HomeMy WebLinkAbout04 - Woody's Wharf Use Permit Appeal PA2011-055 - CorrespondenceLAW OFFICES OF
ROGER JON DIAMOND
2115 MAIN STREET
SANTA MONICA, CALIFORNIA 90405 -2215
TELEPHONE (310) 399 -3259
FAX (310) 392 -9029
rogdiamond@aol.com
November 5, 2013
Leilani I. Brown, City Clerk
City of Newport Beach
100 Civic Center Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660
e -mail: LbrownL.newportbeachca.gov
a rRECLIVAEID A6 FER Y§3:9BODA
IPR"u't:r." __Ll-.0 13 t _E_1 I n16
1`,1�`n.F "li ITE M 1
nr�l� F'Rt/ T(1 AeR Inn: `..FJ
Re: Woody's Wharf /Appeal From Planning Commission to City Council -
Hearing November 12, 2013
Dear Ms. Brown:
On behalf of the applicant for the conditional use permit and modification of the permit
and on behalf of the applicant for all of the permits that were considered by the Planning
Commission and which are now before the City Council, I hereby respectfully object to
the jurisdiction of the City Council.
The matter was heard by the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission rendered
a decision at a contested hearing. No interested party that appeared in opposition to the
application before the Planning Commission appealed to the City Council. The Newport
Beach Municipal Code limits appeals from Planning Commission decisions to the City
Council to those interested parties who formally file appeals. To appeal one must
utilize a form provided by the City and file that form properly filled out with the City
Clerk. The appropriate fee must be paid.
None of that was done in this case. Instead, a City Councilman, Mike Henn, purported
to appeal by sending an e -mail to the City Clerk. However, the City Clerk did not file
anything. Furthermore, no fee was paid . Mr. Henn was not an interested party. In
fact, he was a biased City Councilman who should have disqualified himself from the
hearing that the City Council purported to conduct.
letter
November 5, 2013
Page 2
In any event, please make sure this letter is filed with the City Clerk and with the file in
this case. Woody's Wharf and the applicant wish to go on record as opposing the
jurisdiction of the City Council to take any further action in this matter. The City
Council was without jurisdiction to hear the appeal. See discussion of appellate rights
in California in the case of Burwell v. Burwell, _Cal.App.4th _, 2013 DJDAR 14623
at page 14625 (20013).
Please confirm that the City Clerk is stamping a copy of this letter.
The City Council lacks and still lacks jurisdiction to proceed with this matter. The
decision of the Planning Commission is the final decision in this case. Please confirm
this in writing .
Thank you.
tS* crely,
//�1 1 c / /,1
i �c�GPQ���V1 J inMdk�J
ROGE J N DIAMOND
RJD:jb
cc: G. Pappas
Aaron C. Harp, City Attorney