Brian Slattery Photo
Beginning demolition at Church Street South.
A new study puts numbers to an allegation central to a lawsuit against owners of the crumbling Church Street South housing complex: that neglected damp, moldy conditions made it hard for most kids and adults there to breathe.
The report was written by Carrie Redlich, a Yale School of Medicine professor who has spent decades researching the effects of environment on health problems like asthma.
Redlich surveyed 268 adults and children who lived in Church Street South before unsafe conditions led government to start clearing out families from the 22-building, 301-unit complex across from Union Station so it can be demolished.
Redlich found that 89 percent of the children surveyed had respiratory problems, including 48 percent who either developed physician-diagnosed asthma or saw their condition worsen while living at Church Street South. And 94 percent of the women had respiratory conditions, including 37 percent with physician-diagnosed asthma.
“Remarkably high” rates, Redlich concluded. Even among an urban population already at risk for high asthma rates.
And she concluded that conditions at the complex likely contributed to the problems.
Aliyya Swaby Photo
Yomaly Rivera, one of the former tenants suing Northland.
Redlich’s revelations appear in a report filed Wednesday as an exhibit in Noble v. Northland Investment, a lawsuit pressed by former Church Street South tenants against complex owner Northland Investment Corp. of Massachusetts company.
The exhibit was entered into the record in conjunction with a filing by David Rosen, the New Haven civil rights attorney representing the tenants. Rosen filed a motion in Superior Court in Waterbury this week formally asking Judge Linda Lager to certify the complaint as a class action, meaning it would seek damages on behalf of all present and former Church Street South tenants, not just the five tenants named in the complaint: Personna Noble, Christina Foster, Yomaly Rivera, Luz DeJesus, and Rosa Rodriguez. Rosen filed a 42-page revelation-filled memorandum supporting the case for class action certification. (Click here to read the full memorandum.)
Northland has not yet responded to the Rosen complaint in court. It has filed responses in a similar suit filed by a former tenant, arguing that it didn’t technically own Church Street South, so it’s not liable for damages. (It created a subsidiary called Church Street New Haven LLC to buy the complex in 2008 for about $5 million.) Northland also argued that it is exempt from the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act because its leasing of “low-income residences is specifically authorized and regulated by the United States, acting through the Department of Housing and Urban Development.” HUD paid the rents on Church Street South through Section 8 rental subsidies.
Friday afternoon the company issued a statement accusing Rosen of “ignoring the facts, selectively choosing incomplete information.”
“Northland looks forward to the opportunity to address his inaccurate claims in court,” the company stated. “Any notion that Northland was undertaking demolition of Church Street South by neglect is simply unsupported by the facts and will be addressed in our response to the court.”
Everybody’s Problem
Scene of a May 2010 homicide investigation at Church Street South (left), frozen drainage pipes (top right), illegal dirt bike riding in a publicly-accessible courtyard (center right), and broken apartment furnace (bottom right).
The latest filing by Rosen argues that not just the five families, but all the Church Street South families constitute a “class” with a common interest. They are all “low-income families or individuals who signed identical leases, resided in the same complex, and have been or will soon be relocated as a result of pervasive conditions that affected all of the residents of Church Street South.” And “the defendants’ conduct affecting each class member arose from a common motivation, the desire of Northland Investment Corporation and its affiliated entities to demolish the complex and build upscale housing in its place.”
Millions of dollars could be at stake in Lager’s ruling if the plaintiffs prevail. They seek unspecified damages for “physical injuries, illness, and emotional distress caused by the conditions in Church Street South, by the destruction of their neighborhood and community, and by their dislocation from their apartments and relocation into hotel rooms, typically one room for a family”; for property loss caused by leaks and other “unlawful” conditions in their apartments, losses and costs suffered during relocation; and for attorneys’ fees.
The motion argues that Northland from the start wanted to demolish the complex in order to build a larger, more profitable mixed-income development. Then-Mayor John DeStefano suggested that demolition-rebuild plan when it bought the property. But politics stalled that plan. “I bought it to build something better there,” Northland board chair Larry Gottesdiener told the Independent in a previous interview. Church Street South remained a fully federally-subsidized low-income complex, with conditions worsening by the year. Only after legal aid attorneys brought dangerous conditions to light did the federal government insist the complex be evacuated and plans develop to demolish the complex once everyone’s out. The city and Northland are now seeking federal money to proceed with that larger mixed-income concept.
“Northland’s demolition-by-neglect allowed the company to escape its obligation to rent the complex to low-income families, and to clear the families out of the buildings and begin a process of redevelopment that it had failed to achieve by other means.” Rosen’s memo argues.
Rosen’s legal team submitted a report by an “expert engineer” named James Parry. Parry visited 22 apartments in 14 Church Street South buildings and reviewed “thousands” of photos, along with government inspection reports and documentation of roof inspections. He concluded that a “complex-wide failure” to prevent years-old leaks or to adequately repair them led to continued dampness, water damage, and mold. He reported finding “mold and mildew in every bathroom” and in most cabinets. He found rotting window sills and frames and continually damaged walls and ceilings, with “water running down the external walls and getting into window and door openings.”
Another expert cited, industrial hygienist Robert Klein, reported that “HUD identified over 2,300 deficiencies across 282 dwelling units, common building areas, and the complex office building.” (Click here to read his full report.) In other words, in the view of the plaintiffs, the problems affected everyone in the complex, not just the five families filing suit.
“Northland knew even before it bought the property that Church Street South badly needed repairs to its structural elements, including the building envelope, roofing, windows and window frames, plumbing, heating and ventilation systems, bathroom and kitchen fixtures,
electrical systems, means of egress, and exhausts,” the motion claims. (It makes a further claim that has been redacted form the public record.) Northland “never took the actions necessary” to meet legal health and safety standards, “recklessly” and deliberately allowing conditions to deteriorate and endanger tenants, Rosen’s motion argues.
In the statement issued Friday afternoon, Northland called such allegations “unfair” and “untrue.” The company specifically denied the neglect accusation.
The statement noted that Northland inherited well-known “construction and design deficiencies” at Church Street South that dated back decades: “Northland has continuously responded to tenant concerns, maintained the property, and made repairs and capital improvements. With the knowledge and consent of HUD and the City, the property was decommissioned beginning in 2015. Northland has relocated the Church Street South residents at its own expense, including spending millions of dollars for temporary housing, meals and related tenant expenses.”
Northland noted that its plan with the city is to include the same number of low-income apartments in the largest new complex.
“Remarkably High”
Carrie Redlich.
Professor Redlich submitted her report on asthma and other health problems at Church Street South as part of the new filings. Redlich directs the Yale Occupational and Environmental Medicine Program. She writes that her research and clinical practice have focused on “environmental and work-related asthma and airways disease.” For over 25 years she has regularly inspected people’s homes to see how the environments in them affect the occupants’ breathing.
She found a lot of environmentally related asthma and other respiratory problems in her Church Street South survey. (Click here to read Redlich’s report filed with the court this week.)
Physicians had diagnosed asthma in 48 percent of the 170 children she surveyed, conditions that started or worsened while they lived at Church Street South, she wrote. And once they left the complex, some 66 percent saw their conditions improve.
Redlich reported that 41 percent of the children had additional respiratory conditions, 47 percent had developed skin problems, and 45 percent, emotional distress.
Adults had trouble breathing, too: 37 percent of the 98 surveyed had physician-diagnosed asthma; 58 percent had other respiratory problems. All those with asthma developed the condition or saw it worsen while living in the complex, according to Redlich’s findings; 74 percent saw conditions improve once they moved out. The survey found 85 percent of the adults suffering “emotional distress,” 73 percent, depression.
Redlich noted that asthma rates can vary across populations, and other factors besides moldy apartments can cause breathing problems. She noted that New Haven public school students in general have higher than average asthma, with an average prevalence of 14.6 percent.
That’s still far lower than 37 percent, Redlich wrote. She concluded that the rates for both children and adults are “remarkably high.”
“The conditions present in the Church Street South apartments, including the pervasive water intrusion, dampness and mold,” Redlich concluded, “on a more probable than not basis, contributed to the markedly high prevalence of physician-reported asthma documented by Church Street South residents, and also likely to other respiratory and health problems.”
One day she might be called to testify to that conclusion in court.
But first, Judge Lager must decide whether five families’ — or hundreds of families’ — lives will be affected.
Previous coverage of Church Street South:
• Families Relocated After Ceiling Collapses
• Housing Disaster Spawns 4 Lawsuits
• 20 Last Families Urged To Move Out
• Church St. South Refugees Fight Back
• Church St. South Transfers 82 Section 8 Units
• Tenants Seek A Ticket Back Home
• City Teams With Northland To Rebuild
• Church Street South Tenants’ Tickets Have Arrived
• Church Street South Demolition Begins
• This Time, Harp Gets HUD Face Time
• Nightmare In 74B
• Surprise! Now HUD Flunks Church St. South
• Church St. South Tenants Get A Choice
• Home-For-Xmas? Not Happening
• Now It’s Christmas, Not Thanksgiving
• Pols Enlist In Church Street South Fight
• Raze? Preserve? Or Renew?
• Church Street South Has A Suitor
• Northland Faces Class-Action Lawsuit On Church Street South
• First Attempt To Help Tenants Shuts Down
• Few Details For Left-Behind Tenants
• HUD: Help’s Here. Details To Follow
• Mixed Signals For Church Street South Families
• Church St. South Families Displaced A 2nd Time — For Yale Family Weekend
• Church Street South Getting Cleared Out
• 200 Apartments Identified For Church Street South Families
• Northland Asks Housing Authority For Help
• Welcome Home
• Shoddy Repairs Raise Alarm — & Northland Offer
• Northland Gets Default Order — & A New Offer
• HUD, Pike Step In
• Northland Ordered To Fix Another 17 Roofs
• Church Street South Evacuees Crammed In Hotel
• Church Street South Endgame: Raze, Rebuild
• Harp Blasts Northland, HUD
• Flooding Plagues Once-Condemned Apartment
• Church Street South Hit With 30 New Orders
• Complaints Mount Against Church Street South
• City Cracks Down On Church Street South, Again
• Complex Flunks Fed Inspection, Rakes In Fed $$
• Welcome Home — To Frozen Pipes
• City Spotted Deadly Dangers; Feds Gave OK
• No One Called 911 | “Hero” Didn’t Hesitate
• “New” Church Street South Goes Nowhere Fast
• Church Street South Tenants Organize
I'd be interested to know if there's a comparable control group of children who similarly live next to a gigantic highway. Farnam Courts springs to mind.