word on the street: another store closing
With all the troubles Good Food Market has had in the last six months (and probably even longer, I just hadn't noticed) I was happy to read in the most recent issue of the Chestnut Hill Local that their problems with L & I were solved within twenty-four hours of proper applications. This makes the news I was just told a little harder to swallow.
Word on the street:
The Good Food Market will be closing their doors forever at the end of the month. At the end of what month? I am assuming April since March's end is so close and no mention was made of this in the Local article last week. Sources also said that some kind of 50% off sale would come next.
Since no official announcement has been made, the person who told me said their spouse discovered the market's closing on his own, I cannot swear that there is any truth at all to this rumor. I will say that the source is reliable: a long-time local business owner and CHBA member.
The Local article also mentioned that their most recent set of trouble with L & I were caused by anonymous complainants, who are still unknown. I say that complaints without a face should not be acknowledged. Everyone has a right to face their accuser! Who knows?... it could end up being love at first spite.
Labels: Chestnut Hill Local, Good Food Market
posted by reverend chris at 3/27/2010 02:39:00 PM
11 Comments:
It's true and it's just not right. This was a legal business and something has smelled from the moment the CHCA approved the business and then the pols downtown -- for the first time in CHCA history -- denied a variance.
Whatever neighbor did this should have her name published. She's proud of it, right? Let her stand beside her actions.
Jen Zoga announced the closing on the GFM's blog on Friday: http://goodfoodchestnuthill.blogspot.com/
The official closing date will be April 3.
There you have it, folks! Another example of the fairness of 19118.
I didn't give two shits whether this store stayed open or not.
But any reasonable analysis of the timing, planning, and location of this business plan knew it was doomed, regardless of any neighborhood interference.
Jude, a former Caruso's manager opened a little grocery around the corner from Zoga's location, a better location, on the Avenue, in better economic times, ten years ago. No opposition, had a take out operation too. He was gone in a year.
I'll put it so you can understand it, you idiots.
Certain people wanted it to close so they made some calls.
If you wanted it to stay open, all you had to do was shop there.
All the L&I visits couldn't have effected a concerted effort by helpful and generous patrons. If you had spent your money there, she would have stayed. Do I need to tell you how businesses weather a tough first year?
The fault my dear Horatio, is not in the stars, or Downtown, you dumb fucks, but in yourselves.
Ed (how you like me now?)Feldman
Are you drunk? A really, really mean drunk?
No anon, I'm a sleepy drunk. We Jews don't drink much, we need clear heads to keep the Goyim at bay. My drug of choice is, of course, marijuana. How about you, my stupid, uneducated, little darling?
Ed, if you really don't give two shits, why were you at the zoning board to support the denial of the variance in October? Gave at the office?
Wrong! I was not at the zoning board. Or at at any other meeting concerning the Market. Get your facts straight, dipshit. And listen to Morning Feed on Gtownradio.com Mon-Fri from 9-10AM. It'll help.
Ed (we all look alike to you, I guess) Feldman
Oh! Now my feelings are hurt! I'm sorry, Eddie, I'm still going with the mean (paranoid) drunk theory.
So who are the "certain people" Ed? Why be cryptic now when you love to namedrop in these postings?
Don't know you, Ed, but using "LIL" seems like a significant misrepresentation
Adam
Certain People-
They're not anonymous. They signed a petition objecting to the take-out part of the GFM's operation before the store was open, and before the varince for that option was applied for.
This aspect of the business required a variance. Therefore, the Business owner had the opportunity, and in a business sense, the obligation, to consider whether she could survive without such an option.
She decided that she could survive, during a recession, on a side street, in a neighborhood that has been losing businesses, large and small for years.
Regardless of the calls to L&I, whose origin I have no knowledge of, her business suffered no loss of operating hours, her deli cases were never closed, and she was not fined. I checked.
The lawyer that handled these issues was supplied by her landlord. I can't find out who paid for his/her services.
So, as far as I can find out, and the Local article was no help, GFM suffered no monetary penalties from any post opening interference.
When the variance was denied, the owner had a decision to make. She made the wrong one.
If the neighbors who didn't want her there in the first place didn't shop there, it's their right.
If those who wanted her there didn't shop there enough, maybe they should have shopped there some more instead of writing all those passionate letters.
Any business that can't last a year with a side street rent had bigger problems than the lack of coffee and Ice Cream take-out-in the dead of the worst winter in years.
She didn't even have enough back-up capital to make it to the summer?-When a slow economic recovery was predicted?
She didn't think this through.
Ed (business is tough-that's why Hillers are bad at it) Feldman
Post a Comment
<< Home