I'm going to object. We just heard closing argument. Let's just move on with the case.
This is a repeat of what happened last time and why my client is so reciferously objecting.
So David Orvanides has a running objection to every ruling that's against him. We'll all stipulate that he's made that objection.
And let's move on, because the reality is that asking the witness from memory, and it's irrelevant in any event, because the written record shows an application and a permit.
If they don't match up as a matter of law, then he's made his case. If they do match up, which is obvious from the record and the evidence in the record, then he doesn't have a case.
But remembering how many times she spoke to different people is irrelevant. Absolutely irrelevant and designed, I would say, to confuse and obfuscate. And then to say my client has been dishonest with the application. There's going to be issues with Mr. Paquetto on that. So I think that we should just close the record, have the argument, and move forward.
Well, that objection for the purpose of the court reporter, that objection was raised by Mr. Primavera, and that objection is sustained.
All right.
I'm sorry.
So wait, I don't even know what that objection was.
It means your time has run out, and we're going to go through some redirect, and then we're going to move on so that we can meet the time established by the board.
In good faith, we all have an obligation to meet the time established.
is now acting as if he's the zoning board. I understand that. Mr. Orfinites, I think you need
to stop and I think you need to follow the chair's rules. Mr. Orfinites, no one's trying
to gag you or prevent you from asking questions, but even in my non-legal mind, I'm not an attorney,
it seems like you've been asking the same questions repeatedly. No, I've actually moved
through all a series of different questions the problem is is that i keep getting slightly
different answers and that makes my job extremely difficult as i'm sure you can maybe it's no
disrespect maybe you're not getting the answer you want i think that's what i mean it's not trying to
get the answer i'm hearing on one side there's no exchange of of communications there's not an
amendment there is an amendment where's the amendment there's it's i mean i'm sorry it's
It's it's I am trying to find out what happened here again.
And you can say and which I'm entitled to do through the questions and securing testimony.
And I'm not asking the same questions. It's just that I keep getting different answers.
Well, then you're asking the same questions. If you're getting different answers, it means you're asking the same questions.
No, I'm getting this different answers in the same. I ask one question and I get different answers from the same question again.
And I can't be more specific. I'm trying, you know, I'm being very precise in what I'm saying. I learned my lesson from the first one, not to afford open ended questions, but even in my pointed questions, was there an amendment filed? It was, yes, there was, but it's not, it's, there's not a separate application. And I said, then I follow up and say, there's not a separate application. Yes, there is a separate application. I mean, we can have the reporter read it back.
doesn't matter it does matter it's extremely relevant part of the it's what
if i may if i may interject on behalf of sam meyer steel we would like an opportunity
mr could please identify yourself uh joseph cattuzzi on behalf of sam meyer steel uh we
would briefly like an opportunity to examine this witness we've been afforded no opportunity to
present our case and we'll be directing to the point uh chairman mr cattuzzi this is sharon
Ms. Saleta, as we announced at the beginning of the hearing, you will be permitted to question the witness once Mr. Orfanides has finished.
Okay, thank you, Ms. Saleta.
Once his time has run out.
understood thank you uh it's my understanding that the board's already ruled on that the time
Understood. Thank you.
It's my understanding that the board's already ruled on that.
is up yeah and that's mr reuter speaking yeah i'm sorry keep no worries keep doing that so um
okay mr katuzzi thank you thank you chairman so i'm going to share my screen uh bear with
me just a second here i think mr orfiniti's screen okay it's down now okay okay is my
screen being shared? Not yet. Okay, hold on. All right, Mr. Hull, again, my name is Joseph
Cattuzzi. I represent a neighboring property owner to One Red Line Road, Sandmeyer Steel
Company. So thank you for your time. Thank you for being here today. I have a few questions
for you. Mr. Orfanides was going through the process that you went through and some communications
you had with the applicant. I'd like to show you an email dated April 23rd, 2020 from the
applicant's counsel to a Kristen Bay with the philadelphia.gov address. And there's really
one part of this email I just want to show you and see if you have a reaction and recollection.
The applicant's counsel is talking about the proposed uses and then says, where it's highlighted here, I think the examiner looked at the overlay and saw that the code suggests that accessory uses, which would otherwise be prohibited as principal uses, should be prohibited and require ZBA approval.
Ms. DeHal, does that, hearing that, does that ring a bell or refresh your recollection at all?
Yeah, this is the first time I have asked the question, but I didn't know that that is the accessory detail sale and the accessory structure at that time.
And then after Civic Design, I issued the permit. I came to know that this is not the main use.
This is just like for the accessory use for the main use. That's why I have added the information as for the Civic Design notification.
Is it is it fair to say, Mr. Hall, that your your initial impression when you looked at the materials was that this required would require a zoning board approval?
Yes. OK. And can you walk me through why you believe that?
Because I saw the definition of like, can I give you the core section?
Sure. That'd be great. And I may bring it up here, too, but you can give it to me, Mr. Hall.
i didn't mean to interrupt you mr hall what was the code it's okay it's okay thank you
okay and then did you express when you when you form the belief that it needed zoning board
approval uh did you communicate that to to anyone i communicated with my applicant i discuss about
this project and then she told me that this is not the retail sale this is not the fueling gas
station this is just like an accessory use and i suggested to the applicant if it is an accessory
use they don't have to put apply for the zoning application this is just like understood and they
have the core section two core sections it allows to have the accessory retail sale and the accessory
repair for only for the main use and then as for as base of the definition and as for the cb design
results the permit and mr hall prior to this application how long have you been a plan examiner
10 11 years about 12 10 to 12 years yes 12 years about how many plans would you say you've reviewed
in your decades worth of experience as a plan examiner? So many. I hear you. So quite a few
plans, right? Right. And it's fair to say your instincts then having reviewed so many plans,
you're pretty familiar with the zoning code. Yes, yes. And did you, when you formed your initial
belief, that was based on your over decades of experience, right? When you determined it needed
zoning board. You've been doing this for so long, it seems pretty simple to you, right? Yes. Okay.
So I'll put up on the screen an example. This is, we agree that the property is zoned I-2 and in the
far northeast overlay district. Yeah, just an objection. When you say it may need zoning board
approval, what use are we talking about? I think she's been talking about what we're described as
either accessory fueling or retail i just want to make sure since this is an area of examination by
examination by Mr. Cattuzzi, that he explains what his real issue is. We're not talking about
that he explains what his
the million plus square feet of warehouse. You're talking about a de minimis amount of either
truck washing or truck fueling solely for UPS trucks, and then a business office,
which is a de minimis size. I think she said after CDR, and I hope the stenographer understood
what she said, she saw additional supplemental information through a very voluminous CDR
process. And she realized, oh, this isn't a Sunoco gas station. This is strictly for the trucks. So
let's be particular about what you're examining. I'm going to object to that. That's not even an
objection. It's not based on relevancy. My question was very clear. We looked at an email
and we continued. So that's not an objection to relevancy. It's not a proper objection.
But we'll continue. It's confusing. What are you referring to?
Look, I have limited time.
I'm trying to be as direct as possible.
And those types of interruptions and objections are not proper and delay this.
All right.
Maybe I don't understand.
But are you talking about the fueling or the car wash?
What are you talking about so I can understand?
It's not clear to me from your question.
This is a million square foot operation.
What are you talking about so we know what she's answering?
Could you be more specific, Mr. Cattuzzi?
um well so so mr hall we'll go through now we we agree um because i want to probe your
your initial assessment back in i guess that email was dated april all right uh we'll pull
it back up up there with me april of 2020 it was
yeah so april 2020 i apologize let me pull this back up
all right so april of 2020 that's the time frame when you and at that point when you
made the determination that zoning board approval was required were you looking at the zone what
for what it's only required for what please carl please what one minute the sonographer can't
did you yeah mr cathutia you can be more specific to that question that would be helpful
Sure. So, Mr. Hall, I'm going to put up a picture of a plan that I think we've all agreed shows the types of uses. And I've highlighted some things here. Do you remember seeing this general plan for this application?
can you see on my screen yes all right so this is exhibit five in sandmeyer steel zoning
zoning exhibit package but mr hall i'm going to go over a few uses that are shown and then i'm
going to ask you some questions about them okay so do you remember seeing this uh proposed
warehouse that's over a million square feet yes okay and then uh oh
and then do you remember seeing a portion of that million square foot warehouse is titled
proposed accessory vehicle service and maintenance and it's nearly 20,000 square feet
do you remember seeing that vehicle service and maintenance is this one of the uses that you
thought needed zoning board approval no it's not i said the accessory is not
accessory we don't they don't have to go to the zoning board they don't need to i asked like maybe
it is a main use is the retail sale and the auto repair shop applicant told me this is not the main
use if it is the accessory use service then they don't have to go okay but just trying to get a
better sense of um what exactly made you you know formed your belief what exactly was it in the plans
and materials that you thought they needed zoning board approval?
Because for my safety point of view, I have asked if they have the retail or not.
They say no, no retail, no auto repair shop.
I want to make sure whether I'll review the good for me.
That's why I asked them.
And they explained to me this is not the main auto repair shop.
This is not the main gas station.
This is for only accessory use for the main use.
Okay. So just a few uses on the plan. I'm going to see if you remember them. You have the vehicle service and maintenance portion of the building. We have vehicle fuel storage or proposed accessory fuel storage and proposed vehicle wash station. Do you remember these components on the plan, the components of the use?
Yes, yes.
Now we'll go back to the zoning code section.
We all agree that it's zoned in the far northeast overlay district?
Okay. And do you remember seeing this code provision? This is, I represent to you, it's from the section about use regulations in the Far Northeast Overlay, and it says commercial vehicle repair and maintenance, vehicle fuel stations, etc., are prohibited within all lots zoned I-1, I-2, right?
And do you remember seeing this?
this is not the main use that's okay but but is it fair to say that um well how about this
yes and answered she says because it's not a main use or open to the public it's permitted
if you don't like the answer object to it and move on the objection is sustained it's been
asked several times, Mr. Kattusi, by yourself and Mr. Orfanides. Sure. Mr. Hall, is it your
position now, this is the definition, I'm just putting up the screen of how commercial vehicle
repair and maintenance uses are defined. Is it your position that if the applicant calls a use
accessory, then it can repair, install, maintain the mechanical components and bodies of large
trucks on property, even if it's explicitly prohibited, that the definition accessory
somehow allows, otherwise allows, which was otherwise prohibited? That doesn't fall under
that category because they are not doing the repair. The main use is the transportation center
and that is accessory for the repair for the cross-transposition center, not for the repair
for other stops. That's why it doesn't comply with that section, but this is understood. This
is only for the retail and the auto repairs of like personal vehicle repair and maintenance
only for the main use that this is not for the repair for other stops that's why like
we don't have to see that definition i guess okay but the so how about the fueling facilities
because remember we went over the the fueling storage center that that's shown on the plan
and they have they talk about fueling uses i would say objection asked and answered
mr hall please mr hall please respond so mr hall remember we talked about the the fueling uh
facilities and fueling features on the plan now the far northeast overlay district prohibits
commercial vehicle repair and maintenance uses i understand we we maybe disagree about whether or
not this means you can do it if it's accessory. But it does say here that truck stops, and this
was the portion of the plan that was in place when you reviewed it, it says truck stops and
fueling facilities are included in this definition. So why didn't the application get a refusal if
they're putting fueling facilities on the... Excuse me? Because they have to go to the
zoning board if the main use was like auto repair and the gas station that's not the main use main
use is the transportation center truck transportation center and they don't have to go to the zoning
board because this is not the main use this is the accessory use gas system for the truck
transportation center not for the other people and repair just like they have the um they have
fix the like they have to fix a small thing and then they don't have to go outside that's why
that that is only for the accessory for the menus okay and mr harvey they don't have to go to the
zoning board because it doesn't another point i think he's just trying to argue with mr primavera
something's wrong with your microphone we can't hear you all right i think again i think this
accessory uses i don't see what what the objection is here it i couldn't pull in with my a truck
i'm not i'm not affiliated with ups or any other it's accessory use specific to the ups um operation
and mr chairman de chico i think this may help us uh you know address that point uh and mr hall
when you were reviewing the the application or reviewing the accessories did you consider that
the zoning code says accessory uses and structures are subject to the same regulations that apply to
principal uses and structures it's not access to you they don't have to apply for the zoning
application if it is the accessory use but in this case because they went to the zoning board that's
how i put that language as for the zoning board suggestion actually this is the like menus like
accessory use and accessory structure, they don't have to apply with the zoning application.
Okay, but did you consider this this specific section that says accessory uses?
Yes, I'm asking her if she considered it.
No, I'm asking her if she considered it.
She said she considered it.
I think she did.
I'm sorry.
I'm sorry.
Everybody slow down.
Carl, something is wrong with your microphone.
All it is is a lot of static, and we can't keep talking over each other, folks.
Thank you, Chair.
Is that better?
Mr. Primavera, it might be a good idea to go out and come back in,
and we'll immediately promote you to see if that can resolve your audio issue.
Let's give Mr. Primavera a couple minutes to get.
While we're doing that, can we just take like a minute break?
Take five minutes.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.