Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013-02-05City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 1 of 29 February 5, 2013 . ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS CITY OF LIVONIA MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING HELD FEBRUARY 5, 2013 A Regular! Meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals of the City of Livonia was held in the Gallery of the Livonia City Hall on Tuesday, February 5, 2013. MEMBERS PRESENT: Matthew Henzi, Chairman Craig Pastor, Vice Chairman Sam Caramagno, Secretary Edward E. Duggan, Jr. Elizabeth H. McCue Kathleen Mcintyre Robert E. Sills MEMBERS ABSENT: OTHERS PRESENT: Michael Fisher, Assistant City Attorney Scott Kearfott, City Inspector Bonnie Murphy, Court Reporter The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. Chairman Henzi then explained the Rules of Procedure to those interested parties. Each petitioner must give their name and address and declare hardship for appeal. Appeals of the Zoning Board's decisions are made to the Wayne County Circuit Court. The Chairman advised the audience that appeals can be filed within 21 days of the date tonight's minutes are approved. The decision of the Zoning Board shall become final within five (5) calendar days following the hearing and the applicant shall be mailed a copy of the decision. There are four decisions the Board can make: to deny, to grant, to grant as modified by the Board, or to table for further information. Each petitioner may ask to be heard by a full seven (7) member Board. Seven (7) members were present this evening. The Secretary then read the Agenda and Legal Notice to each appeal, and each petitioner indicated their presence. Appeals came up for hearing after due legal notice was given to all interested parties within 300 feet, petitioners and City Departments. There were twelve (12) persons present in the audience. (7:00) City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 2 of 29 February 5, 2013 APPEAL CASE NO. 2013-01-01: Patricia and Alan Pope, 11201 Fairfield, Livonia, Ml 48150, seeking to erect a covered front porch resulting in deficient front yard setback. Front Yard Setback Required: 25ft. Proposed: 22ft. Deficient: 3 ft. Henzi: Mr. Kearfott, anything to add to this case? Kearfott: Not at this time, Mr. Chair. Henzi: Any questions for Mr. Kearfott? Hearing none, will the Petitioner please come to the podium. Good evening. Petitioner: My name is Patricia Pope, and I live at 11201 Fairfield. Henzi: Mrs. Pope, tell us why you want to construct the overhead covered porch? Petitioner: Well, primarily because it has to do with the weather, we have bad knees which I did bring my first surgical appointment paper with me, I have to get a double knee replacement. And we did put a railing up but it would be better if we had a covered porch to protect the surface from any hazardous conditions. Henzi: Did you contract with a builder? Petitioner: Yes, we did. Henzi: And there are some plans in our packet, were those prepared by your builder? Petitioner: Yes. Henzi: Is the goal to match the shingles and overall architecture that exists already? Petitioner: Yes. He's doing the entire roof at the same time he puts the cover on. Henzi: Any questions for Mrs. Pope? Pastor: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Pastor. Pastor: Do you have any plans of enclosing this in the future? Petitioner: Absolutely none. Henzi: Anything else? Hearing none, is there anyone in the audience who wants to City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 3 of 29 February 5, 2013 speak for or against this project? If so, come on up. Seeing none, are there any letters on this case? Caramagno: Sure are. Casandra Sobczak, 11301 Brookfield, writes an approval (letter read). We have Reverend William Tindall, 11441 Hubbard, approval (letter read). Approval from Roseanne Deirmen, 11313 Fairfield (letter read). An approval from Karen Dishman, 11307 Fairfield, (letter read). Paul Mancina, 11101 Fairfield, approval, (letter read). William Nitz, 11320 Brookfield, approval (letter read). And we have an approval from Kimberly Peters at 11022 Fairfield, (letter read). Henzi: Mrs. Pope, is there anything you'd like to say in closing? Petitioner: No. Sills: Mr. Chairman. Henzi: Mr. Sills. Sills: May I address the Petitioner? Henzi: Sure. Sills: How long have you resided in this home? Petitioner: Oh, about since '87. Sills: Is there some reason you haven't put a roof on it until now? Petitioner: My knees started acting up probably about five years ago and like I said we just put a railing up and I noticed in order to get to the railing, you have to cross an uncovered area of the porch. And I do have to have both knees replaced, one will be in May, the other will be in the fall. Sills: I don't have any objection to your request, I just wondered why you haven't done it sooner. Petitioner: Money. Sills: Thank you. Henzi: Thank you. I'll close the public portion of the case and begin the Board's comments with Mrs. McCue. McCue: I will totally support this, I agree, you've got so many neighbors surrounding you that have the covered porch and to me the practical difficulty with the weather, especially the way it's been in the past several weeks, it makes sense to me so I will be in support. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 4 of 29 February 5, 2013 Henzi: Mr. Duggan. Duggan: I, too, will be in support. I know driving around your neighborhood there were a number of homes that had similar plans. I think there even was one that was six houses down from you that also has a similar set up as it is now. So I think you absolutely need it and I will be in support. Henzi: Mr. Pastor. Pastor: Yes, I'll also be in support. Henzi: Mr. Caramagno. Caramagno: I think you made a good case here and the variance is minor, I've got no objection. Henzi: Mrs. Mcintyre. Mcintyre: The variance is minor and all the letters are in support which suggests to me that your neighbors know that however you do this will be nicely done so I will be in support. Henzi: Mr. Sills. Sills: I'm 100 percent in support, I'm only surprised you didn't start it sooner. Henzi: I, too, will support the request for all the reasons stated by the other Board members. I'd suggest a couple of conditions, that it be built according to the plans with materials to match the existing home and that it not be enclosed, so the floor is open for a motion. Pastor: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Pastor. Upon Motion by Pastor, supported by Sills, it was: RESOLVED, APPEAL CASE NO. 2013-01-01: An appeal has been made to the Zoning Board of Appeals by Patricia and Alan Pope, 11201 Fairfield, Livonia, Ml, 48150, seeking to erect a covered front porch resulting in deficient front yard setback. Front Yard Setback Required: 25ft. Proposed: 22ft. Deficient 3 ft. The property is located on the west side of Fairfield (11201), between Orangelawn and Plymouth, Lot No. 134-02-1392-000, R-1 Zoning District, be granted for the following reasons and findings of fact: City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 5 of 29 February 5, 2013 1. The uniqueness requirement is met because this is not uncommon with other homes in the subdivision. 2. Denial of the variance would have severe consequences for the Petitioner because of impending surgery and this would create a safe haven for entrance and exit to the home. 3. The variance is fair in light of its effect on neighboring properties and in the spirit of the Zoning Ordinance because of the overwhelming support and approval from neighbors. 4. The Board received seven (7) letters of approval and no (0) objection letters from neighboring property owners. 5. The property is classified as "Low Density Residential" in the Master Plan and the proposed variance is not inconsistent with that classification. FURTHER, This variance IS granted with the following conditions: 1. That it be built as presented to the Board. 2. That the porch not be enclosed. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Pastor, Sills, McCue, Mcintyre, Duggan, Caramagno, Henzi NAYS: ABSENT: City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 6 of 29 February 5, 2013 (7:15) APPEAL CASE NO. 2013-02-02: Yaroch Properties, 16013 Middlebelt, Livonia, Ml 48154, seeking to construct an addition to a nonconforming office bulding resulting in deficient front yard setback and deficient number of parking spaces. Front Yard Setback Parking Spaces Required: 40ft. Required: 20 Proposed: 24ft. Proposed: 16 Deficient: 16 ft. Deficient: 4 Mcintyre: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mrs. Mcintyre. Mcintyre: I'd like to recuse myself from this case. Henzi: Okay. Mr. Kearfott, do you have anything to add to this case? Kearfott: Not at this time. Henzi: Any questions for Mr. Kearfott? Hearing none, will the Petitioner please come forward. Representative: Good evening, Board. My name is Jon Holowicki, 19931 Farmington Road, Livonia. I'm an architect representing Mrs. Yaroch. First off, let me describe the nature of her business, The Home Instead, and what happens is people come to her business, she's been there ten and a half years, they come to her business, the caretakers. They come in, check in, get their assignment for the day and leave. So there's no care at this facility, it's just people come, get their assignments and go. Right now there's a lot of traffic, parking on the street, which would be eliminated by increasing the parking. This is side yard. We recently went to the Planning Commission, meeting the setbacks, and meeting the parking requirements. It was Scott and Mark at that first meeting that said go back to the Zoning Board, instead of pushing the building in line because it's a nonconforming existing structure, it's nonforming in the first place and we had to go for a variance anyway. So they suggested we push it up to the front and be in line and the structure is back 6 feet from the existing house. And they also suggested that we take the parking lot and reduce it from 20 to 16, eliminating the 4 on the extreme west side to give more landscaping and decrease the curb surface for water drainage. We complied with all the Planning Commission's recommendations and we drew the plans and went to City Council and everybody was in agreement and the last hurdle was coming here before you folks. It was kind of their idea. Henzi: I don't understand the first part when you talked about you went to Planning Commission and they asked you to move it forward, are you talking about the addition, what does that have to do with the parking spots? Representative: They were two separate issues. The setback is one issue, the parking is another one. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 7 of 29 February 5, 2013 Henzi: Your claim is had my original plan would have complied, I wouldn't need a variance by your Board? Petitioner: Well, again, because it's nonconforming in the first place, they said no matter what you did, you're coming here anyway. It was their recommendation to push this back towards Middlebelt Road in line with the other structures and eliminate the push towards the neighbors. I believe the front yard setback is -well, the side yard is 25, I forget what the front yard is. It was their recommendation to line it up. So that's where we are today. Henzi: Any questions for Mr. Holowicki? McCue: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mrs. McCue. McCue: How many parking spots do you have right now? Representative: Six total. McCue: So you have six total spots right now and you're moving to sixteen, is that correct? Representative: Yes. McCue: So based on the size the requirement is twenty? Representative: The requirement is twenty and our original plan had twenty. McCue: Thank you. Henzi: Have you had any conversations with any neighbors? Representative: No, I have not. Henzi: You'll hear letters that are read which complain about a lack of parking. Representative: Right now with the six spots the caregivers are parking in the street, so there's a need for more parking and we're adding ten more. Henzi: Can you tell us a little bit about the business and why sixteen parking spaces is enough? Representative: Do you want to address that? Petitioner: Is it all right if I address that? Henzi: Sure, just tell us your name and address. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 8 of 29 February 5, 2013 Petitioner: Glenna Yaroch, 18867 Canterbury, Livonia, I'm the owner. The current situation is that when my administrative staff comes which is typically around 8:00, I say around because they're in and out, there's field staff, I add nurses to that that aren't in the building that much, when they're in the building. If we have a training class with the caregivers, there's generally four caregivers in a training class. So in the perfect storm if everybody was there at the exact same time, then we would have overflow and that's when we run into a situation. So the building is for purposes of offices because we sit now three in a tiny little room together right now so everyone will have their own individual offices, we do all of our billing and scheduling. Jon actually is slightly wrong on that. The caregivers don't come to the building to get their assignments, it's all done by phone, and deposits, payroll, it's all done by direct deposit. So if they do stop in, then they're just stopping in for a specific reason. So the only time there's a real major issue with parking is if everybody is in the building at the exact same time and we have a training class going on. So in that situation, you know, we would typically need 10 to 12 spots depending on if the part-time staff was staying or going back out in the field. Henzi: Then going forward are you saying the maximum need is 12 spots? Petitioner: Yes. Henzi: Anything else? Petitioner: We do all the care in the home, we don't - the seniors don't come to us at all, we care for them in their own home. Henzi: So by constructing the addition, you're not bringing in additional staff, your parking needs will remain the same? Petitioner: Our issues right now with my building are oxygen. I have three administrative staff for every little tiny 8 by 8 office and they're all on the phones and they can't hear. So by expanding, we're going to have individual offices for all the office staff and then have our training room which is larger because we work with a hospital bed, bedside commode, a Hoyer lift, wheelchairs, walkers, we work with our caregivers in doing a lot of one on one training and we use a lot of equipment to show them how to use that properly. Henzi: Okay, thank you. Any other questions for the Petitioner or her representative? Caramagno: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Caramagno. Caramagno: What about the retention pond over here along what is it, Puritan Avenue? Petitioner: Yes. Representative: Apparently the builder has been to the Engineering and we went and saw Mark last week and had him look at the site because this retention pond that was City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 9 of 29 February 5, 2013 suggested is on the south side of the property and that property drains south to north. So it's absolutely ridiculous that it's not going to work. But there's two catch basins existing already in that parking lot, one at the west end and one right behind the existing building that we can drain right into and we have an engineer working on that now. So the city believes that we're not going to need the retention pond that they originally asked for but we've got to get through Engineering to get that approved. Caramagno: Approved to eliminate it? Representative: Yes. It was their suggestion we put it in in the first place, but once they actually looked at it they said this is stupid, this is not going to work. Caramagno: If you eliminate that, don't need that- Petitioner: Then we can have twenty parking spots. Caramagno: Then you can have twenty parking spots? Representative: They don't want us to, the Planning Commission doesn't want it now. They want more lawn, they want more trees at the back. The other four spots that we had and in keeping with the setbacks and everything, were at that west end. Caramagno: They want the green space, I see that and I understand that, this was a green space, this was a retention pond, this was a green space of sorts. But I see you've spent a lot of- well, you've got a lot of shrubbery, trees plugged in here, a lot more. Representative: There's a significant number now that these trees have grown up and grown older so now our attempt is to go back in and infill with new pine trees and let the taller ones be and let the shorter ones eliminate the view. Caramagno: Fill it up a little bit. Representative: Yes. Caramagno: How about the new walk in front, what, you've got a new sidewalk coming out, is that what it shows here? Representative: Yes. Caramagno: Was there sidewalk that runs along the building? Representative: No. Petitioner: Not along Puritan, over on Middlebelt. Representative: Yeah, but we're connecting, that's another thing they wanted to see is a connector from that sidewalk to the front door because apparently that does not exist. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 10 of 29 February 5, 2013 Caramagno: Yeah, I wouldn't think so. How many cars do you normally park on the side street? Represenative: I've seen three or four there myself. Petitioner: That would only be on a training day. Typically one. Caramagno: So, this should also eliminate that, would it not? Petitioner: It would completely eliminate it. Caramagno: Which will really ease up that road. When you come in Puritan there and there's a couple two, three cars there, that will get your attention right now and this would be a dramatic improvement. That's all I've got. Henzi: I've got a question for Scott. Scott, how do we arrive at the twenty spots as a requirement? Kearfott: If you give me a moment, I can get that for you. Henzi: Never mind, it says on the plan. One parking stall for each 200 square foot. Sorry about that. Any other questions for the Petitioner? Hearing none, is there anyone in the audience who wants to speak for or against the project? If so, come on up to the podium. Patricia Caruana: I'm Patricia Caruana, I'm on Puritan Street right on the corner, 29515. I have some pictures. Originally when we got this letter, I called the Zoning Board and they told me they were not enlarging the parking lot at all, that they were just enlarging the building and that's what we were first told. I'm not against them building the building but what we primarily want them to do is enlarge the parking lot. It is way too small at present. Usually there's anywhere from five or six cars in the parking lot, I've seen up to ten cars in the parking lot parked bumper to bumper where they have a hard time getting out. Overflow traffic, and this is on a steady basis, is anywhere from five to six cars up to nine or ten cars. This is all the time. It's a safety issue because it's right at the corner, this business is right at the corner of Puritan and Middlebelt, right at the light there. You've got traffic coming from both ways and then with the business traffic parked there also, it's very hard to get through. You have pedestrians in the summertime, well, in wintertime, too, but a lot in the summertime and it's just a big accident waiting to happen. And what we would like to see them do is to enlarge the parking lot according to the Code. Henzi: Can you be a little bit more clearer, you say on a steady basis you see nine or ten cars; would that be parked on the lot, on the street or a combination? Patricia Caruana: Five or six cars are usually in the lot all the time. When I see nine or ten cars parked in the street in addition to their parking lot, it's whenever they have meetings and usually on Thursdays, sometimes it's two or three times in a week, in the summertime it's more, probably with business meetings going on and you know social City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 11 of 29 February 5, 2013 gatherings and stuff there. But in the summertime it's worse. A lot of times when we've mowed the grass in the front, their cars are in the way. Sometimes there are cars, in front of our house, sometimes their cars are parked by the mailbox, this is steady going on all the time and that's why I took pictures. The whole point to us is enlarge your parking spot. It will be easier for them to park, easier for the residents, it will be much safer. Henzi: Have you seen the plans submitted by the Petitioner? Patricia Caruana: No, no. Henzi: Do you know that they're proposing a 16-spot parking lot? Patrician Caruana: No, I wasn't aware of that. Like I said, when I called the Zoning Board, they told me when we got the letter in the mail I think the next day after I called and they told me they were not. That's why we came here today about that. And it says on there that twenty - that you need twenty spots, I personally believe twenty would probably be more in line with what they need for the business and the residential community as opposed to sixteen. They have a big backyard and there is also a vacant lot beside them. They're a business, that's part of the cost of doing business. Henzi: Thank you. Anything else? Anybody else want to speak for or against the project? If so, come on up. Hearing none, are there letters? Caramagno: There are. Vincent and Patricia Caruana wrote a letter but they spoke already so I don't have to read their letter and I have a letter from Marie Glanz at 29519 Puritan, (letter read). Henzi: Would the Petitioner like to make a closing statement? Petitioner: I am glad to see that there is some support from the neighborhood as well for the additional parking. I don't believe there's ever been cars parked on the other side of the street in front of the home that we're referencing. I can't be responsible for cars that belong to the neighborhood. I will tell you that we do average five to six cars, we have six parking spots, and on Thursdays we do our training in class and that's what I was referencing in all of this so that's it. Henzi: Thank you. Pastor: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Pastor. Pastor: Excuse me. Henzi: Mrs. Yaroch. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 12 of 29 February 5, 2013 Pastor: Your neighbor brought some pictures and there's one picture that I count at least six cars parked down the street. She's claiming that you've had as many as nine or ten cars in your existing parking lot. That's exactly what you're asking for in parking. How many people are involved in the training? Petitioner: Our training classes are four to five. Pastor: Plus how many are in the building at that time? Petitioner: If everybody was in the building at the same time, it would be twelve to thirteen tops. Pastor: How many employees do you have? Petitioner: Caregivers or administrative staff? Pastor: Okay. Petitioner: Okay. Well, the caregivers don't come in the building, they're out in the field. Pastor: Never? Petitioner: They could stop in and pick something up for five minutes. Pastor: So how many people do you have on staff? Petitioner: Total there's probably 140 because they work in the homes. Pastor: How many people do you have normally on a daily basis? Petitioner: On a daily basis, six to eight. And they're part-time so they're not there all day. Pastor: Six to eight people and when you have a training class you have another four to five people at that time? Petitioner: They're not all in the building, they're nurses, they're out in the field. Pastor: Thank you. Henzi: I'd like to follow up on that line of questions. I don't know why this is so difficult. When you talked earlier I got the sense you were saying that the maximum number of cars you ever had was twelve. Now I'm completely confused as to who's in the building when. Can you tell us Monday through Friday who's there, how many cars you need, and then the training day, which is the big day, who's there and how many cars you'd need. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 13 of 29 February 5, 2013 Petitioner: I can tell you I have five full-time staff. So, then there are part-time staff, so typically there is about eight people but they work different days and different shifts so it would depend on what the part-time staff, if they're like Monday, Wednesday, Friday, and someone else is Tuesday, Thursday, they're not all there at the same time. So I'm trying to give you an overall view of like eight people theoretically. Henzi: So more than eight employees, however- Petitioner: And four caregivers on a training session. Henzi: Got it. Petitioner: So, twelve. Henzi: Okay, thank you. Anything else? I'll close the public portion of the case and begin the Board's comments with Mr. Duggan. Duggan: My big thing was where your business was located, that it backed up to the neighborhood right there and how it affects the neighborhood and when you decided to add ten more parking spaces than you've got, that's a great thing, and the fact that you need twelve, twelve cars there which will also give you some flexibility if there are twelve cars on that given day. I think the plans look great and I think the additional parking lot is absolutely needed and I will be in support. Henzi: Mr. Pastor. Pastor: Normally I wouldn't be in support of cutting down this many parking spots because this is a small business and it seems like if my math is correct, is she won't need sixteen spots at any time so I suppose I could support this. Henzi: Mr. Caramagno. Caramagno: What I hear is you're making some more room to make it more office friendly for a small staff of people, and we have one neighbor in question, generally there's overflow parking for training and from the math we were given it seems that that takes care of most of that problem, if not all of it, during those training days and that makes sense to this. After all, we're dealing with a request from our city to have a little more green space there when you probably could squeeze a couple more parking spaces on that side. The intent is to make it look green almost all the time, I'm okay with that. As far as the setback goes, I think that's really a nonissue, there's a nonconformity there already, so I'm okay with it. Henzi: Mr. Sills. Sills: I think the sixteen parking spots are quite adequate for your business. I can understand the part-time help and the coming and going as it will be on a weekly basis. There's nothing really there on an everyday basis where you would require more than sixteen parking spaces so I can be in support. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 14 of 29 February 5, 2013 Henzi: Mrs. McCue. McCue: Following what Planning Commission and Council had recommended, taking that into consideration removing four of these spots from that location I don't think will hinder the business or the neighborhood in any way, shape or form. It makes a lot of sense to me. The only issue of real concern I think I heard from anybody here is the parking situation which allowing this variance is going to improve the parking situation and operationally you don't need any more than that, I too, will be in support. Henzi: I would support a temporary variance. I have a couple of concerns. I think it's been adequately explained that sixteen is sufficient but I don't know, we've also got dispute that sixteen might not be sufficient. I'm also concerned what happens a year from now if there are fourteen people coming to these things for twenty spots, but there may be consensus for something. The floor is open for a motion. Upon Motion by Duggan, supported by McCue, it was: RESOLVED, APPEAL CASE NO. 2013-02-02: An appeal has been made to the Zoning Board of Appeals by Yaroch Properties, 16013 Middlebelt, Livonia, Ml 48154, seeking to construct an addition to a nonconforming office building resulting in deficient front yard setback and deficient number of parking spaces. Front Yard Setback Parking Spaces Required: 40ft. Required: 20 Proposed 24ft. Proposed: 16 Deficient: 16 ft. Deficient: 4 The property is located on the west side of Middlebelt (16013) between Puritan and Greenland, Lot No. 053-02-0298-001, OS Zoning District, be granted for the following reasons and findings of fact: 1. The uniqueness requirement is met because of where the property is located with the residential neighborhood behind it. 2. Denial of the variance would have severe consequences for the Petitioner because of the amount of parking spaces required for employee parking makes an expanded parking lot good for the neighborhood. 3. The variance is fair in light of its effect on neighboring properties and in the spirit of the Zoning Ordinance because of issues presented by the Petitioner and current lack of parking for its employees. 4. The Board received no letters of approval and two (2) letters of objection from neighboring property owners. 5. The granting of this variance will not adversely affect the purpose or objective of the Master Plan because it is zoned "Office" and the granting of this variance is not inconsistent with that classification. FURTHER, This variance is granted with the following conditions: City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 15 of 29 February 5, 2013 1. That it be built as presented to the Board. 2, That Petitioner comply with the requirements of City Council and the Planning Commission per CR 497-12. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Duggan, McCue, Pastor, Sills, Caramagno, Henzi NAYS: ABSENT: RECUSED: Mcintyre City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 16 of 29 February 5, 2013 APPEAL CASE NO. 2013-02-03: Livonia IT Office Building, LLC, on behalf of Lessee, Dave & Buster's, 19375 Victor Parkway, Livonia, Ml 48152, seeking to erect four wall signs upon a commercial building resulting in excess number of signs and wall sign area. Wall Signs Allowed: One Proposed: Four Excess: Three Wall Sign Area Allowed: 255 sq. ft. Proposed: 553 sq. ft. Excess: 298 sq. ft. Henzi: Mr. Kearfott, anything to add? Kearfott: Not at this time. Henzi: Any questions for Mr. Kearfott? Hearing none, will the Petitioners please come forward. Representative: Thank you. I'm John Carlin, 2855 Coolidge, Troy, Michigan, here on behalf of Dave & Buster's. This is the request that we have for the signage. We actually have a situation where we need to have as much notification to people in the area, it's not like we're right out on the main highway and it's actually just a situation with the signage to help people find out where the restaurant is in the facility. I'd like to introduce Fred Henninghausen who is director of construction and development for Dave & Buster's, he's here from Dallas and would like to address the issues. Petitioner: Hello, I'm Fred Hennighausen from 6918 Clear Springs Parkway in Garland, Texas, which is a suburb of Dallas. I just want to say first of all, how excited we are to be able to be looking at the community where we've had multiple occasions to try to move into this area and this looks like that's going to take and we're thrilled about that. I will mention just in regard to signage, we're a regional draw so the signage is extremely important to us and we're on a piece of property where we basically have from and then to that are more presenting themselves to the highway. So, being able to sign that property well is important to us. If you look at some of the elevations you can tell the signage doesn't dwarf the building, it's fairly well balanced and proportional and we're just looking for the opportunity to present ourself well as we come to town. Henzi: Perhaps you can tell us a little bit about the types of signs, for instance are these a prototype sign, is this a corporate requirement, that sort of thing? Petitioner: Well, we often kid about prototypes, it seems like our prototype changes every week as we open stores around the country. But this is the last of a - or it's our last series of stores that reflects a new Dave & Buster's and we've been launched that way, we've rebranded ourselves over the past probably three years, we've focused heavily on this particular offering and we feel comfortable about it and feel it presents itself well, it's done well in some of the other markets. The signage is a little bit more contemporary than some of the older fleet that we have but it's fairly- it's not flashy, it's fairly straightforward. We capitalize on the use of those three round logos I think you City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 17 of 29 February 5, 2013 see in the presentation material. They're expensive signs, we usually look for a bit of a third dimension to those with a flat round panel background and then raised letters on the surface of it. It's not a cheap sign but well done. It looks great at night. And then since people don't necessarily know what D & B is and they may not be able to read fine print at a distance then typically we'll try and find some place on the building to spell out the name which we've attempted to do there I think on the side that faces the primary highway and spelled out Dave & Buster's. We had a couple of other tag lines that we would like very much to use that help people understand a little bit about our concept but I understand those weren't received favorably so we are not presenting those. Henzi: You mean you've got other stores where you've got text on the building? Petitioner: Yes. Henzi: And that was refused here? Petitioner: Yes. Henzi: What sort of things? Petitioner: You know one of our tag lines is "Get your game on", so it just helps people realize we're a gaming place, you know, for fun arcade games, basketball shoots and things of that sort or games of skill. But I know that you, as I understood, were not favorable to that. Henzi: I think the last question I have is how were the sizes determined, is there science behind this, for instance the logo has got to be X circumference? Petitioner: Sure. You know our branding company would love to have a sign that's actually larger than the building but I work with the design and construction side and we try and look at that building as a piece of architecture and try and create a design that's appropriate and tasteful. So that's why I think as you look at those elevations, you can see those signs are not over the top. And no, there's no criteria that we have to have about sizes, it's just what we feel fits with the building and also presents well for the highway being the distance it is from our building. Henzi: Thank you. Any questions? Pastor: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Pastor. Pastor: I'm looking at your sign package and I fully get why you want the sign to be Sign A-2, okay, someone has to explain A-1, okay, that's facing someone else's parking lot. A-3 I get as well but you're asking us to go four times more than we allow and over two times the amount of square footage, this A-1 I'm not getting. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 18 of 29 February 5, 2013 Petitioner: You know the A-1 sign is over our entry so that's the I guess the tallest part of our building and we- that is one of our seven branding elements that we use around our front entry, one of those is the logo because we want people to see as they're leaving their parking and heading towards the front door that this is branded appropriately. And also, in this particular case, it presents itself to I guess what would be the highway intersection that is a little bit south of the property here. I think A-2 as you see it on your drawing if I'm not mistaken, actually is back on the fin of the building, it's closest to the other structure right there, too. So the A-2 on the plan that you're looking at actually should be on top of that B, so this is just an opportunity to get a little bit more height and again presentation to the highway. Pastor: My point is you're facing someone else's parking lot. Petitioner: Facing what, I'm sorry, sir. Pastor: You're facing a parking lot. Petitioner: Right. Pastor: And you're not actually getting any advertisement out of it. My point is I understand you want signs, don't misunderstand me. But you're asking for four signs instead of one. You're asking for 553 square feet instead of 255 which is a lot, is there any room in this package to maybe delete a sign and that's the sign I see. Petitioner: Well, you know, again from our standpoint, from a branding standpoint, we felt like we've already taken away honestly a significant part of our identity signage which is "Get your game on". That is the way we go from the name Dave & Buster's to something that tells a little bit about who we are so we've stepped back from that. We've also removed another identifying element for our branding which is the use of some neon treatments and things of that sort, we've pulled back on that. Again, I would say I know the criteria is all there for a good reason but we're actually not coming with a - if you look at the size of the building, you know, it's fairly understated in terms of signage, it just is. And so I know it may not fit that footage but it certainly feels appropriate, it's not what our branding company would like, but it feels - again, it feels like it fits the shape. If we were to delete anything I probably wouldn't take the sign off from over the front door just because all of our guests go through that entry and that is a place that we do want to brand our facility. Pastor: Thank you. McCue: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mrs. McCue. McCue: I just wanted to see how we were looking in relationship to - okay. One other thing, did we or did we not recently approve a variance for the office building in that area, correct, where we added to one side and placed it on both sides, heading down Victor Parkway and 275, am I correct? City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 19 of 29 February 5, 2013 Henzi: lnfineon is what you're thinking of, right? McCue: I think so. Henzi: Yes. McCue: So I'd be curious to know what type of variance we did on that as well and I can't remember off the top of my head. Because I do agree that to some degree they've got a little bit of an odd situation with Victor Parkway and 275 and trying to figure out where that sign should go is a challenge. Do you know what we did on the variance for lnfineon with the office space? Representative: (Sossin) Matt Sossin, 39000 Country Club Drive, Farmington Hills, Michigan. I'm the owner of the lnfineon Building so what I believe they received a variance for was for two building signs and a monument sign. So, I think they were allowed one sign was the ordinance, so they got three signs. McCue: Okay, thank you. Duggan: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Duggan. Duggan: Going through the City Council meeting when you guys were at the City Council you guys were talking about how most of your core business is made up by people who are 10 to 15 miles away from the restaurant, my question for you is that in some of your reasoning for needing more signage is that you have people who are coming from I think you even said up to 30 or 40 miles away they come to Dave & Buster's and you need to have the sign so they can see where it is. My question for you is do you guys you know the percentage of those who come from over 30 miles to visit your store, like the Utica one, do you have any idea how many people from Livonia, for instance, or neighboring cities come to your business? Petitioner: Well, there are some people in our company that would, I'm afraid I'm not one of them unfortunately and I do know generally that our business is based - it's a regional classification so we absolutely are looking for more than just the neighborhood and so it makes us less familiar, as you say, as we draw from the surrounding area. We do studies on that. We actually run questionnaires and we, I believe, may run credit card checks on addresses to see where people are coming from but I'm afraid I can't tell you. Duggan: But at least for our sake it's safe to say in respect to can we say a good portion comes from outside 25, 30 miles, I don't know how much of a percentage we can put on this, you expect a good part of it is coming from people who live 25, 30 miles away? Petitioner: You know, Loretta, you may have something else to say about this, but I would say I believe that would be on the fringe of how the - kind of the furthest we City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 20 of 29 February 5, 2013 would expect people to come. I'm thinking within something like a 25 mile range, I don't know that we expect much further than that but you may have something further on that. Reeves: Loretta Reeves, and I'm at 1889 Manzana Avenue, Punta Gorda, Florida, and in addition if I may answer your question, I think 25 to 30 miles is what we anticipate. Duggan: Okay. Reeves: But we also do a lot of corporate activities where we have a lot of people coming from various parts of the whole United States when they're visiting their corporate headquarters to come to our facility for fun and games or training opportunities. So we have a lot of people coming in from a lot of the hotels in the surrounding area and I think that's a huge draw for us as well. Duggan: All right, thank you. Reeves: Sure. Henzi: Any other questions. Caramagno: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Caramagno. Caramagno: Just something for a clarification for me, the sign that faces the freeway, 275, we have one drawing here that it's orange, and one that it's blue. Petitioner: I beg your pardon, I'm sorry. Caramagno: On the 275 side, I guess Item B. Petitioner: Right. Caramagno: We've got two drawings here, one it's orange and one that's blue, the orange looks a little fancier. Which sign is going to be up there? Petitioner: I'm not seeing the orange one. You know, I don't think we've done an orange sign. Typically it's a blue face but it's a white, at night the face goes white because it's perforated so anyway. Reeves: I can speak to that, I think. I believe there was a confusion with our architect who did the renderings with the orange one and then the sign company when they put the package together did it correctly with the blue lettering on it, so sorry, that was my fault. Henzi: Anything else? I have a question for Scott. You passed around a sheet from 1997 indicating a variance granted for Doc's, did you find anything more recent? I'm City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 21 of 29 February 5, 2013 pretty confident we allowed that monument sign on Victor Parkway in the last five, six years, so I think they've got even more, is that possible? Kearfott: Yes. There is a monument sign that I didn't have the paperwork on that but yes, you are correct. Henzi: All right. Any other questions? Hearing none, anyone in the audience who wants to speak for or against the project? If so, come on up. Seeing no one, are there letters to be read? Caramagno: No. Henzi: Anything you'd like to say in closing? Reeves: No. Henzi: Okay. I'll close the public portion of the case and begin the Board's comments with Mr. Pastor. Mcintyre: I have a question for Mr. Kearfott. Would Doc's and Big Daddy's have been in the radius that would have received an opportunity to comment on this? Henzi: I would think they would have to be. Kearfott: Correct. Mcintyre: And so they didn't comment, is that correct? Henzi: No, they would have sent them to businesses, too. Mcintyre: Okay. Henzi: Not just residences. Mcintyre: That's what I figured but I wanted to be sure, okay. Henzi: Go ahead, Mr. Pastor. Pastor: Well, I think I could support this. I really don't like supporting sign variances of this extent but seeing what exists at Doc's it's kind of hard to say no to this, so I'll be in full support. Welcome. I'm glad you picked Livonia. Henzi: Mr. Caramagno. Caramagno: I'm going to be in support, too. Let's face it, it's a very, very large building and it's a destination for a lot of people. It may not be something you visit every two months but it's a destination when you do, and you've got to be able to find this place and I think that will do the trick. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 22 of 29 February 5, 2013 Henzi: Mrs. Mcintyre: Mcintyre: I appreciate all the comments that were made and in reading through about all of the adjustments that have been made because sometimes when large businesses come to your community they come with the approach, this is our package, this is our brand package, this is what we have, this is what we want. I really appreciate the accommodation that was made to fit in with the flavor if you will of the city in removing the neon and given the size of the building visually, this signage looks very appropriate and what you do need for identification but it certainly doesn't appear to overwhelm your site and esthetics are a part of it and I think these are esthetically pleasing given the size so I have no reservation. Thank you. Henzi: Mr. Sills. Sills: I agree with the comments of my colleagues and I'll be in full support. Henzi: Mrs. McCue. McCue: I'm in agreement with what everybody has said and again, I want to welcome you to the City and I appreciate your flexibility and willingness to work with the plan. And again, just regarding the size of the building and the position of the building and the location, to me it justifies what you're asking and I'll be in full support. Henzi: Mr. Duggan. Duggan: I, too, will support. The plans look great and the location along Victor Parkway so I will be in support. Henzi: I, too, will support your request. First, to me the location presents a unique hardship. This is a property with three frontages like what was pointed out. Let's say somebody is stopped on Seven Mile at Victor Parkway, that's quite a distance but you could see into that area, you know, compound that by the highway traffic and they certainly need additional signage. I will compliment Dave & Buster's by saying that you know this is a fairly large excess with respect to the number of signs obviously and wall sign area, but when I look at the signs it just doesn't look that big because I think that it blends in with the property, I think it's going to look very nice. The floor is open for a motion. Fisher: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Fisher. Fisher: You'll see in the notes on the application, they have "In addition, D & B requests the use of LED lights ...." Because that contradicts paragraph 15 of the Council approving resolution, they withdrew that request and we got a piece of paper reflecting that but it's not in my copy and I just wanted to make sure the record is clear on that." Sorry to interrupt. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 23 of 29 February 5, 2013 Henzi: Thank you. Mrs. Mcintyre, were you going to make a motion? Motion by Mcintyre, support by Pastor: RESOLVED, APPEAL CASE NO. 2013-02-03: Livonia, IT Office Building, LLC, on behalf of Lessee, Dave & Buster's, 19375 Victor Parkway, Livonia, Ml 48152, seeking to erect four wall signs upon a commercial building resulting in excess number of signs and wall sign area. Wall Signs Allowed: One Proposed: Four Excess: Three Wall Sign Area Allowed: 255 sq. ft. Proposed: 553 sq. ft. Excess: 298 sq. ft. The property is located on the west side of Victor Parkway (19375) between Seven Mile following reasons and findings of fact: 1. The uniqueness requirement is met because of where the property is located and its regional draw which requires signage that is visible to its patrons. 2. Denial of the variance would have severe consequences for the Petitioner because patrons would not see it from the highway. 3. The variance is fair in light of its effect on neighboring properties and in the spirit of the Zoning Ordinance because neighboring properties were granted sign variances and the Board received no opposition from same. 4. The Board received no (0) letters of approval and no (0) letters of objection from neighboring property owners. 5. The granting of this variance will not adversely affect the purpose or objective of the Master Plan because it is zoned "Office" and the proposed variance is not inconsistent with that classification. FURTHER, This variance is granted with the following conditions: 1. That it be built as presented to the Board. 2. That Petitioner comply with the requirements of City Council and the Planning Commission, per CR 500-12. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Mcintyre, Pastor, McCue, Duggan, Sills, Caramagno, Henzi NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 24 of 29 February 5, 2013 APPEAL CASE NO. 2013-02-04: Livonia IT Office Building, LLC, on behalf of Lessee, Dave & Buster's, 19375 Victor Parkway, Livonia, Ml 48152, seeking to construct a commercial restaurant building with mechanical amusement devices resulting in deficient number of parking spaces and parking space width. Parking Spaces Required: 595 Proposed: 408. Deficient: 187 Parking Space Width Required: 10ft. Proposed: 9ft. Deficient: 1 ft. Henzi: Mr. Kearfott, anything to add to this case? Kearfott: Not at this time. Henzi: Any questions for the Inspection Department? Hearing none, will the Petitioners please come forward. Representative: Again, John Carlin. Again, the issue here is how the calculation, the number of parking spaces that we need is figured out. The Ordinance requires one parking space for each of the 200 games that we have here, or plan to have here. One for each of the 72 employees and one for every two seats and we have 645 seats so we end up with 595 spaces. We have found in not only our other many restaurants but also the one in Utica, the one in Utica, the ratio of what we're asking for here today is almost identical to the ratio. This one is a smaller restaurant so we'll have fewer spaces but we don't need one for every 200 games. Most people that come here will be families, 64 percent will come with others and many are children, they're going to be playing several games, people eat at the same time, there's no way that we need that kind of space. Dave & Buster's is extremely comfortable with the 408 that we have. As you probably know, 72 of those are for the employees and they are in the very far corner of the parking lot. So, we've got ample room and we're very comfortable with it. We don't want to have a restaurant where we can't have the people park so we're very comfortable with this. We thought that the Council was, the Planning Commission was and we're asking for the variance to allow it. I think, does the width of 72 of these also included in the same? Yes. So, those 72 spaces that are 9 feet instead of 10 feet are for our employees and again, they are at the very back space, they are the farthest away from the front door so people are not going to - our employees can come in the back door. People that are visiting the facility are not going to be parking in that far corner so. And again, that's the 72 because there are 72 employees. Henzi: Is that portion of the lot going to be marked employee only parking? Representative: We can do that. Henzi: Can you give me an idea as to what this parking proposal - or how it compares to your other stores nationally? In other words when a national company comes in a lot City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 25 of 29 February 5, 2013 of times I'll say the biggest store we have we only need 400 spots and here we need 408 or something along those lines. Representative: We actually had that when we were going to one of the discussions with the Council and it was at that point that we were surprised at the ratio or what we were asking for here was almost identical to what was in Utica and what there was in most of the restaurants around the country. Some will vary because of the location near a university or something like that they'll be some changes. But we were surprised, we had a study done on this some time ago. One of the Council members asked for that, we supplied it and he was convinced that would be sufficient here with the ratio that we are using. Henzi: Well, what do you mean by the ratio? You say that it's similar to Utica, are you saying that Utica is a much bigger store but you need the same number of parking spots? Representative: No, no, no. Utica is a much bigger store, it's closer to 60,000 square feet, 55,000 and it has more spaces than we would have here. Again, the ratio is the same. I think that- what was the ratio? Reeves: Again, Loretta Reeves, the ratio that we have with what we've done with our parking study with various locations nationwide is on a comparison and it ironically is exactly what we have here, it's almost one space per hundred square feet of building space, exactly the same thing in Utica. We have approximately 550 parking spaces for 5,500 square foot building. Representative: 55,000. Reeves: 55,000, excuse me. And here we're at 40,000 and some change and we've got 408, so we've got exactly the same ratio, one per 100 square feet of building space. Henzi: And that suits the company's needs on a national level? Reeves: Yes. Henzi: Okay. Any other questions? McCue: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mrs. McCue. McCue: What is your capacity people-wise in the building? Do you have that number? I guess I'm trying to look at packed Friday night, Saturday afternoon. I mean if you don't, then that's fine. Petitioner: It does range depending on how the municipality wants to evaluate it but it runs anywhere from about 900 to 1,100 typically and we'd love to always have that many people. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 26 of 29 February 5, 2013 McCue: Right, you'd like to have more. Got you. Thank you. Henzi: Anything else? I have one for Scott. Do you have any idea how many times we've approved 9-foot spots even if it's just for employee only? Kearfott: I don't know how many times we've approved it, I know we have in the past, but I do know the TCF Bank that you asked about, yes, they did approve 9-foot spaces for employees there. Henzi: On College Park? Kearfott: Yes. And I think we allowed it at St. Mary's Hospital, right? Henzi: Yes. Kearfott: Doc's did not have any 9-foot spots. Henzi: Thank you for looking. Any other questions? Hearing none, anyone in the audience want to speak for or against the project? Seeing no one coming forward, any letters on this case? Caramagno: None. Henzi: Is there anything that you want to say in closing? Representative: I'll just mention one thing, we're not really allowed in our office to bring any kind of a project to the table to our CEO unless it meets the parking requirement, we establish that early on and we can't even bring it. If we get to a point where we're even hinting as if it would be under par, then we'll look at even razing the building if we have to which we've done a time or two. But based on this sized building and this arrangement that we have, we feel very confident in the parking. We do not want our guests to have to go somewhere else for a game or a dinner. Henzi: Thank you very much. I'll close the public portion of the case and we'll begin the Board's comments with Mr. Caramagno. Caramagno: Well, I heard some things that were consistent with the presentation, that they were comfortable with the 408 spots a bunch of times, I heard that you really don't put a bad plan to the people that make the final decisions and that seems to make sense to me. Why would you ever want to make this type of investment and not be able to have adequate parking for people to come into your building? It just wouldn't make sense. I understand trying to get something in and trying to have something done, but to do it and not be thoughtful of it doesn't make sense. Your square foot comparison for the building versus the parking spots, that seems to make sense as well with your large store on the east side and in comparison to the rest around the country. So, if you think 408 does it, then it seems to me it does, too, just a general thought, so I'd be in support. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 27 of 29 February 5, 2013 Henzi: Mrs. Mcintyre? Mcintyre: I, too, will support it. I'm by profession I'm not a parking spot calculator person, but if you look at the fact that you've got 645 seats and the requirement by our Code is 323, so two people in each party coming plus one person at each of the games, and in addition one parking spot for every two games plus employee parking, I don't have any problem here with the 9-foot parking for the employees. The one comment that I would make since they're parking in the back of the lot, I know this is beyond the scope of what we approve, but it's well lit where the employees park for their security. But I think this is a great plan and it certainly seems very reasonable. It's not in your best interest to have a situation where people can't find your place so I would support it. Henzi: Mr. Sills. Sills: I think it's been planned out real well. I like the way the handicaps are set up. I'm not really happy with the 9-foot parking spaces, we've been through this many times before, but being it's for your employees only, far be it from me to detract from having dent doors from their cars. I don't want any dented doors on my cars so I can approve this. Henzi: Mrs. McCue. McCue: I pretty much go along with what everybody else is saying. Comparing it to the Utica store makes a lot of sense, you guys have been there a long time, you know how to make that work. And again, going back to what Mrs. Mcintyre said about the average number of people per car, when you factor that in, it makes sense so I will be in support. Henzi: Mr. Duggan. Duggan: I, too, will support. Henzi: Mr. Pastor. Pastor: I will be in support. Henzi: I, too, will support the request. I think it's reasonable, I liked the answers that the Petitioner gave, he's done a very good job. I don't have any problem with the 9-foot spots, I'm comfortable with it based on the fact that we've approved some 9-foot spots at an office park where people park for longer periods of time, and at nearby College Park TCF Bank area and here it's going to be dedicated to employee only, so the floor is open for a motion. Upon motion by Duggan, supported by Pastor RESOLVED, APPEAL CASE NO. 2013-02-04: Livonia IT Office Building, LLC, on behalf of Lessee, Dave & Buster's, 19375 Victor Parkway, Livonia, Ml 48152, seeking to City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 28 of 29 February 5, 2013 construct a commercial restaurant building with mechanical amusement devices resulting in deficient number of parking spaces and parking space width. Parking Spaces Required: 595 Proposed: 408 Deficient: 187 Parking Space Width Required: 10ft. Proposed: 9 ft. Deficient: 1 ft. ** The property is located on the west side of Victor Parkway (19375) between Seven Mile and Pemborke, Lot No. 024-05-0004-00, C-2 Zoning District, be granted for the following reasons and findings of fact: 1. The uniqueness requirement is met because of the size of the building and where the property is located off of the expressway and Victor Parkway 2. Denial of the variance would have severe consequences for the Petitioner because it adequately provides ample parking for the restaurant. 3. The variance is fair in light of its effect on neighboring properties and in the spirit of the Zoning Ordinance because the Board received no opposition from same. 4. The Board received no (0) letters of approval and no (0) letters of objection from neighboring property owners. 5. The granting of this variance will not adversely affect the purpose or objective of the Master Plan because it is zoned "Office" and the proposed variance is not inconsistent with that classification. FURTHER, this variance is granted with the following conditions: 1. That it be built as presented to the Board. 2. That Petitioner comply with the requirements of City Council and the Planning Commission. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Duggan, Pastor, McCue, Mcintyre, Sills, Caramagno, Henzi NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. Reeves: Can I just add one more note? I work all over the United States doing restaurant development and I can tell you I've never had an experience like I had here in Livonia, working with your staff, working with your professionals, it's just been an amazing experience. I specifically thank this group's support system, you guys did a heroic thing for us and we really appreciate you working with us and making sure we got everything that we needed to be operational and to be a success here because we want City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 29 of 29 February 5, 2013 heroic thing for us and we really apprec iate you working with us and making sure we got everything that we needed to be operational and to be a success here because we want to be a part of your community and we really appreciate what you've done for us. Thank you. Henzi: Thank you very much. Upon motion by Duggan, supported by Mcintyre, to approve the minutes of December 11,2012. There being no further business to come before the Board, the 8:30p.m. /bj