4

6

Two of the sites, Black Rock and Connecticut Avenue, were developed with three-storey, two-room deep blocks of flats grouped around courtyards reminiscent of the college quadrangles that had recently been built at many American universities. The site plans took advantage of existing and newly planted shade trees to make both projects oases in their neighbourhoods. The three flat plans used were minimal, but the detailing inside and out was comforting in the assurance and skill with which basic materials and formal devices were manipulated.

The houses built on the other sites used a restrained neo-Georgian vocabulary similar to that of the blocks of flats, but with mixed success. At Grasmere the proportions are less comfortable, and the houses clash with wood-frame houses already on the site. Moreover, the attempt at Grasmere to shape a space by echelonning the volumes along Roanoke Avenue works better in plan than reality, where the spatial nature of the street between the freestanding suburban houses makes the progression away from the street line seem ragged and jarring.

Seaside Village is the most successful of the tracts developed with houses, despite the fact that it was built for the least skilled workers to live in and was purposely planned with re-

7

duced standards intended to keep the middle-class from annexing the conveniently located housing after the war (the intentions didn't work). Though small and spartan – they were built with no source of heat except for the kitchen stoves – the houses were lovingly designed. A delay in the schedule allowed Sturgis and his associate on this project, Andrew H Hepburn of the Boston firm Hepburn and Parker, extra time to study the houses in model, with the result that 'the plan well illustrates the possibilities and advantages of a non-rectangular development in economising ground space and street construction and equipment with due regard to convenience of movement and the maximum benefit from sunlight and air, together with the housing of a population as large as such a tract can hold without congestion.'³

The rows of single-family houses at Seaside Village are arranged in groups designed according to street layout and other conditions. The carefully studied massing of the low houses, their architectural treatment, and their placement along the picturesque streets recall an old New England village, where outbuildings and extensions have been added over time to the original houses. But the irregularities in the plan are not arbitrary. Some were caused, as at Black Rock, by the placement of

5

8

existing trees. Other features, such as the several courts, stem from a desire to have as few houses as possible front on South Avenue, a road constantly used by heavy trucks. The resulting green courts serve as playgrounds for the children.

The projects influenced later low-income housing in Fairfield County, most notably at Rippowam Village in Stamford (destroyed in the early 1960s by the construction of the New England Thruway), where the city hired Hepburn and Shurtleff to design group houses arranged around courtyards.⁴

### Notes

1. Sylvester Baxter, 'The Government Housing at Bridgeport, Connecticut', *Architectural Record* 45, February 1919, pp 123–141.

2. 'The Workingman and His House', *Architectural Record* 44, October 1918, pp 302–325.

3. Baxter, *op cit*, p 138.

4. 'Rippowam Village Housing Development', *Architecture* 50, September 1924, plates 132–135.

4. Seaside Village, plot plan, 1918

5. R Clipston Sturgis, Hepburn and Shurtleff, Seaside Village, typical houses

6. Seaside Village, typical house group, 1918

7. Seaside Village, semi-detached group houses, 1918

8. Seaside Village, cul-de-sac off Sims Street (ph: JMM)

64

LAFAYETTE PLAZA
Bridgeport, Connecticut

CONSULTING ARCHITECT AND PLANNER:
Lathrop Douglass, FAIA

Lafayette Plaza, which is located in Bridgeport, Connecticut (population 156,000), was developed by private enterprise. The 730,000 square feet of retail space is anchored by Gimbel's and Sears. Gimbel's, which was built at a subsequent stage, is located north of State Street and is connected to the project by a pedestrian bridge. The architects for Gimbel's are Abbott Merkt & Company. The project includes a seven-story office building. The city built a 3,000-car seven-level garage, which connects directly to both levels of the mall and to roof parking over the stores. The parking charge is nominal.

Although this project sparked a large amount of CBD redevelopment, the center itself had difficulty in securing full occupancy. The reason for this, according to the architect, Lathrop Douglass, FAIA, is that the plaza is three blocks away from the city's main retail center and is isolated. Also, because of the convenient connection between the roof level and the second level, the first level was more difficult to lease. The new master plan prepared by Gruen Associates calls for a connection between the roof level and the second level, the first level was more covered mall.

Another factor which anticipates improved economics of Lafayette Plaza is the building of the connector route between the Connecticut Thruway and the Wilbur Cross Parkway, which is located on the periphery of Bridgeport. This allows Lafayette Plaza to compete with a large suburban mall by shortening travel time to the plaza.

The developer is Hammerson, Fusco & Amatruda Corporation.

ABOVE, LEFT: Overall view. (1)

Sears, Roebuck & Co.; (2)

two-level stores; (3) Gimbel's; (4)

offices; (5) seven-level parking;

(6) hotel; (7) T.B.A. ABOVE:

Entrance. (Photographer: George Szeberenyi.)

Section.

239