Quarterly Yearnings : Group Sues Over What It Calls Shoddy Redevelopment Project

For eight years, the elderly residents of the Horton House have had this little problem with their closets. They can either hang up their clothes or they can close the closet doors, but they can’t do both. The closets are only 17 inches deep.

That was only one of the unique features of the building that the owner, San Diego Interfaith Housing Foundation, found unacceptable. In October, 1984, the nonprofit foundation filed suit against the architect and four contractors, claiming their work on the building was inexcusably shoddy.

Now, after more than four years of pretrail maneuvering and waiting for a courtroom, the case is scheduled to go to trial Monday before Superior Court Judge Ross Tharp.

Designed as Replacement Housing

The 14-story, 150-unit housing project at 333 G St. was designed for low-income, elderly and handicapped people. It was built as part of the city’s redevelopment effort in the crumbling Gaslamp Quarter, and was intended to provide replacement housing for elderly downtown residents who were about to be displaced by other redevelopment projects.

To date, the concept has worked well, according to Bob Carpenter, chairman of the board of the Interfaith Housing Foundation.

“It’s a great place despite the defects,” Carpenter said. “We have a stable tenancy, and the residents have developed a cultural base of their own. The quality of their life has been enriched.”

But the quality of the tenants’ lives would be enhanced even more if they had comfortable living quarters, Carpenter claims.

“In a number of units, the heating system has been unable to keep the rooms warm, even though San Diego is a mild climate,” he said. “Older people require warm rooms, and they are very susceptible to the cold.”

Other defects alleged in the lawsuit include a plumbing system that causes the kitchen sinks on the lower floors to overflow, inadequate water pressure in the sinks and showers, kitchen light switches located in other rooms, inadequate ventilation, and an emergency generator system that fails to operate the elevators and the emergency fire pump.

Difficult If Not Dangerous

Foundation members also allege that the builders’ apparent failure to stick to specific requirements has created a situation that is difficult, if not dangerous, for the elderly tenants.

For instance, the faucet handles are of a type that the elderly and handicapped have difficulty gripping, according to the suit. Also, the bathroom washbasins are not attached to the wall, as requested.

“As designed, they are loose from the wall, creating the danger that elderly residents who typically might use them for support will injure themselves,” said attorney Steven A. McKinley, who is representing the foundation.

McKinley said the foundation does not want monetary compensation, only corrections of the defects.

“But there hasn’t been any willingness on the part of the defendants to correct the problems,” he said.

McKinley said that one of the defenses used by some of the defendants is that the project was approved as is by the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development.

Good Enough for HUD ..

“They’re saying that if HUD approved it, it must not really be a problem,” he said. HUD officials were unavailable for comment Wednesday.

One of the primary defendants, the architecture firm of Tucker, Sadler & Associates, would rather go to trial than accede to the foundation’s demands, according to the firm’s attorney, Glen Rasmussen.

“I do understand Interfaith is displeased with the planning and construction,” he said, “but we believe the budget the architects were given mandated a number of cuts, and the place would not have been built if the cuts had not been made.”

“It is really a matter of budgeting, and the amenities they wanted could have been included in the first place,” Rasmussen said. “This is really a device for them to get what they couldn’t have in the first place.”

“That’s true that there are almost inevitably going to be budget reductions in a project like this,” said Interfaith board member Crosby Milne. “But you don’t eliminate basic elements. If it’s not corruption it’s at least a major moral issue, when someone’s trying to do something like build affordable housing for the elderly.”

Other defendants in the suit include Roel Construction Co. of North Dakota; Merle Strum & Associates Inc.; Lee Tracy Associates Inc. and A. O. Reed & Co. Inc.