Judge frees drawings for Family Court plan

The bankruptcy ruling was lauded, but a builder vowed the fight was not over.

August 29, 2010|By Mark Fazlollah and Joseph Tanfani, Inquirer Staff Writers

In a ruling applauded by advocates of a new Family Court building in Center City, a federal bankruptcy judge found Friday that $6 million in architectural drawings were no longer part of a bankruptcy proceeding filed by developer Donald B. Pulver's firm.

The ruling by Judge Eric L. Frank increased the chances that the state would be able to start construction on the facility at 15th and Arch Streets before Gov. Rendell leaves office in January.

While the legislature has already appropriated $200 million for the project, Rendell must release the funding once he is satisfied that the project has been properly bid.

But Pulver's spokesman said the developer's fight in bankruptcy court was far from over.

Pulver filed for bankruptcy, hoping to maintain his developer's role and the architectural drawings, after his plan to develop the Family Court facility with lawyer Jeffrey B. Rotwitt was terminated by Pennsylvania Chief Justice Ronald D. Castille, who had been personally overseeing the project.

Before becoming Pulver's codeveloper, Rotwitt had worked for Castille to find possible sites for the courthouse and help oversee the project.

Castille said he had nixed the Pulver-Rotwitt deal after he learned of Rotwitt's role as codeveloper in The Inquirer - a role, Castille said, that put Rotwitt on both sides of the deal.

Rotwitt has denied any conflict, saying he became Pulver's codeveloper only after his work for the courts was over. He has also said everyone involved with the project, including Castille, knew of his role as codeveloper.

Pulver filed for bankruptcy in hopes the maneuver would prevent the Philadelphia Parking Authority, which owns the site at 15th and Arch, from revoking his development rights.

Pulver's lawyers argued in bankruptcy court that the architectural drawings belong to Northwest 15th Street Associates, his tiny Conshohocken development firm, not the state, because the firm had procured them with money paid by the courts. Had the drawings remained an asset in the bankruptcy, the procurement of new drawings could have caused delays and cost overruns.

Advocates of the new facility feared the project would have died if the architectural plans had not been released.

"This is the most critical step in all the legal proceedings," said lawyer Carol Tracy, director of the Women's Law Project and a longtime advocate for the new court.

1 | 2 | Next »
|
|
|
|
|