Another supermarket Targeted for extinction

Queens Chronicle

Key Food on 31st Street in Astoria has shut down despite months of rallying from the community and elected officials.

Maryam Shariat Mudrick, co-founder of the Astoria Mutual Aid Network, had tried to save the business and said the news was not well received on Astoria Facebook pages.

“Regardless of the political association of the group, everyone is frustrated and disappointed that yet another grocery store and place to access food has been shuttered,” she told the Chronicle.

She said many residents in the neighborhood are elderly and that there are “very few grocery stores” in the area.

“There’s just a void and people are worried as they’re getting into the colder months that they’re going to have to travel to get their basics for living,” Mudrick said.

Astoria Food Pantry co-founder Macaela Sears said she expects longer lines at the pantry. “That’s my first and main concern,” she said, adding that the closure means 150 lost jobs during a pandemic and an unemployment crisis.

“People are not only losing their jobs but they’re going to lose their healthcare for a union job and have to decide, ‘Am I going to pay for my healthcare or am I going to pay for my groceries?’” Sears said.

They said the next closest similar market is at least 10 blocks away. There is a CTown Fresh Astoria on 31st Street and 24th Avenue but it’s more expensive.

“The Key Food split the difference on affordability and quality,” Mudrick said. “There are cheap options in the neighborhood and there are boutique options in the neighborhood but Key Food had everything. It was accessible. You could buy everything you needed in one location. It was right by the subway. There’s nothing like that for sure.”

Target will come into the location, against the wishes of some in the area.

Not so essential construction continues during state shutdown, including the Target in Elmhurst

THE CITY

The list of “essential” construction projects and permitted work has ballooned sixfold since Gov. Andrew Cuomo announced a virtual construction shutdown last month, Department of Buildings data shows.

Some 4,936 job sites are now allowed to be worked on, up from about 800 on April 3, according to the Buildings Department.

Among them: hotels in Manhattan and Brooklyn, a new Queens Target, and, as the Columbia Spectator first reported, the future home of Columbia University’s business school.

The greenlighted projects also include renovation work on rental buildings under an exception for a “sole worker,” raising concerns for tenants.

Under a revision of its original shutdown guidance, the state has expanded “essential” building work beyond primarily infrastructure projects, hospitals and affordable housing.

As long as ground already has been broken, construction now can also proceed on any type of business that’s allowed to continue in-person operations during the state’s coronavirus-driven “pause.”

That broader list includes hotels, restaurants, convenience stores, banks, appliance stores and storage facilities, among other businesses. Public and private school construction is also permitted.

One worker on a Manhattan hotel project fumed, saying his bosses were treating the pandemic like “a joke.”

“To make the hotel essential, they might as well open every job, because that hotel is far from essential,” he said. “That hotel is deemed essential while we are deemed expendable.”

The city’s rules for “essential business” construction appear somewhat narrower than the state’s.

Work on “essential businesses” can proceed only “if it pertains to alterations of existing buildings and has been permitted by the department prior to April 15, 2020, the city guidance says.

DOB notes that the vast majority of the 35,000 sites that were ordered shuttered in March are still closed. But some local residents say they’ve been shocked to see work going forward on a wide-ranging set of long-term projects while the pandemic still claims hundreds of lives per day.

The far-from-complete Target site in Elmhurst, also slated to contain a Starbucks and a Chipotle, will eventually house some type of “ambulatory diagnostic treatment or healthcare facilities” above the 23,000-square-foot big box store, city filings show. So the Department of Buildings is allowing construction to continue.

Patricia Chou, a member of the grassroots community group Queens Neighborhoods United, which has long opposed the development, said that while a medical office may be in the offing, the core of the planned facility is still a shopping center.

“Our primary concerns are that they are endangering workers at the site and exploiting loopholes to complete this project,” she said.

Community, supermarkets and mom and pop store owners decry Target's small-format store expansions

THE CITY

Target has Queens in its sights, with new stores planned for Astoria and Elmhurst — but activists in both neighborhoods are waging separate battles to boot the big-box retailer.

The Targets are set to open by 2022 on bustling blocks steps away from subway stations and near grocery stores, pharmacies, newsstands and restaurants.

Opponents fear the chain stores will erase union jobs and mom-and-pop shops, and lead to potential displacement of longtime residents.

“These corporations — Amazon, Target, Walmart, whoever — treat our neighborhoods like corporate playgrounds, and think our people are just open wallets,” said Patricia Chou, an organizer with Queens Neighborhoods United, a grassroots group that is taking legal action to stop the Elmhurst store.

 “These stores bring us closer to new and existing guests, and give us the opportunity to meet the needs of new communities,” said DeBuse, touting the smaller stores as an “easy and inspiring shopping experience.”

In Astoria, Target’s arrival at busy 31st Street and Ditmars Boulevard would push out five active businesses, while consuming other vacant storefronts.

Neighborhood resident and newsstand operator Kinnira Patel said her landlord informed her it won’t renew the lease on her decade-old business come August.

“They said I could stay month-to-month. How can you stay month-to-month? I have to pay two months ahead to keep the lights on,” said Patel, 54. “Now I don’t know what I’m going to do next.”

 On, these bodega Targets rely on automated cashiers.

Stop work order issued over zoning at controversial Elmhurst site

From the Times Ledger:

The city Department of Buildings issued a stop work order as of Aug. 29 on the controversial development at 82nd Street and Baxter Avenue in Elmhurst after the application to have the plot rezoned was challenged in City Council.

Anti-gentrification group Queens Neighborhoods United and City Councilman Francisco Moya (D-Jackson Heights) praised the challenge, claiming the Target slated for the location was no different than any other proposal brought forward by the developers, Sun Equity and Heskel Group, which would only drive residents and business out of the community.

The area is zoned R6/C1-3 which allows for businesses that serve “local consumer needs,” such as laundromats and bodegas. The challenge through the DOB labels the development at 40-31 82nd St. as a “department store,” which is not allowed under the zoning.

Community beats back overdevelopment project

From the Queens Chronicle:

The controversial rezoning plan for 40-31 82 St. near the Jackson Heights-Elmhurst border has been withdrawn following months of community uproar, according to activists, Assemblywoman Ari Espinal (D-Jackson Heights) and the office of Councilman Francisco Moya (D-Corona).

In a press release issued Saturday, Espinal took credit for the withdrawal of the application, saying she successfully urged Councilman Francisco Moya (D-Corona) to withdraw his previously pledged support for the project.

In a lengthy post on the group's Facebook page a day earlier, activist group Queens Neighborhoods United cheered the news but said it will continue to fight against any plan to develop luxury housing on the site.

However, a Department of City Planning spokesperson told the Chronicle on Monday that the agency had not received a withdrawal letter from the developer, Sun Equity Partners.

Sun Equity Partners did not immediately respond to requests for comment on the demise of the proposed 13-story, mixed-use structure — dubbed The Shoppes at 82nd Street. But the group's spokesman, Hank Sheinkopf, confirmed the decision in a statement issued to Politico.

"After conversations with Councilmember Moya and Assemblywoman Espinal, and taking the borough president's recommendations into consideration, we have decided to no longer pursue this rezoning application," Sheinkopf said. "We are continuing with construction as permitted under the current rezoning."

2 bad MIH projects coming to Woodside-Elmhurst

From City Limits:

...the idea that triggering MIH makes this rezoning some sort of salve to the affordability crisis is a cruel joke. The most common criticism of MIH is that the “affordable” units are unaffordable to neighborhood residents. That’s certainly true. In my own writing, I’ve mostly focused on the impact that adding additional market rate development capacity will have on neighborhoods targeted for gentrification. But this rezoning points to another absurdity in the law.

The developer is proposing to use what’s called “option 2” of MIH, which requires the owner to set aside 30 percent of their units (in this case 27 apartments, all studios and 1-2 bedrooms) at an average of 80 percent of the Area Median Income (AMI). The word “average” is crucial here, because it implies that the developer will provide a range of options, which might look as follows.

• In the best-case scenario, there would be just 9 new apartments for the typical neighborhood household, which makes something like 40 percent AMI. This also means there would be nothing for half the people of Elmhurst—the poorer half that is most likely to face displacement.
• 9 apartment seekers would get homes at 80 percent AMI, and pay close to the median asking rents for market-rate apartments in the district. This means that wealthier-than-average people will get average priced apartments, and it will be called “affordable housing.”
• Another 9 wealthy but inexplicably ill-informed households might take the 9 apartments offered for 120 percent AMI, which amounts to prices above the neighborhood’s average asking rent.
• For some reason, people making 3 times the neighborhood median income are expected to move in and pay more than market rates for so-called “affordable” housing. Perhaps the developer assumes they’ll be willing to pay more in rent for the privilege of living above a Target.

From Sunnyside Post:

A two-tower complex with over 500 residential units could be making its way to Queens Boulevard in Woodside.

The large-scale development, put forth by Madison Realty Capital, would see a 17 and a 14 story building at 69-02 Queens Boulevard housing 561 units combined, according to filings with the Department of City Planning.

Over 425,000 square feet would be allowed to the residential portion of the complex, which includes 392 market rate apartments and 169 affordable units. The site would also see 5,640 square feet of commercial space.

The development would also include parking for 242 cars, and an open space between the two towers at ground level featuring picnic tables, table tennis, a putting green, and a sand lounge for residents.

A sand lounge? What the hell is that?

Remember, Mandatory Inclusionary Housing was supposed to offer more "affordable housing" but that only comes with out of character structures and a shit-ton of ridiculously priced units that hasten gentrification.

Target replacing Forest Hills B&N

From the Daily News:

A new Target store is slated to take over the space formerly occupied by Barnes & Noble at 7000 Austin St., in Forest Hills, the Daily News has learned. The store will be the first flexible-sized location in Queens for Target, which has recently been offering more compact shopping experiences for city-dwellers.

Target inked a deal for a 15-year, 20,795-square-foot lease and is slated to open at the property in mid-2016.

Trying to unionize Target

From the NY Times:

In the world of big-box discounters, Target enjoys a reputation as a model corporate citizen that sells the latest in cheap chic. That’s a sharp contrast to the image of Wal-Mart, the world’s largest retailer, which labor unions have pilloried for years, accusing it of providing skimpy wages and benefits and skirting various labor laws.

Some 5,000 workers at 27 Target stores in the New York area are being urged to join a union.

But the arrows are about to come flying at Target’s famous bull’s-eye logo. The nation’s largest union for retail workers has embarked on its first broad campaign to unionize Target workers.

The union, the United Food and Commercial Workers, is trying to organize 5,000 workers at 27 Target stores in the New York City area. A majority of workers at the Target store in Valley Stream, N.Y., have already signed cards supporting unionization, and a government-supervised election there on June 17 will be the first time in more than two decades that Target workers will vote on whether to join a union.

The union decided to focus on Target after employees in Valley Stream, on Long Island, asked for help in unionizing. Echoing longstanding complaints by some Wal-Mart workers, the store’s employees complained that many of them earned too little to support a family or afford health insurance, forcing some to rely on food stamps and Medicaid for their children.

That's interesting. No one protested when Target came to town. But Wal-Mart is a different story? Hmmm...

Walmart bad, Target good?

From Wall Street Journal:

Wal-Mart Stores Inc. remains a pariah to U.S. labor unions and urban activists who continue to hold the world's largest retailer to a different standard than rival Target Corp. as they block its plans to expand into the nation's biggest cities.

Hoping to improve its reputation, Wal-Mart in recent years has boosted employee health benefits, launched programs to reduce its environmental impacts, and paid hundreds of millions to settle lawsuits alleging that its workers were denied lunch and bathroom breaks.

Yet the Bentonville, Ark., retailer continues to serve as the archenemy of labor unions and urban foes, who believe that if they can make Wal-Mart change its practices, smaller retailers will more readily follow suit.

Wal-Mart executives maintain they are making headway against what they regard as outdated and inaccurate perceptions by arguing that the company can generate new construction and retail jobs at a time when cities desperately need the economic boost.

Target by contrast opened in Harlem in July with a red carpet gala attended by Jerry Seinfeld and New York politicians—and little hand-wringing about the consequences for shopkeepers or union cashiers.

"I know they are going to hurt me," said Anthony Ciarletta, owner of the 85-year-old Leto-Ascione Pharmacy two blocks away from the Harlem Target. Mr. Ciarletta said no politicians had bothered to check if he was worried about Target.

The disparate treatment has even begun to rankle a few labor organizers, who note that Target's wages and benefits mirror Wal-Mart's.

By most objective standards, Wal-Mart's compensation is quite similar to its publicly traded retail competitors, and sometimes better. It now offers a more generous health care plan than the retail average; nearly 80% of Wal-Mart's U.S. workers are eligible for health coverage, compared to just 58% for the retail sector as a whole according to the Kaiser Family Foundation.

Target declines to disclose its pay, but workers in Chicago said wages for entry level jobs, such as cashiers and inventory stockers, start at the state's minimum of $8.25 an hour. That is lower than the $8.75 hourly wage that Wal-Mart has pledged to pay to start in the city, according to local politicians.