The urban disposition, as proposed by the Ministry of Public Works and explained by Dagoberto Ortensi, mirrored other coeval villages: a quadrangular central square, embellished by a fountain, where administrative offices would overlook from. From here, dwellings are distributed throughout the main arteries. The buildings of which today is very little left were of single elevation, having sloping roofs and an entrance door at the proximal end. The expenditure, foreseen to convert the shacks into actual homes for the farmers, amounted to 970.000 Lire. In fact, according to Ministry’s intentions, the buildings could be further enlarged through a second floor, so to have two lodgings both equipped with kitchen, bedroom, services and storage room, but only upon completion of the road-construction works. Nevertheless, as Lilianne Dufour points out, the buildings’ regular and symmetric arrangements give the place a notably impersonal look and rather similar to a labour camp than to a “modern living facility”.
According to some documents mentioning, the Borgo’s lifetime didn’t last long considering that soon after its establishment several feudal families had requested the assignment of abandoned and precarious pavilions. Moreover, since 1932 the institution in charge of the working-class villages’ management – the Commissariato alle Migrazioni e Colonizzazioni – seemed defying any form of restoration works, stating that “any attempt of […] enhancement” proved useless. This surely was a major setback for the designer Giuriati and the entire Ministry, as attention was paid to the choice of locations that should be applying “the basic requirements for a standard sleeping accommodation, such as the proximity to railway stations, road junctions, roadman’s houses […] and to sites with easy drinking water provision”.
Today only two original constructions remain of Borgo Littorio, while others have been demolished and materials have been reused for the construction of dry stone walls and other restorations interventions. The failure of the operation, which initially reflected the urgent need for land reclamation works, was caused by a lack of consideration regarding the assigned beneficiaries of housing and agricultural land. The hic et nunc was therefore favoured, neglecting any possible future purposes.

From a sound related point of view, it’s the presence of the Bosco Ficuzza forest absorbing happenings from behind the village, its dominant position overlooking the valleys between Prizzi and Campofelice di Fitalia and the thereupon aperture (marvellous also in terms of visual landscape) – that allows a listening experience that is not hindered by obstacles of any kind, resounding even at considerable distances and making the site characteristic for the role that each sound item has within its acoustic development. In fact, besides the definition of each single envelope, from silence to silence, it is still possible to perceive the sound’s full morphogenesis, as this is an essential element of bio-based listening. Events like birdcall rehearsals are very special and very interesting, turning soloists of a major orchestra and playing alongside the wind, the cars in the background and the sound of the fronds, though this time from a distance (unlike for many other villages where this element was steadily around in close proximity). Each of these events to be perceived as original sound and reflected sound, while enriched by the insight and by the distance to the source.