Have a personal or library account? Click to login
PRUITT IGOE VS CITY OF THE FUTURE Cover

Figures & Tables

Figure 1.

Development of the Pruitt-Igoe housing estate, author’s own drawing [13]
Development of the Pruitt-Igoe housing estate, author’s own drawing [13]

Figure 2.

Layout of PlantIT, author’s own drawing [18]
Layout of PlantIT, author’s own drawing [18]

Assessment criteria

Assessment criteriPruitt-IgoePlantIT
First group++
Second group+-
Third group-+
Fourth group--

Second group

Uniformity of urban developmentUniform shape of buildings, standardization of housing areas

Third group

Mixed functionality and diversityMixing the functions of stores, offices, individual apartments in one place
Mixed functionalities using the neighborhood within the block and inside the building
Mixing people at different ages, income levels, cultures and races
Diversity of apartmentsVarious size of apartments
High quality architectureEmphasis on beauty, aesthetics, comfort of the urban environment, creating a “sense of place”
Rooting of the sense of public spaces in the community
Urban designThe human scale of architecture and a beautiful environment that supports the humanist spirit
Traditional neighborhood structureClear distinction between the center and the peripheries with a clear indication of this
Creation of public spaces in the center
High quality public spaces
Main destinations used on a daily basis within a ten-minute walk
The largest density of development in the city center gradually becoming less dense on the outskirts
Sustainable developmentMinimal impact of buildings on the environment and its maximum use
Eco-friendly technologies, respect for the environment and awareness of the value of natural systems
Energy efficiency
Limiting the use of non-renewable energy sources
Increase of local production
More emphasis on walking, limitation of driving
Digitization of the connection networkFlow of information on energy consumption, access control, movement, work, leisure and entertainment

First group

Accessibility by footFacilities located 10 minutes of walking distance from home and work
Buildings located close to a thoroughfare with windows facing the street
Parking places on the street or in underground car parks
Narrow streets designed for vehicular traffic with a low speed
Areas for pedestrian and motor traffic
Network of links through communication pathsNetwork of interlinked streets providing redistribution of traffic and promoting walking routes
Hierarchical streets: narrow streets, boulevards, avenues
network of pedestrian connections and public spaces ensuring the attractiveness of walking through them
Increased densityBuildings, shops and service facilities located in the close vicinity
More efficient use of resources and services
Green transportHigh-quality transport network used to connect cities, towns and settlements
Pedestrian-friendly design of cities, providing extensive use of bicycles, rollers, scooters and walking tours promoting everyday traffic
Quality of lifeAccess to running water, sewage, light, recreation and green areas inside and around the housing estate

Fourth group

Social segregationRacial segregation, material segregation
High-scale of objectsBuildings with several floors
Accumulation of populationCommon spaces inside buildings
Deficiency in availability of sufficient communicationInsufficient number of parking spaces
Dry ambient environmentLack of diversity in local environment
DOI: https://doi.org/10.21307/acee-2019-048 | Journal eISSN: 2720-6947 | Journal ISSN: 1899-0142
Language: English
Page range: 15 - 21
Submitted on: Mar 6, 2019
Accepted on: Nov 15, 2019
Published on: Jan 7, 2020
Published by: Silesian University of Technology
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 4 issues per year

© 2020 Agata GĄSOWSKA-KRAMARZ, published by Silesian University of Technology
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.