This paper explores the tensions between advocates of reuse of an innovative modern design, and those who believe that social justice or political expedience requires demolition. It also makes the case that modernist planning strategies are not incompatible with current urban design strategies to create more sustainable communities.
The history of urban renewal and modernist design in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania is a story of success and failure. Pittsburgh’s post-war environmental reforms (smoke control) are well known, as are the groundbreaking projects of patrons such as Edgar Kaufmann and Frank Lloyd Wright (Fallingwater).
Today, Pittsburgh is challenged with reconstructing once-innovative attempts to redesign large areas of the city. Pittsburgh’s lower Hill District—one of the nation’s most important, historic African American communities—was extensively destroyed for construction of the Civic Arena, a 415-foot operable dome (architects Mitchell & Ritchey with structural engineers Ammann & Whitney). The project, conceived by Kaufmann and funded as an inventive public-private partnership, evicted 8,000 people from their homes.
Four decades later, the community has not recovered and many see the Arena as inflammatory or obsolete. As a new, state-subsidized arena is under construction adjacent to the Civic Arena, a reconstruction of the lost street grid between the Hill and Downtown is proposed. Many view the Civic Arena as an obstacle to be torn down in a “renewal of urban renewal.” This reflects trends by cities hoping to “undo” the damage of urban renewal by promoting current New Urbanist planning over modern design that is considered unworthy of preservation or even reuse.
The author has proposed that renewal of physical connections across acres of parking can be accomplished more successfully through reuse of the Arena shell as a civic space that could anchor the community, in the tradition of a town square. One of models is Lucca, Italy’s ancient Roman coliseum—a model urban space surrounded by housing and shops.
The complexities and contradictions of twenty-first century design and preservation are not easily navigated in the rich social context of the Hill. One of its greatest residents, playwright August Wilson, may point the way: “My plays insist that we should not forget or toss away our history.” While he was referring to his roots in the community and the culture he knew, his words challenge us to ask questions about the many histories and memories that exist—good and bad.
Interested in hosting your competition on Worldchanging? Contact Us and tell us about your competition!
Who's online
There are currently 0 users and 707 guests online.
Supported by 
This paper explores the tensions between advocates of reuse of an innovative modern design, and those who believe that social justice or political expedience requires demolition. It also makes the case that modernist planning strategies are not incompatible with current urban design strategies to create more sustainable communities.
The history of urban renewal and modernist design in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania is a story of success and failure. Pittsburgh’s post-war environmental reforms (smoke control) are well known, as are the groundbreaking projects of patrons such as Edgar Kaufmann and Frank Lloyd Wright (Fallingwater).
Today, Pittsburgh is challenged with reconstructing once-innovative attempts to redesign large areas of the city. Pittsburgh’s lower Hill District—one of the nation’s most important, historic African American communities—was extensively destroyed for construction of the Civic Arena, a 415-foot operable dome (architects Mitchell & Ritchey with structural engineers Ammann & Whitney). The project, conceived by Kaufmann and funded as an inventive public-private partnership, evicted 8,000 people from their homes.
Four decades later, the community has not recovered and many see the Arena as inflammatory or obsolete. As a new, state-subsidized arena is under construction adjacent to the Civic Arena, a reconstruction of the lost street grid between the Hill and Downtown is proposed. Many view the Civic Arena as an obstacle to be torn down in a “renewal of urban renewal.” This reflects trends by cities hoping to “undo” the damage of urban renewal by promoting current New Urbanist planning over modern design that is considered unworthy of preservation or even reuse.
The author has proposed that renewal of physical connections across acres of parking can be accomplished more successfully through reuse of the Arena shell as a civic space that could anchor the community, in the tradition of a town square. One of models is Lucca, Italy’s ancient Roman coliseum—a model urban space surrounded by housing and shops.
The complexities and contradictions of twenty-first century design and preservation are not easily navigated in the rich social context of the Hill. One of its greatest residents, playwright August Wilson, may point the way: “My plays insist that we should not forget or toss away our history.” While he was referring to his roots in the community and the culture he knew, his words challenge us to ask questions about the many histories and memories that exist—good and bad.