IBJNews

Developer settles suit with Hudson condo residents

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

The homeowners' association for a downtown Indianapolis condominium complex that claimed the building’s construction was faulty has settled its lawsuit with the developer.

Terms of the settlement, reached Wednesday, are confidential.

The Hudson Condominium Association Inc. filed the suit in Marion Superior Court in March against The Hudson Condominiums LLC, an entity established by Carmel-based Kosene & Kosene Residential Inc. to develop the project. The complaint also named builder Constructa Inc.

“The association is pleased to have resolved all pending litigation,” said attorney Joseph Chapelle, who represented the association, in a written statement. “The association is moving forward with taking care of the building and any necessary repairs are under way now.”

Kosene began construction on the 70-unit Hudson building at 355 E. Ohio St. in 2004 and finished in 2006. Units in the Hudson range from 901 square feet to 2,804 square feet, and originally sold for $176,350 to $721,517.

The complaint alleged that Hudson residents in 2011 began noticing cracks in the first-floor walls and ceiling. They also noticed a slope in the floor.

An engineering firm hired by the homeowners' association to examine the building concluded that improperly installed truss hangers had slipped, causing the floor trusses to move.

Engineers also determined that improperly placed backfill caused the floor of the basement garage to shift, according to the suit.

The homeowners' association sued Kosene for breach of implied warranty and negligence, and wanted the developer to pay to repair the building.

“We’re happy that we worked together with the association and the insurance company to reach a satisfactory settlement,” David Kosene, president of Kosene & Kosene, told IBJ.

The homeowners' association also filed a similar complaint against its insurer, The Travelers Indemnity Company of America.

Travelers had notified the association that it was denying coverage for the damage. But the association claims that an insurance policy it had with the company that ran through June 2011 should cover the damage.

That suit was dismissed from federal court in Indianapolis in late August.

The Hudson is one of three luxury condo projects, including the Maxwell and Packard, that Kosene has developed downtown and named after classic cars.

Repairs also continue at the Packard at 450 E. Ohio St. after its homeowners' association filed a similar lawsuit against Kosene & Kosene in June. The suit is pending in Marion Superior Court.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Kosene at Fault
    The Packard continues to find code violations & poor workmanship every day. Even the outdoor lights in the courtyard are out of code & a fire danger! NEVER trust a Kosene!
  • wrong name
    Guess they should have called the Hudson, the Pinto

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. First, the Athenaeum is going to have to get past the hurdle with the Lockerbie residents and the agreement that the parcel would be residential. Second, and in my opinion, this prime piece of property should include parking, PLUS, a black box theater(s), some market rate and affordable artist housing and a plan to renovate and reconfigure the second story theater. I would negotiate to add the DeHaan property surface parking lot into the development mix, place a one story surface parking garage on the DeHaan lot on the street level (for the Dehaan tenants use during the daytime) and add a second story to the garage that would become an addition to the current second story theater and then change the direction of the theater by moving the stage across the alley and on top of the DeHaan lot parking. You can add all the stage elements that are currently missing from the Athenaeum stage to make it more attractive for use by Ballet, Opera and traveling productions. Plus, the theater changes would probably help solve some of the soundproofing issues. Alas,it does not seem to be a part of the strategic plan to conduct a study to determine best use of the property. Seems like the current plan is a quick and easy move that ignores the property best use/potential and any strategic property planning for the effect on future generations.

  2. I recall that MSA's pilings are still in the ground and hard to remove. It’s not likely any proposal will include significant underground construction/parking because of this. Start adding 2 floors of retail, 8 floors of parking and 5-10 floors of possible hotel, and/or 10-20 floors of residential, and you are at 30 floors already with possible expansion of all the uses. But then again I could be wrong.

  3. Accoriding to their website there is no deadline to the Do Not Call list. What is this article referring to??

  4. On what planet are they entitled to this largesse from the stockholders? These people make multi-million dollar salaries: Pay for your own personal travel.

  5. It matters because they're already paid enormously fat salaries: Pay for your own personal travel. Being "taxed on it" isn't a valid excuse--so what? They're still being gifted a raft of luxury perks from somebody else's money on top of an enormous, lavish salary.

ADVERTISEMENT