)=$ L",I9==$ ,;$
=JMJ"M&6)=&<),6$ M9:J6$ MR$
b,6)6:$ Q)<7$ J"M&6$ "969Q&8$
L,8)I)9=$ )6$ <79$ ;,"G9"$
L",G,<)6:$ W=8JG$ I89&")6:X$
&6*$"9L8&I9G96<$Q)<7$7):74
")=9$ LJM8)I$ 7,J=)6:# C $0)<)9=$
>8)'9$5<#$P,J)=B$I,J8*$89:&88R$
*9=):6&<9$ 8&":9$ =Q&<79=$ ,;$
J"M&6$ ;&M")I$ &=$ ,M=,89<9$ ,"$
M8):7<9*$ *)=<")I<=$ <,$ )6)<)&<9$
9G)696<$ *,G&)6$ >)#9#$
!"#$%&'+)'5&<988)<9$()9Q$;",G$D`$'G$,;$5<#$P,J)=-$T@DC$Q)<7$;,"G9"$1"J)<<4/:,9$
I,GLJ8=)(9$ LJ"I7&=9=B-$
=)<9$ )6$ 6,"<7$ 5<#$ P,J)=$ ,J<8)69*$ )6$ "9*$ >5,J"I9Y$ d,,:89$ c&"<7-$ P&6*=&<-$ &6*$
*9G,8)=7$ 7,J=)6:$ =<,I'$ )6$ 0,L9"6)IJ=B#$

,8*9"$69):7M,J"7,,*=-$&::"9:&<9$)6<,$8&":9"$8,<=-$&6*$=9IJ"9$a9*9"&8$;J6*)6:$;,"$L",+9I<=$8)'9$
1"J)<<4/:,9#$ %,"<:&:9$ *)=I")G)6&<),6$ &6*$ "9=<")I<)(9$ I,(96&6<=$ &II96<J&<9*$ ]7)<9$ a8):7<$ <,$
<79$ =JMJ"M=-$ 9OI8J*)6:$ V8&I'=$ &6*$ ,<79"=$ =JI7$ &=$ \9Q=$ &6*$ 0&<7,8)I=-$ )#9#$ /")=7_/<&8)&6$
)GG):"&6<=$>1J8)*,-$T@@@[$K7&M)<-$T@@E[$j"J=9-$T@@SB#S$K7)=$89;<$M97)6*$G&6R$V8&I'$.G9")I&6=$
)6$ I)<R$ I96<9"=$ Q)<7$ ;&88)6:$ L,LJ8&<),6-$ &6$ 9(9"4*Q)6*8)6:$ <&O$ M&=9-$ &6*$ 89==$ 9GL8,RG96<$
,LL,"<J6)<)9=-$Q7)I7$;,88,Q9*$&6*_,"$;J"<79"$96&M89*$=JMJ"M&6)=&<),6#$K7)=$89*$<,$&$*)=<)6I<)(9$
L&<<9"6$,;$"&I)&8$=9:"9:&<),6-$Q7)I7$96*J"9=$)6$5<#$P,J)=$<,$<7)=$*&R#F$
$
P)'9$GJI7$,;$<79$I)<R-$D?<7$I96<J"R$<969G96<=$I7&"&I<9")=9*$<79$!95,<,40&""$69):7M,J"7,,*$
)6$6,"<7$5<#$P,J)=$M9;,"9$1"J)<<4/:,9#?$K7)=$7,J=)6:$*9<9"),"&<9*$M9<Q996$<79$D?T@=$&6*$D?A@=#$
UQ69"=$ >W=8JG8,"*=XB$ *)*$ 6,<$ G&)6<&)6$ <79)"$ L",L9"<)9=-$ L",;)<99")6:$ ,6$ (,8JG9$ ,;$ "96<=#$ 0)<R$
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
C
$5)GJ8<&69,J=8R-$ ;)6&6I)6:$ G9I7&6)=G=$ )6$ <79$ D?A?$ 2&<),6&8$ N,J=)6:$ .I<$ )6I96<)()=9*$ G&==4L",*JI9*$ 7,J=)6:$
*9(98,LG96<=$)6$<79$=JMJ"M=#$
S
$.')6$<,$WMJ=)69==$"9*8)6)6:-X$Q7)I7$Q&=_)=$<79$L"&I<)I9$,;$*96R)6:$=9"()I9=$M&=9*$,6$9<76)I)<R#$
F
$599$T@D@$^&I)&8$!,<=$%&L=$,;$<79$]98*,6$0,,L9"$096<9"$;,"$1JM8)I$59"()I9-$^9I<,"$&6*$e)=)<,"=$&<$<79$36)(9"=)<R$,;$
e)":)6)&$>!J=<)6$.#$0&M89-$0"9&<,"BY$7<<L=Y__*9G,:"&L7)I=#()":)6)&#9*J_!,<%&L_)6*9O#7<G8#$
?
$.$ <969G96<$ )=$ &6$ &<<&I79*-$ =9G)4*9<&I79*-$ ,"$ *9<&I79*$ GJ8<)4;&G)8R$ "9=)*96<)&8$ *Q988)6:$ Q79"9$ &6$ ,Q69"$ 7,8*=$
<79$8&6*$&6*$"96<=$<79$*Q988)6:$&6*_,"$",,G=$<,$&6$96*4J=9"#$

!"#$0&"'$!&()*$0&+,"-$./01-$0234.$
.$5&)67"8$,9$0,*8":);<$
$
authorities failed to require basic property maintenance. The city decided to redevelop an
inner ring of historic neighbourhoods including DeSoto-Carr to save downtown properties
from a perceived imminent loss in value. Public authorities favored slum clearing and
replacement with concentrated high-rise public housing. Some factors bring into question the
justification for slum clearing at the time. First, density was not a distinguishing trait of Pruitt-
Igoe. It was slightly higher than existing conditions, which only marginally represented a new
opportunity for additional housing. Public authorities had to replace demolished tenements.
Pruitt-Igoe’s appeal was quality, not quantity. Second, there was similar housing in poor White
neighbourhoods of south St. Louis. In the post-war period, property owners rehabilitated and
gentrified many south St. Louis neighbourhoods into some of the most attractive places to live
in the city. South St. Louis was also subject to slum clearing over the years. However, Black
neighbourhoods in north St. Louis seemed to bear a disproportionate burden by comparison.
Property owners and public authorities might have exaggerated tenement deterioration to
access Federal funds. Third, public authorities constructed Pruitt-Igoe with Federal funds at a
+/-$36 million dollars (or $12,500/du) cost in 1954. It is unclear what this cost included. Costs
could have been higher, shuttled between different city, state, and Federal budgets. If
exclusive to housing, then cost would be $360 million (or $125,000/du) in today’s monetary
terms. This cost/du is low (not impossible) to renovate a St. Louis tenement today. If we
prescribe a more reasonable $200,000/du cost, this would renovate 1,800 tenements, 69% of
historic peak occupancy in 1957 or 78 more tenements than 60% occupancy at Pruitt-Igoe.
These factors undercut urban renewal policies giving rise to slum clearing and Modernist public
housing solutions. However, public authorities never seriously considered tenement
rehabilitation or neighbourhood gentrification.

Cass Avenue (“Cass”) to the north, North Jefferson Avenue (“N. Jefferson”) to the west, Carr
Avenue to the south and North 20th Street to the east bound the site (Figure 4a).10 Stronger
interconnectivity to the east/south than north/west characterised streets in the future Pruitt-
Igoe site in north St. Louis.11 Before World War II, most employment opportunities were to the
south and east at the Union Station rail yards and riverfront port/rail/warehouse facilities,

10
Inclusive of public buildings, ballfields, and the Vaughan Public Housing Complex.
11
A 1933 U.S. Geological Survey map is the baseline for the space syntax model of north St. Louis. Information
about alleyways - extensive in older residential areas of St. Louis - is unavailable. Typically, alleyways parallel public
right-of-ways in St. Louis. They only tend to reinforce the pattern of the urban network using space syntax.

Dr. Mark David Major, AICP, CNU-A

A Failure of Modernism

"9=L9I<)(98R#$ K79"9$ )=$ :")*$ *9;,"G&<),6$ Q9=<$ ,;$ 2#$ \9;;9"=,6$ &6*$ :")*$ 9OL&6=),6$ )6<,$ <79$ =)<9$
;",G$ <79$ 9&=<_=,J<7$ Q)<7$ ,;;=9<<)6:$ 6,"<74=,J<7$ =<"99<=$ L&"<Q&R$ )6<,$ <79$ =)<9$ &6*$ &:&)6$ &<$
0&==#$$
$
%,*9"&<9$ <,$ 8,Q8R$ )6<9:"&<9*$
=<"99<=$ I,GL,=9*$ <79$ =)<9#$
0,889I<)(98R-$<7)=$G&'9=$=96=9#$
K79$6,"<7Q9=<$Q&=$<79$=L&<)&8$
W79&"<X$,;$<79$=)<9-$&*+&I96<$<,$
<79$ 2,"<7$ \9;;9"=,6_0&==$
)6<9"=9I<),6#$ 2,"<7$ \9;;9"=,6$
9O<96*=$ 6,"<74<,4=,J<7$ ;",G$
N9M9"<$ 5<"99<$ <,$ ]&=7)6:<,6$
.(96J9-$I,6<)6J)6:$)6<,$=,J<7$
5<#$ P,J)=$ &8,6:$ &$ *);;9"96<$
&8):6G96<#$0&==$9O<96*=$9&=<4
<,4Q9=<$ ;",G$ 69&"$ <79$
")(9";",6<$ <,$ d"&6*$ .(96J9#$
0&==$ Q&=$ &8=,$ L&"<$ ,;$ 5<&<9$
N):7Q&R$ F@$ I,669I<)6:$
;J"<79"$ Q9=<$ <,$ 1&:9$
V,J89(&"*#$ /6$ <79$ =)<9-$ <79"9$
Q9"9$ <Q98(9$ 6,"<74=,J<7$
=<"99<=-$ <Q,$ I,6<)6J)6:$
;J"<79"$ 6,"<7$ &6*$ ;,J"$ <,$ <79$
=,J<7-$&6*$,68R$;,J"$9&=<4Q9=<$ !"#$%&' ,)$>&M,(9B$5L&I9$=R6<&O$G,*98$,;$:8,M&8$)6<9:"&<),6$)6$<79$;J<J"9$
1"J)<<4/:,9$ =)<9$ >,J<8)69*$ )6$ Q7)<9B[$ &6*-$ >M98,QB$ )6<988):)M)8)<R$ =I&<<9"$
=<"99<=-$ <7"99$ I,6<)6J)6:$ )6*)I&<)6:$=<"99<=$>"9*B$&6*$=JM=R=<9G=$>R988,Q-$*,<<9*$8)69=B$,;$<7)=$=)<9$
Q)<7)6$6,"<7$5<#$P,J)=-$D?EE#$2UKcY$!,<<9*$8)69=$&"9$6,<$I,""98&<),6$8)69=$
;J"<79"$ 9&=<$ &6*$ ,68R$ ,69$ <,$ MJ<$;,"$()=J&8$"9;9"96I9$,68R#$$

<79$ Q9=<#$ .88$ )6<9"=9I<9*$ &<$ "):7<$ &6:89=$ 9OI9L<$ ,69$ =7,"<$ =<"99<$ &<$k_4<Q96<R4=9(96$ *9:"99=#$
K79"9$Q9"9$;);<R49):7<$=9:G96<=-$&88$I,GL,=)6:$8,6:9"$=<"99<=$9OI9L<$<7"99-$Q7)I7$Q9"9$=7,"<$
=<"99<=$I,669I<9*$&<$M,<7$96*$&6*$6,$IJ84*94=&I=#$V&=9*$,6$&$D?EF$5&6M,"6$G&L-$<79"9$Q&=$&$

!"#$0&"'$!&()*$0&+,"-$./01-$0234.$
.$5&)67"8$,9$0,*8":);<$
$
minimum of 730 street-oriented dwelling entrances, probably more.12 This was 12.6 dwelling
entrances per street segment and 45.6 per street.13 Despite only 16 streets in a regular grid
layout, there was a sophisticated spatial logic to this site (Figure 4b). Cass and N. Jefferson
governed distinctive ‘intelligible’ subsystems characterising the relationship between
connectivity and global integration, i.e. what you have access to immediately and further
away.14 One was associated with N. Jefferson, Carr Avenue, and access to the east/south and
the other with Cass/access to the north. There were intelligible relations in unconnected
parallel streets, dependent on street length. This is elegant evidence of the regular grid’s
instrumental power to generate subtle differentiations in the urban spatial network, despite its
strong prescriptive order (Pope, 1996; Major, 2015a). Public authorities intended Pruitt-Igoe as
a symbol of post-war urban renewal and housing policies. They could have hardly chosen a
more strategic, high profile site for that purpose. Due to its context, the site wants to be
intelligible. It is difficult to make it unintelligible in space syntax terms. There is no evidence
the architects or public authorities were attempting so. If anything, they underappreciated the
spatial resilience of the site’s contextual relations, overvaluing its symbolic power as a location
at the expense of undervaluing its instrumental power in the north St. Louis urban pattern. In
part, this is crucial for understanding what went wrong at Pruitt-Igoe.

3. DESIGN AND PLANNING FLAWS
The initial proposal for the site - high-rise, mid-rise, and street-oriented residential mix - was
acceptable to city authorities. However, it exceeded Federal costs of the St. Louis PHA, which
imposed a uniform 11-story building height. The approved Modernist design included
separation of uses, stripped down aesthetics where ‘form follows function’ as advocated by
American architect Louis Sullivan, building siting to free the ground level for green spaces,
circulation (e.g. pilotis), and intrusion of natural light (Gropius, 1923; Corbusier, 1925).15 The
site plan incorporated pre-existing St. Stanislaus Catholic Church/School along the eastern

12
Sanborn maps show the building footprints. Only small lot, residential dwellings with minimal street setbacks are
included in this estimate, which excludes vacant lots, alleyway-accessed buildings, residential dwellings with deep
street setbacks, residential subdivisions in section, and large (probably non-residential) buildings.
13
These estimates cannot take into account the effect of vacant dwellings.
14
We use Intelligibility (global integration v. connectivity) due to fewer, longer, and more connected streets in
American cities, which are shallower with less differentiation in terms of spatial depth than European cities (Major,
2015b). Intelligible subsystem means a subset of related routes, crossing over the correlation line into higher ranges
of both measures, within the larger urban context.
15
A pilotis uses support piers, which raises the architectural volume, liberates the ground for circulation under the
building, and provides a sense of floating/lightness in the architecture itself.

Dr. Mark David Major, AICP, CNU-A

A Failure of Modernism

9*:9#$ e&J:7&6$ 1JM8)I$ N,J=)6:$ 0,GL89O$ >,L969*$ D?`S4`FB$ Q&=$ 8,I&<9*$ &*+&I96<$ <,$ <79$
=,J<79&=<#$K79$;,"G&8$=7&L9$,;$<79$=)<9$&6*$8,I&<),6$,;$L"949O)=<)6:$",&*=_=<"JI<J"9=$)6;,"G9*$
1"J)<<4/:,9X=$L8&66)6:#$$
$
5L&I9$=R6<&O$&88,Q=$J=$<,$=99$L&==$<79$;,"G&8$,"*9"$,;$)6<")6=)I$ZJ&8)<)9=$)6$&$=)<9$>9#:#$Q)<7)6$
<79$M,J6*=B$<,$M9<<9"$J6*9"=<&6*$)<=$9O<")6=)I$ZJ&8)<)9=$>9#:#$,J<Q&"*$<,$<79$I,6<9O<B$MR$"98R)6:$
,6$<79$G)6)G&8-$G,=<$,L<)G&8$8)69=$,;$=):7<$L&==)6:$<7",J:7$9(9"R$=L&I9$J6<)8$&II,J6<)6:$;,"$&88$
L,<96<)&8=$ )6I8J*)6:$ M)=9I<)6:_*)&:,6&8)=)6:$ &I",==$ <79$ L8&6#$ .<$ 1"J)<<4/:,9-$ <7)=$ )6I8J*9*$ <79$
"#$%&#'$ L&==&:9Q&R=-$ Q7)I7$ Q9$ 7&(9$ <,$ "9I,6=<"JI<$ M&=9*$ ,6$ <79$ L&()6:$ L8&6$ &6*$ 7)=<,")I$
L7,<,:"&L7=# DC $.$ "#$%&#'$ &<$ <79$ M&=9$ ,;$ 9&I7$ <,Q9"$ L&"<)&88R$ W8)M9"&<9*X$ <79$ :",J6*$ 89(98$
>&LL",O)G&<98R$ `@h$ ()=J&88R$ &6I7,"9*$ <,$ <79$ :",J6*B#$ K79"9$ &LL9&"9*$ <,$ M9$ <Q,$ I)"IJ8&<),6$
",J<9=$ ()&$ <79$ "#$%&#'$ L9"$ <,Q9"$ >!"#$%&' /' &6*$ "9;9"$ <,$ a):J"9$ DB#$ /<$ L",()*9*$ &II9==$ <,$ <,Q9"$
)6<9"),"=$ ()&$ =<&)"Q988=$ &6*$ 989(&<,"=Y$ ,69$ 989(&<,"$ &6*$ <7"99$ =<&)"Q988=$ 9&I7-$ Q7)I7$ =L8)<$
=<&)"Q988$ J=&:9$ )6<,$ =9L&"&<9$ Q)6:=#$ !Q988)6:$ 96<"&6I9=$ L"9(),J=8R$ ,")96<9*$ <,$ =<"99<=$ Q9"9$
989(&<9*$ )6$ =9I<),6$ <,$ <79$ 7):74")=9$ )6<9"6&8$ I,"")*,"=#$ K79$ <7"9=7,8*$ ,;$ <79=9$ =<&)"Q988=$ &6*$
989(&<,"=$>DET$)6$&88B$Q9"9$<79$W;",6<$*,,"=X$&<$1"J)<<4/:,9[$&88$,")96<9*$)6Q&"*$<,$<79$MJ)8*)6:-$
6,<$ ,J<Q&"*$ <,$ <79$ LJM8)I$ =L&I9#$ U;$ I,J"=9-$ <79R$ Q9"9$ 6,<$ ;",6<$ *,,"=$ &<$ &88-$ 9;;9I<)(98R$
"9L"9=96<)6:$ &$ I,GL89<9$ 98)G)6&<),6$ ,6$ <79$ =)<9#$ K79$ e&J:7&6$ =,I)&8$ 7,J=)6:$ &8=,$ 7&*$ WIJ<4
<7",J:7X$ L&==&:9Q&R=$ &<$
:",J6*$ 89(98#$ VJ)8*)6:$
;,,<L")6<=$ &6*$ 7)=<,")I&8$
L7,<,:"&L7=$ G&'9$ I89&"$ <79$
8,I&<),6_,L9"&<),6$ ,;$ )<=$ WIJ<4
<7",J:7X$ ",J<9=$ >"9;9"$ <,$
a):J"9$ DB#$ 0"JI)&88R-$ <79R$ Q9"9$
=9L&"&<9$ >"9=)*96<=$ I,J8*$
&(,)*$ <79GB$ ;",G$ &II9==$ <,$
<79$ <,Q9"$ M8,I'=-$ =,G9$ ,;$
!"#$%&' /)$ e)9Q$ ,;$ &$ "9=)*96<)&8$ <,Q9"$ "#$%&#'$ &<$ 1"J)<<4/:,9$ M9;,"9$
Q7)I7$96*J"9*$J6<)8$T@@C#$K7)=$ *9G,8)<),6$)6$D?ST$>5,J"I9Y$.;;,"*&M89$N,J=)6:$/6=<)<J<9B#$

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
DC
$^9I,6=<"JI<9*$,6$<79$;,88,Q)6:$M&=)=Y$DB$);$)<$8,,'9*$8)'9$&$8)69$,;$=):7<$=69&'9*$<7",J:7-$<796$)<$L",M&M8R$*)*$=)6I9$
&$8)69$7&=$6,$Q)*<7$)6$<79$"9&8$Q,"8*-$Q7)I7$I,6=)=<96<8R$,IIJ""9*$&<$89==$<7&6$;)(9$*9:"99=$L&"&8898$<,$9O<9"),"$Q&88=[$
&6*-$TB$):6,")6:$I7&6:9=$)6$989(&<),6$*J9$<,$8&6*=I&L)6:-$Q7)I7$<79"9$Q9"9$&$;9Q$9O&GL89=$MJ<$6,69$<,,$*"&=<)I#$

!"#$0&"'$!&()*$0&+,"-$./01-$0234.$
.$5&)67"8$,9$0,*8":);<$
$
Q&=$6,<$<79$I&=9$;,"$L&==&:9Q&R=$)6$1"J)<<4/:,9#$.<$;)"=<$:8&6I9-$<79$=L&<)&8$G,*98$&LL9&"=$&')6$
<,$I7&,=$>!"#$%&'0-B#$
$
d969"&88R-$ G,=<$ L9,L89$ &:"99$
&$ *9=):6$ ;8&Q$ )6$ <79$ 7):74")=9=$
Q&=$ )6I8J=),6$ ,;$ W=')L4=<,LX$
989(&<,"=-$Q7)I7$,68R$L",()*9*$
&II9==$<,$<79$D=<-$A<7-$S<7-$&6*$
D@<7$ ;8,,"=# DS $%,=<$ "9=)*96<=$
7&*$ <,$ J=9$ *&"'$ =<&)"Q988=$ 4$
L")G&")8R$*9=):69*$&=$;)"9$9O)<=$
4$ <,$ &II9==$ <79$ ;8,,"=$ ,;$ <79)"$
&L&"<G96<$ >!"#$%&' 0.B#$
a,"G9"$ "9=)*96<=$ )6*)I&<9$
<79=9$=<&)"Q988=_989(&<,"=$Q9"9$
&$ L",M89G$ ;",G$ <79$ M9:)66)6:$
>a"9)*")I7=$ 9<$ &8-$ T@DDB#$ /6$
<79G=98(9=-$<79R$Q9"9$6,<$<79$
L",M89G#$ /<$ Q&=$ <79$ &II9==$ <,$
<79G$;&I)8)<&<9*$MR$<79$:",J6*$
89(98$ "#$%&#'-$ Q7)I7$ =99G=$ <,$
7&(9$ M996$ J6I,6<",889*$ &6*$
LJM8)I&88R$ &II9==)M89#$ /<$ !"#$%&' 0)' >&M,(9B$ 5L&I9$ =R6<&O$ G,*98$ ,;$ :8,M&8$ )6<9:"&<),6$ ;,"$ 1"J)<<4
/:,9$Q)<7)6$6,"<7$5<#$P,J)=-$I)"I&$D?`F[$&6*-$>M98,QB$1"J)<<4/:,9$=<&)"Q988-$
G9*)&<9*$ ;,"G&8$ &II9==$ &6*$ *&<9$J6'6,Q6$>a"9)*")I7=$9<$&8-$T@DDB#$

=L&<)&8$*)=<")MJ<),6$;",G$)6=)*9$<,$,J<=)*9$&6*$>#,*!>*0'1#$5<&)"Q988$J=&:9$L",()*9*$&$=G&88$MJ<$
"98)&M89$=JLL8R$,;$()I<)G=$)6$ZJ)9<$=L&I9=$<,$I,GG)<$&$I")G9#$K79$"#$%&#'$&8=,$L",()*9*$&II9==$<,$
GJ8<)L89$",J<9=$&<$:",J6*$89(98-$Q7)I7$G&*9$)<$9&=R$<,$W*)=&LL9&"X$)6$1"J)<<4/:,9-$9=L9I)&88R$&=$
,IIJL&6IR$"&<9=$*9I8)69*$&6*$*&G&:9*$9O<9"),"$8):7<)6:$Q96<$J6"9L&)"9*#$5,G9$L9,L89$GJ=<$
7&(9$ ZJ)I'8R$ "9&8)=9*$ &6*$ &I<9*$ ,6$ <7)=$ ,LL,"<J6)<R#$ /6<96=)(9$ L&<",8=$ M9:&6$ =,,6$ &;<9"$
,L96)6:-$ 9(96$ M9;,"9$ &6R$ Q98;&"9$ "9I)L)96<=$ 8)(9*$ <79"9#$ K79=9$ =9IJ")<R$ G9&=J"9=$ ;&8<9"9*$ &=$
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
DS
$5')L4=<,LX$ 989(&<,"=$ J=9$ I&6<)89(9"9*$ ;8,,"$ L8&<9=$ <,$ G)6)G)=9$ ;8,,"$ &"9&-$ Q7)I7$ "9*JI9=$ I,=<$ ;,"$ I,6I"9<9$ L,J"=$
&6*$ &==,I)&<9*$ G9I7&6)I&8$ 9ZJ)LG96<#$ .II,"*)6:$ <,$ *&<&$ I)<9*$ MR$ %/K-$ <79$ <,<&8-$ &884)6I8J=)(9$ I,=<=$ ,;$ W=')L4=<,LX$
989(&<,"=$&"9$E@h$8,Q9"$<7&6$=<,LL)6:$,6$&88$;8,,"=#$

!"#$0&"'$!&()*$0&+,"-$./01-$0234.$
.$5&)67"8$,9$0,*8":);<$
$
conditions worsened during the 1960s. Emergency services effectively abandoned Pruitt-Igoe
as too hostile of an environment due to residents venting their frustrations whenever these
public servants did respond to a call. Criminal activity spread from the stairwells to elevators to
communal galleries/corridors. According to Bristol (1991), “forced to walk through the galleries
to reach their apartments, residents were threatened and attacked by gangs, who used these
spaces as hangouts. Residents were also frequently attacked in the elevators.” This occurred
even as some residents maintained their apartment interiors until St. Louis PHA began phased
vacating of the premises in 1968 for demolition.

Planning also played a role. There were 92 distinct spatial routes in the layout, representing a
256% increase.18 This imbued a sophisticated ‘intelligible dysfunction’ to the spatial structure,
layering multiple vulnerabilities for opportunity and escape in Pruitt-Igoe, which further
implicates the pilotis. As before, there were two intelligible subsystems in the north and south,
which is evidence for the spatial resilience of this strategic site in north St. Louis (Figure 7).
However, N. Jefferson and Cass were no longer the most immediate, connected routes. The
separation of pedestrians and vehicles designed in the site made these streets more globally
integrated, distinguishing N. Jefferson and Cass as perimeter streets for moving vehicles in the
spatial structure. Instead, the layout internalised and heightened connectivity within the tower
blocks on diagonals/gridlines (or segments thereof) for pedestrians, parking, and green space.
Critically, this meant N. Jefferson and Cass did not govern these intelligible subsystems.
Internal diagonals from Cass Avenue to Thomas Street and the Vaughan social housing
principally governed the northern subsystem. Thomas Street and N. Jefferson were in this
subsystem, formally adjacent at its edge. The east-west gridlines from the riverfront passing
through the Vaughan and Pruitt-Igoe social housing terminating at/near N. Jefferson
principally governed the southern one. This internalized, heightened connectivity was
important. The vertical scale of the tower blocks was dramatically different from the
surrounding area. Most likely, they operated like ‘walls’ in the urban fabric due to scale in
elevation and limited liberation of the ground level in plan. The pilotis afforded sufficient
visibility to facilitate formal access (i.e. to stairwells/elevators) but insufficient visibility to
facilitate surveillance of spatial distribution at ground level.

18
Inclusive of alleyways in the site based on the 1938 Sanborn Map, note #12.

Dr. Mark David Major, AICP, CNU-A

A Failure of Modernism

K79=9$ <Q,$ )6<988):)M89$
=JM=R=<9G=$ &II,J6<9*$ ;,"$
9(9"R$ ",J<9$ )6$ 1"J)<<4/:,9$
)<=98;#$ ^,J<9=$ )6$ <79$ 6,"<79"6$
=JM=R=<9G$ L&==9*$ <7",J:7-$
&*+&I96<$<,-$,"$<9"G)6&<9*$,6$
TS$ ,;$ <79$ EE$ >S@hB$ "9=)*96<)&8$
<,Q9"=#$ ^,J<9=$ )6$ <79$
=,J<79"6$ =JM=R=<9G$ *)*$ =,$
;,"$ 9(9"R$ "9=)*96<)&8$ <,Q9"#$
2)69$8&":94=I&89$*)&:,6&8$&6*$
:")*8)69$ ",J<9=$ L&==)6:$
<7",J:7-$ <9"G)6&<)6:$ Q)<7)6-$
,"$ ,6$ e&J:7&6$ <,Q9"$ M8,I'=$
&8=,$ ;&I)8)<&<9*$ &II9==$ <,$
9(9"R$ "9=)*96<)&8$ <,Q9"#$
K79=9$ ",J<9=$ L&==9*$ <7",J:7$
1"J)<<4/:,9-$ <9"G)6&<)6:$ &<$
0&==$ >TB$ ,"$ 2#$ \9;;9"=,6$ >SB#D?$
KQ,$ ",J<9=$ L&==)6:$ <7",J:7$
<79$ 6,"<79"6$ 7,J=)6:$ &"9&=$
MJ<$,68R$<96J,J=8R$I,669I<9*$ !"#$%&' 1)' >&M,(9B$ 5L&I9$ =R6<&O$ G,*98$ &6*$ >M98,QB$ )6<988):)M)8)<R$ =I&<<9"$
)6<,$ <79$ =,J<79"6$ =JM=R=<9G$ )6*)I&<)6:$ ",J<9=$ ,;$ <79$6,"<79"6$>"9*B$&6*$=,J<79"6$>M8J9B$=JM=R=<9G=$)6$
1"J)<<4/:,9$Q)<7)6$6,"<7$5<#$P,J)=$I)"I&$D?`F#$2UKcY$!,<<9*$R988,Q$8)69=$&"9$
&"9$ 9=L9I)&88R$ &8&"G)6:#$ K7)=$ 6,<$I,""98&<),6$8)69=-$;,"$()=J&8$"9;9"96I9$,68R#$$

9;;9I<)(98R$ *9G,6=<"&<9=$ 7,Q$ <79$ =L&<)&8$ =<"JI<J"9$ >)6$ L&"<)IJ8&"-$ <79$ "#$%&#'$ L&==&:9Q&R=B$
:969"&<9*$ &6$ 9&=R$ <,$ "9&*$ &6*$ J=9$ 8&R,J<$ ;,"$ ;,"G&8$ &II9==$ >,LL,"<J6)<RB$ &6*$ =L&<)&8$
*)=<")MJ<),6$>9=I&L9B$)6$I")G)6&8$&I<)()<R$<7",J:7,J<$1"J)<<4/:,9-$9=L9I)&88R$;",G$<79$=,J<7#$U6$
<79$ ,<79"$ 7&6*-$ )<$ )=$ L9"L89O)6:$ 7,Q$ &$ Q9884I,669I<9*-$ )6<988):)M89$ 8&R,J<$ ,6$ =JI7$ &$ =<"&<9:)I$
=)<9$I,J8*$7&(9$:969"&<9*$&$M",'96$)6<9";&I9$M9<Q996$&*J8<=$&6*$I7)8*"96$Q796$<79"9$=99G=$
&MJ6*&6<$I)"IJG=<&6<)&8$9()*96I9$;,"$=JI7$&$M",'96$)6<9";&I9$M&=9*$,6$=,;<$*&<&-$9#:#$"9=)*96<$
<9=<)G,6R_&"I7)(&8$ ;,,<&:9#$ K79$ G,=<$ "9&=,6&M89$ 9OL8&6&<),6$ )=$ <79$ 8&R,J<$ *)*$ 6,<$ :969"&<9$

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
D?
$U69$9OI9L<),6$<9"G)6&<9*$&$M8,I'$&Q&R$&<$<79$)6<9"=9I<),6$,;$c88),<$.(96J9$&6*$d&GM89$5<"99<#$

!"#$0&"'$!&()*$0&+,"-$./01-$0234.$
.$5&)67"8$,9$0,*8":);<$
$
this broken interface; at least, not in terms of spatial structure. We have to look elsewhere for
answers.

4. THE VALUE OF CO-PRESENCE
The best answer most consistent with available evidence, timeline, former resident testimony,
and spatial analysis is declining occupancy generated the broken interface between adults and
children. Occupancy peaked at 91% in 1957. Sources differ about how quickly depopulation
occurred at Pruitt-Igoe. According to Ramroth (2007) and Newman (1973) respectively,
occupancy was 67% in 1965 and, after a certain point, never rose above 60%. Eventually,
spatial layout came into play as a dependent variable in terms of provision. There were too few
adults and too many children for too much space. This further exposed the design and
planning flaws in the layout for opportunity and escape in criminal activities, especially for the
more expansive and segregated southern intelligible subsystem with multiple connections to
the Vaughan social housing. This is why the ground level exterior spaces initially seemed
unimportant in the 1950s but later more so to residents during the 1960s. It involves the innate
value of co-presence in the built environment. Three factors seemed especially critical for
Pruitt-Igoe. Two were ‘baked-in’ problems for which there is extensive research, i.e. racism
and regulatory failures. The third seems overlooked, i.e. end of large-scale construction and
opening of the Vaughan Public Housing Complex.

First, regulatory failures skewed demographics. Lower income families led by a work-age,
unemployed male could not receive government assistance for public housing. Apparently, St.
Louis PHA was flexible about these rules, advising low-income families how to circumvent
them, i.e. husband left family so female-led household received assistance. This cut in half the
adults in such households. Projected across multiple households, this significantly reduced
adult males living at Pruitt-Igoe and negatively affected co-presence in spatial terms. The
demographics only worsened as St. Louis PHA shuttled the most economically vulnerable
populations - unable to secure placement in other public housing - into Pruitt-Igoe during the
1960s. Second, the December 7, 1955 Federal court order to desegregate St. Louis public
housing undercut occupancy and maintenance at Pruitt-Igoe. It is impossible to envision
(legally feasible and morally defensible) alternative scenarios at the time. This is the racism

Dr. Mark David Major, AICP, CNU-A

A Failure of Modernism

problem: viable solutions require absence.20 Black residents’ testimony is consistent: Whites
fled. This indicates two things: 1) Whites had more employment opportunities/housing choices
to relocate elsewhere;21 and, 2) they were probably the most reliable rental income source for
the St. Louis PHA, which funded maintenance. This income loss ended effective maintenance,
which was ‘behind the curve’ from the very beginning at Pruitt-Igoe. 22 Most people cite
maintenance as a significant factor in its decline. It is understandable. Thousands of high-rise
residential buildings around the world - public and private, Modernist or not - succeed, in part,
because of strong management policies and consistent maintenance of buildings/grounds.
Third, construction ended with Pruitt Elementary School and Vaughan opening circa 1957-58.
It is impossible to pin down construction schedules to specific weeks, months, or even a year
seven decades later with precision. However, construction work on Pruitt-Igoe residential
towers continued 1-2 years after opening. It is feasible construction for all public buildings
continued on site and/or the immediate vicinity until the beginning of 1958, even 1959. The
early success and peak occupancy appears to coincide with these 5-7 years of construction.
This is intriguing for a few reasons. The constant daytime presence of male construction crews
(who were supposed to be there) may have initially aided maintenance and natural policing of
space. Some residents may have also benefited from direct or indirect employment
opportunities. It is hardly definitive but problems seemed to gather pace after construction
ended in the area.23

Occupancy declined, construction ended, the number of adults (especially males) who
belonged there declined, and the proportion of children in female-led households increased
over time. Unsupervised children participated in petty vandalism, i.e. graffiti, damaged
lighting, etc. There is ample photographic evidence of graffiti. The forthright testimony of
former residents growing up as children in Pruitt-Igoe (“we did some crazy things”) makes
clear the elevators, stairwells, and light fixtures were frequent targets (Freidrichs et al, 2011).

20
St. Louis Post-Dispatch heralded Pruitt-Igoe as the “first integrated public housing” for lower- and lower-middle
class families in the city. This was a misleading reference to the site, not the housing. Black residents lived in the
Pruitt Homes and White residents in the Igoe Homes.
21
Affordable housing became increasingly available in the city as White Flight to the suburbs gathered pace during
the 1950s. From 1950 to 1960, city population decreased by 12.5%. By 1970s, it decreased another 17%.
22
St. Louis PHA premised its maintenance budget and schedule on 100% occupancy at Pruitt-Igoe, which
represents an astounding failure of best management practices, even gross negligence on their part.
23
We are not suggesting city authorities could have simply ‘built their way out’ of the eventual problems at Pruitt-
Igoe. Even if they had attempted such a thing, any fringe benefits for Pruitt-Igoe or its residents would have
gradually disappeared as construction sites shifted further and further away.

Dr. Mark David Major, AICP, CNU-A

A Failure of Modernism

White residents fled, leading to rental income loss and more deferred maintenance. The
perception of social malaise began to feed a vicious cycle. Fearful for their safety, adults
(especially females) limited space use to the interior of buildings (e.g. apartments,
corridors/communal areas) and into/out movement from the residential towers/housing
project to the surroundings (e.g. stairwells/elevators, perimeter streets). Absent parents -
‘disappeared’ males, employed or apartment-bound females - led to more unsupervised
children at ground level. The former residents are especially informative in this regard. People
with nefarious intentions in Pruitt-Igoe frequently paid unsupervised children to serve as
lookouts during their activities. There were always many males who did not live or belong
there, i.e. ‘stranger danger.’ These males came from outside the community to prey on
residents, especially economically vulnerable females. In this sense, the opening of the
Vaughan social housing is troubling. Nine large-scale diagonals/gridlines - some via ‘cut-
through’ passageways - associated with its layout were part of intelligible subsystems in Pruitt-
Igoe, facilitating opportunity in formal access and escape in spatial distribution within its
housing areas, especially to/from the south. Pruitt-Igoe and Vaughan had an asymmetrical
relationship (i.e. unequal) in formal access, vertical scale, and horizontal area. Criminals do not
tend to work where they live. They export their activities to nearby housing areas. There is
insufficient circumstantial or tangible evidence to explicitly implicate the Vaughan public
housing in Pruitt-Igoe’s social malaise. However, the spatial analysis is suggestive.
Metaphorically, if the Modernist architectural and planning flaws of the pilotis was the
‘kindling’ for criminal activity, then declining occupancy, deferred maintenance, and the
Vaughan social housing might have been the ‘spark’ to set Pruitt-Igoe aflame.

5. CONCLUSION
Pruitt-Igoe was a failure implicating many facets of our Modern world: culture, design,
institutions, policy, management, and planning. The built environment and co-presence (i.e.
space and people) are the factors best able to anchor several issues surrounding Pruitt-Igoe in
the real, physical world. Racism was an intractable problem at the time, which fed into
regulatory failures undercutting co-presence and maintenance at Pruitt-Igoe. This increasingly
exposed design and planning flaws in the built environment. We were limited to inferring a
great deal based on archival records/resident testimony. Nonetheless, the circumstantial
evidence and spatial analysis is compelling. Spatial layout was a contributory factor in the

Dr. Mark David Major, AICP, CNU-A

A Failure of Modernism

social malaise at Pruitt-Igoe. The provision of space (i.e. quantity) became a liability as
declining occupancy generated a broken interface between adults and children. Intelligible
dysfunction facilitated opportunity and escape in criminal activities. The lesson for design and
planning is simple one. Too much of a good thing (abundant, intelligible space) under the
wrong circumstances can create the preconditions for much bigger problems.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Birmingham, Elizabeth. 1998. "Reframing the Ruins: Pruitt–Igoe, Structural Racism, and African American Rhetoric
as a Space for Cultural Critique”, Positionen, 2: 2.

Bristol, Katharine. 1991. "The Pruitt–Igoe Myth", Journal of Architectural Education, Association of Collegiate
Schools of Architecture, May 1992, 44:3: 163–171.

Corbusier, Le. 1925. The City of To-morrow and Its Planning (1987 Trans. F. Etchells). Dover Publications: New York.

Duany, Andres, E. Plater-Zyberk, J. Speck. 2000. Suburban Nation: The Rise of Sprawl and the Decline of the
American Dream. New York: North Point Press.

Economist, The. 2011. “Why the Pruitt-Igoe housing project failed,” Prospero: Books, arts and culture Blog, The
Economist, October 15, 2011. Retrieved March 2, 2016:
http://www.economist.com/blogs/prospero/2011/10/american-public-housing

Freidrichs, Chad, J. Freidrichs. 2011. The Pruitt-Igoe Myth. Documentary (79 minutes), Oxford Film Festival:
February 11, 2011. More information available at http://www.pruitt-igoe.com/.

Gehl, Jan. 1971. Life Between Buildings: Using Public Space (1987, 2011 revisited ed). London: Island Press.

Gordon, Colin. 2009. Mapping Decline: St. Louis and the Fate of the American City. University of Pennsylvania Press:
Philadelphia.

Gropius, Walter. 1923. The New Architecture and the Bauhaus (revised edition 1965). Cambridge: MIT Press.

Hall, Peter. 2004. Cities of Tomorrow: An Intellectual History of Urban Planning and Design in the Twentieth Century.
Hoboken, NJ: Wiley, John & Sons, Incorporated.

Hanson, Julienne, B. Hillier. 1987. “The Architecture of Community: Some New Proposals on the Social
Consequences of Architectural and Planning Decisions”, Architecture and Comportement, Architecture and
Behaviour, 3:3: 251-273.

Hillier, Bill. 1986. “City of Alice’s Dreams”, Architects Journal, London: Royal Institute of British Architects, 9th July
1986: 39-41.

Hillier, Bill. 1996. Space is the Machine: A Configurational Theory of Architecture. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.

Kruse, Kevin M. 2007. White Flight: Atlanta and the Making of Modern Conservatism. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton
University Press.

Major, Mark David Major. 2015b. “The Invention of a New Scale: the paradox of size and configuration in American
cities,” Journal of Space Syntax, University College London, Autumn 2015, 170-191.

Major, Mark David Major. 2015a. Relentless Magnificence: The American Urban Grid. PhD Thesis, University College
London, Copies available from the Environmental Science Library, University College London.

Dr. Mark David Major, AICP, CNU-A

A Failure of Modernism


Major, Mark David, A. Penn, B. Hillier. 1999. “The Urban Village and City of Tomorrow Revisited,” Second
International Space Syntax Symposium Proceedings (Eds. F. de Holanda, L. Amorim, F. Dufaux), 2: 48.01-48.18.

Montgomery, Roger. 1985. "Pruitt–Igoe: Policy Failure or Societal Symptom," The Metropolitan Midwest.
Urbana/Chicago: University of Illinois Press.

Newman, Oscar. 1973. Defensible Space; Crime Prevention Through Urban Design. Washington, D.C.: DIANE
Publishing.

Pope, Albert. 1996. Ladders, Architecture at Rice 34. New York: Princeton Architectural Press.

Pulido, Laura. 2000. “Rethinking Environmental Racism: White Privilege and Urban Development in Southern
California,” Annals of the Association of American Geographers. 90 (1): 12–40.

Ramroth, William G. 2007. Planning for Disaster: How Natural and Man-made Disasters Shape the Built Environment.
Chicago: Kaplan Publishing.

Shu, Simon, B. Hillier. 1999. “Housing Layout and Crime Vulnerability,” Second International Space Syntax
Symposium Proceedings (Eds. F. de Holanda, L. Amorim and F. Dufaux), 1:25.01 - 25.12.

Thabit, Walter. 2003. How East New York Became a Ghetto. New York: New York University Press.

Weisman, Leslie K. 1994. Discrimination by Design: A Feminist Critique of the Man-Made Environment.
Urbana/Chicago: University of Illinois Press.

Whyte, William H. 1988. City: Rediscovering the Center. University of Pennsylvania Press: Philadelphia.

Dr. Mark David Major, AICP, CNU-A

A Failure of Modernism