PREMISES AFFECTED - 2801 Emmons Avenue, Borough of Brooklyn.
352-02-BZ
APPLICANT - New York City Board of Standards and Appeals.
OWNER OF PREMISES: Peter Likourentzos
SUBJECT - to dismiss the application for lack of prosecution.
PREMISES AFFECTED - 2801 Emmons Avenue, northeast corner East 28th Street to East 29th Street, Block 8792, Lot 63, Borough of Brooklyn.
COMMUNITY BOARD #15BK
APPEARANCES - None.
ACTION OF THE BOARD - Application dismissed for lack of prosecution.
THE VOTE TO DISMISS -
Affirmative: Chair Srinivasan, Vice-Chair Babbar, Commissioner Caliendo, Commissioner Miele and
Commissioner Chin...... 5
Negative: ...... 0
THE RESOLUTION -
WHEREAS, this is an application, pursuant to ZR §7221 to permit, in a C22 in and R5 (Sheepshead Bay Special Zoning District), the addition of a wedding chapel or banquet hall, Use Group 9, to an existing eating and drinking establishment, Use Group 6, with restrictions on entertainment which is contrary to §94061; and
WHEREAS, this application was originally filed on December 5, 2002 without a financial feasibility study; and
WHEREAS, an initial Notice of Objections was sent by the BSA examiner on January 14, 2003 requesting that a financial feasibility study be submitted as soon as it was available; and
WHEREAS, the applicant submitted a financial feasibility study on May 29, 2003 which the BSA examiner addressed in a Second Notice of Objections sent on June 5, 2003; and
WHEREAS, the June 5, 2003 Notice of Objections indicated that the financial feasibility study submitted was not satisfactory in that the comparable properties provided were insufficient and the study failed to link any unique physical characteristics of the site to economic hardshippursuant to ZR §7221(b); and
WHEREAS, in response the applicant's failure to provide a satisfactory feasibility study, the subject application was placed on the Dismissal Calendar on March 10, 2004; and
WHEREAS, at the March 10, 2004 Dismissal Calendar hearing, the applicant was once again informed that a satisfactory feasibility study had yet to be submitted; and
WHEREAS, the applicant was then granted approximately a month and a half adjournment to submitted the required material and the case was placed on the Board's Special Order Calendar for April 27, 2004; and
WHEREAS, the Board notes that there were no submissions by the applicant following the March 10, 2004 hearing and that the applicant failed to appear at the April 27, 2004 hearing.
WHEREAS, therefore, due to the applicant's continued failure to respond to the Board's numerous requests for information necessary to the instant application, the Board finds that it must dismiss this case for lack of prosecution.
Adopted by the Board of Standards and Appeals, April 27, 2004.