SR-401-030 (22)
~I
PCD:SF:JT:SHK:f:\plan\share\council\strpt\meritreconsider.doc AU6 - 8 _
Council Mtg: August 8,2000 Santa Monica, California
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: City Staff
SUBJECT: Recommendation to Reconsider Denial of Meritorious Sign Appeal of
Marquis West Restaurant (00APP043), 3110 Santa Monica Boulevard,
and Set Date of Public Hearing.
INTRODUCTION
This report recommends that the City Council reconsider its denial of a meritorious sign
appeal and schedule a new appeal hearing for Marquis West Restaurant, one of the
appellants of the final list of designated Meritorious Signs.
BACKGROUND
On March 22, 2000, the City Council heard 55 appeals on the final list of designated
Meritorious Signs. The appeals were the only item on the agenda and the typical
appeal hearing procedure was altered slightly. Since there were only appellants and no
applicants, speakers for each appeal, including the appellants, were requested to
submit a request to speak at the beginning of the meeting. However, the request that
appellants submit a request to speak was done informally. Staff has reviewed a
transcript of the hearing as well as the staff report. No specific mention was made that
an appellant had to fill out a request to speak in order to be heard.
As described in the letter submitted after the hearing (Attachment A), the appellant for
Marquis West was present for the entire hearing and expected to be called to speak to
his appeal request. However, he did not fill out a request to speak slip. Since the
1
~1
AUG - 8 _
format of the hearing deviated from the normal proceedings, the subject address was
not specifically called, and since no request to speak was made, there was no
discussion of this appeal. The appellant did not understand how or when he would
have an opportunity to speak on behalf of his appeal. The City Attorney has advised
that, since it would not have been immediately obvious that an appellant had to fill out a
request to speak in order to be heard, Marquis West's reconsideration request has
merit.
HEARING PROCEDURE
The procedure approved for the March 22, 2000 limited appellants to 3 minutes to
speak with 2 minutes allowed for all other members of the public who wished to speak.
Appellants, as well as other members of the public, were informally directed at the
beginning of the hearing to submit a request to speak to each item. Of the 55 appeals,
Council approved 23 of the appeals and moved to deny the remaining appeals. Review
of the record does not indicate that the appeal for Marquis West was called and no
requests to speak were submitted for this item.
Due to the modified procedure and in review of the public record, staff recommends that
the Council reconsider the original motion to deny and conduct a new hearing to provide
appellant an adequate opportunity to present to his appeal request.
Reconsideration of an item is a two-step process. The Council must first approve
reconsideration; if reconsideration is approved, the Council must set a date to conduct a
new hearing for this appeal. A decision to reconsider this appeal does not address the
merits of the appeal. Approval or denial of this appeal would be considered at the new
2
hearing on the matter. Staff recommends that the Council use the same time limits of 3
minutes to speak with 2 minutes allowed for all other members of the public who wish to
speak.
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACT
The recommendation presented in this report does not have any budget or fiscal impact.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Council approve reconsideration of the Council's denial of
meritorious sign appeal for Marquis West Restaurant, 3110 Santa Monica Boulevard
(Appeal 00-043) and set October 24, 2000 as the hearing date for this item.
Prepared by: Suzanne Frick, Director
Jay Trevino, Planning Manager
Susan Healy Keene, Senior Planner
City Planning Division
Planning and Community Development Department
Attachment: A: Letter dated March 25, 2000 requesting appeal to be re-opened.
F:\PLAN\SHARE\COUNCIL\STRPT\MERITCONSIDER.DOC
August 1, 2000
3
CITY
GREGORY P. HUMPiilliEis
Attorney at Law
1424 4th street, SOO-t"u~~
Santa Monica, Ca. 90l~1
(310) 394-1688
P2 :42
March 25, 2000
REQUEST TO RE-OPEN APPEAL
CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA,
1685 Main St.,
Santa Monica, Ca. 90401
re; Appeal to be placed on Meritorious sign List by MARQUIS WEST
RF.~TAURANT Ann..:.l Nn_ OOAPP04"'l
------------- --rr--- ---- --------
To the HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF SANTA MONICA
INTRODUCTION: It is resoectfullv reauested that Mr. GTUSF.PPF. (JOF.)
D'ANDRIA, President and shareholder~of Mar~i; w~~t ~R~;t~~a~t~b~
extended an opportunity. with supportinq witnesses and his
attorney, to address the City Council -to present an Oral
Presentation concerning the above referenced appeal. While present
at the March 22, 2000 Mr. D'ANDRIA did not get an opportunity to
address the Council. Thus his appeal was not considered by the
Council, and was automatically dismissed. -
REASON FOR THIS REQUEST: He arrived at 6:50 P.M. and was actually
one of the few members of the Public to remain, until the end in
the Chambers of the Council, leaving at approximately 2:00 A.M.
On Arrival Mr. D'ANDRIA was confused by various things that he saw.
He sat down in the audience section of the Chambers, and asked
another gentlemen already present, what he was supposed to do. Mr.
D' ANDRIA had difficulty understanding the other gentleman but
believes he indicated he did not know. Mr. D'ANDRIA saw words
"Roll Call," and believed that the Roll Call would consist of the
calling of the names of each of the Businesses filing appeals, and
that at some point the Name "MARQUIS WEST" would be called, and he
would have his opportunity to address the Council.
Only the next day, after speaking to another Business Owner who had
addressed the council, did he discover that ROLL CALL referred to
the Calling of the Roll U.L Council Inembers Clnu -cna.-c ne was
required to complete one of the small pieces of paper which would
place him in the list of Speakers for the Evening. He also didn't
believe that a failure to address the Council would ensure that his
appeal would net be considered.
Thus he sat all evening, and was never called to speak, while
various Business Owners, Supporters and their representatives
addressed the City Council. After all the Oral Appeals to the
Council were completed, Mr. D'ANDRIA stayed and watched as the
Council Voted and Seconded the Appeals which were to be considered,
and then deliberated and voted on the Appeals.
REQUEST TO REOPEN APPEA.L 1
MERITORIOUS SIGN EXCEi'TJ:ON
1
KAJl:QUXS WEST
Appeal. No OOAPP043
During all this time Mr. D'ANDRIA sat through the 7 hours of the
O'lnn~O'll!'l to the council _ O'lnn th~ ('()lln~il'~ nplihprO'lt-i()n~_ pn;()vinn
~~;y-;~ch~ hi~~ f-i-r~tni~ p;;~s~;:;~ ci;i~~-ie~s~;~--a-;d--~b~-;;v~t-i~~ -~f
Democracy in Action.
He naively assumed, throughout the process, that some statement
would be made at the end of the meeting which would refer to
consideration of Cases not called that evening, indicating,
possibly, that they would be considered at a future session. At
the end of the evening, at approximately 2:00 A.M., on his way out
of City Hall, he actually spoke to the undersigned lawyer, who had
appeared for his client Sun Light Mission Church, and commented to
me that he had found the evening most enjoyable and educational.
The next day, he discovered while talking to the owner of SKI HAUS
(a business located across the street from his) that his Appeal
probably had been dismissed the night before because Mr. D'ANDRIA
had not signed up to address the City Council. Mr. D'ANDRIA was
then given the undersigned's card, and through his personal lawyer,
called this office for assistance.
Mr. D'ANDRIA a Native of Italy who Emigrated to the United States
in 1955 was innocently unaware of the Procedures involved that
night. His appeal has been filed (a copy is attached), and it
eloquently sets out a compelling argument for its endorsement by
the Council.
CONCLUSION: MARQUIS WEST THROUGH MR. D'ANDRIA requests that the
Council exercises its discretion to re-open his appeal and allow
him, his supporters and legal council to address the Council. We
respectfully request that City Council Staff, or other City
Personnel, call and advise this Office when Mr. 0' ANDRIA and
Friends may address the City Council on this matter.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
a./A"J J
~~~'1/'lA..q
GIUS~PPE D'~~DRIAi President
MARQUIS WEST
~g~
GREGORY ~RIES~
Attorney QUIS WEST
cc: CITY OF SANTA MONICA DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT; SANTA MONICA CITY ATTORNEY, MARSHA JONES MOUTRIE;
CITY CLERK, MARIA M. STEWART; COPIES TO ALL COUNCIL MEMBERS;
CITY MANAGER, SUSAN McCARTHY
Enclosure: Copy of Appeal Form and Attachment
REQUEST TO REOPEN APPEAL;
MERITORIOUS SIGN EXCEPTION
2
~QUIS WEST
Appeal. No OOA.PP043
Cit>;.o!
Santa IVlonica
Land Use and Transportation Management Depar1ment
Planning and ZonIng Division
. (310) 458-8341
SIGN ADJUSTMENT. STATEMENT OF FINDINGS
(Please Type or Print all Responses)
Following review of your Architectural Review Board application, the Board will prepare a written decision which will
contain the findings of fact upon which their decision is based. Your response to each of the following sections may
help in establishing such findings. This form must be completed ir your application does not comply with the Sign
Code. -
For Property Located at:
3110 Santa Monica Blvd., Santa Monica, CA. 90404
1. That the strict application of the provisions of the Sign Code would result in practical difficullies or unnecessary
hardships inconsistent with the generarpurpose a'nd intent of the Code or that there are exceptional circumstances
or conditions applicable to the proposed sign that do not apply generally to other signs covered by the Sign Code in
that Our sign i,s' hi'storicallv siqnificant. in that it was erectf'd hf'forp 1970
and is representative of the post-w~r er~ siqn styles of Santa Monica. The frame
was erected in 1944 at the same time with the bottom \ part, SEAFOOD, and 2 small
signs, COCKTAILS and LUNCH. The facing MARQUIS WEST RESTAURANT, CONTINENTAL
CUISINE was installed in 1977 with the famous Crown logo when the Restaurant
Marquis on Hollywoo~'S Sunset Strip, a landmark since 1956, closed and moved to
the present location, bringing movie stars and members of the entertainment in-
duStLY ~o SaIled MonLca.Uur sLgn 1S v1sually slgn1fLcant 1n that it represents.
:t:he use"name and Logo 01' the bus1ness, the crown be1ng the true heraldic re-
l?!?'?!=l~c~~?~ <::Jt a rnarqu1S symbol. /:>lso,. the sight of our sign brings back the
nostaLq1a of theq1amorou~ fifti~'s, C\n eJ;d gone forE;ver.
2. That the granting of-a sign aOJus,ment would not aaversely afrect public salety or public welfare, and would not
be detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the surrounding area, and that the sign will be
harmonious with the site in that
It~~~ an area where similar signs are installed and approved for meritorius
desiqnation, particularly one a few yards away. The removal of our siqn
will 'be detrimental to our business because the restaurant will not be
spotted by drivers by. (After 23 years in the same location, there are still
residents of Santa Monica who don't know we exist.) Furthermore, a client
askinq for our address will be qiven the address and location specifyinq
"adjacent to So-and-SO liquor store,"belittling the high class of our
establ ishment.
Applicant's Signature
S.M. BUSiness Licer,se
-fw( (J!J)/{Iid/~/ I f?(pj. Dale
(C, (') f 3 ,- -r
,) /
fl1 e~ 5-~ ~<O 00