Posts about Food

At Monday night's University Park town council meeting, concerns were aired that the development would generate excessive storm water run-off, poor access for public services, and much, much more traffic. At the same time, the enterprise's economic prospects were questioned: some characterized the design as "another strip mall" where no one could live , shop, or navigate the traffic even if they wished.

Current designs would worsen the traffic problem by only allowing cars to flow on and off of the two arterials, blocking access to neighborhood streets.

The developers, who put up a glossy website using Whole Foods' cachet to promote the project, are nevertheless deliberately vague about their plans while they seek initial rezoning of the property. There is still some doubt as to the soundness of Cafritz' business prospects, and about the company's ability to produce a successful design that would draw customers and residents.

There have certainly been false starts around large scale projects in the area: Wells Fargo recently repossessed the nearby University Town Center, to name one example. But as census data suggests, the DC Metro area is growing relentlessly, and the Route 1 corridor from Mt. Rainier through Hyattsville, Riverdale Park and College Park, will be an important axis of future growth. This will become an increasingly urban area.

Smart growth demands that property around the principal arteries be rezoned from single family to mixed use, especially in areas well-served by mass transit. The 80s Metrobuses provide frequent service along Route 1, Metro's Green Line is nearby, and proposed service expansions would make MARC's Camden Line a more potent transit corridor. As the council members recognized, change is coming, and the real challenge before them is to shape that change in a way that enhances the quality of life rather than worsening congestion.

The town wants the county and state to help fund a $15 million bridge over the railroad for rear access to the property from Lafayette Avenue. It will be challenging to get that kind of commitment in this fiscal climate, but it would be one of the best uses of Council members' political capital.

The Council's discussion accentuated every possible risk, leading a casual observer to think that the project faces a significant political hurdle. Nevertheless, the majority of the Council is confident that the development will succeed, voting to provide $5,000 for a market analysis of its impact, which, as Mayor John Tabori noted, would only measure the "negative externalities" and not the positive ones that could come from a less car-oriented design.

Strangely, there was no mention of jobs, which is a top concern of many voters, particularly in Prince George's. Also lacking was discussion of the value to consumers of new retail opportunities, or of increased property values, or of new sales tax revenues for a town and county overly dependent on property taxes to make up its $2.5 billion annual budget (although it should be noted that Maryland's sales tax exempts unprepared food sales).

Councilmember Jacqueline Bradley Chacon (Ward 7) took a larger view in a letter to her colleagues, noting that encouraging and meeting the needs of consumers with educated tastes would allow for more diversity and more retail outlets, and attract more like-minded residents. Prince George's County is obviously not overflowing with these kinds of choices. Retail sales and sales taxes leak out of the county, and with those retail sales go badly needed jobs.

It is important to understand and work to mitigate the risks of such a major development, but one must also step back and take in a larger view that balances those risks with a sense of the rewards. Unfortunately, the beneficiaries of those rewards tend not to go to council meetings.

CANstruction benefits the Capital Area Food Bank (all food used is donated to the food bank). People can either go to the Building Museum and donate canned foods by voting for their favorite structure (one can = one vote), or they can go online and make a donation where $1 = one vote. It's a great event for a great cause, and we'd love for your readers to get involved.

While the writers cite USDA rules that don't allow small farms claiming the exemption to sell chicken across state lines, they overlook the small detail that Congress instructed the USDA in 2008 to end this rule and allow state-inspected chicken to be sold across state lines. The USDA is only now getting around to implementing that rule change.

But the writers went much further than exposing violations of chicken transport rules. A lab paid by the writers found salmonella in chicken from one of the vendors. This is not surprising, as salmonella is not uncommon in chicken. That's why you're not supposed to eat raw chicken.

The article somehow reached the dramatic conclusion, however, that this "illustrates the danger for consumers who think they can find refuge in markets selling food grown locally." An epidemiologist is then quoted saying, "there's no inherent reason why large production is, on balance, more dangerous than a small family farm".

Towards the end of the article, the writers admit that the lab they paid found the same pathogens in chicken from grocery stores in DC as well as farmers markets, which "demonstrates how easy it is to find pathogens—no matter which market or grocery store a consumer patronizes." That this undermines the article's premise doesn't seem to have occurred to its writers.

Instead, in the most irresponsible decision in the article, they name the farmers markets where pathogens were found in chickens but do not name the grocery stores where the same pathogens were found. Furthermore, the writers don't say how much bacteria was found on chickens at each location, how much is naturally occurring in the human gut and how much scientists say is necessary to make someone sick.

The writers apparently didn't ask anyone why they shop at farmers markets. They simply chalk it up to "a national craving for fresh food and the perception that locally grown food is healthier than food mass-produced by big agriculture and sold in grocery stores."

If they had interviewed a single farmers market customer or advocate for free-range, organic chicken (none are quoted in the article) they would have learned that most farmers market patrons are interested in things other than the size and location of the farms.

Consumers go to farmers markets because knowing who raises your food, under what conditions, is the best way to be confident in the safety of your food. Farmers who can tell you these things are likely to be from small, local farms, but that's not the point.

What conditions might farmers market customers want to know about? Chickens bred in factories owned by the largest chicken companies, Tysons and Perdue, are crammed into a space less than half-a-square-foot with thousands of other chickens. Even if they had room to move, they couldn't because they have been genetically modified to grow so much that their legs can't support their oversized bodies.

If those conditions sound like a breeding ground for disease, that's because they are. A University of Georgia study this year found that 28% of chickens in conventional chicken factories have salmonella, compared to 4% of organic chickens. This study wasn't cited in the Post article.

Chicken factories manage disease by giving antibiotics to their chickens, which of course makes it into the chickens served to customers such as children receiving public school lunches. As 80% of antibiotics in America are given to farm animals, this increases the risk of antibiotic-resistant bacteria.

Millions of consumers are learning about these conditions every year, thanks in part to books like The Omnivore's Dilemma and to documentaries like Food Inc., whose devastating scene of a chicken factory is shown here.

Knowing whether the chicken one purchases was bred under these conditions is what drives customers to farmers markets, not the size or location of the farm.

This article wasn't even written by the Post's own, often high-quality investigative journalists. It came from journalism students at the University of Maryland who made it freely available for reprint. In this case, the article was reprinted word-for-word from the original without a single editorial modification.

Readers of the Post, like all Americans, are increasingly concerned about food safety. Poorly researched scare articles like this one only serve to undermine attempts to truly improve safety.

Much to my dismay, I got there just as Roti and Potbelly were closing, and Tynan Coffee & Tea was already closed, along with Heidi's Brooklyn Deli on 2nd Street. My only remaining food options were Harris Teeter, 7-Eleven and no less than four burger joints: McDonald's, Wendy's, Five Guys, and Burger King.

Being a vegetarian, Harris Teeter offered by far the greatest selection, so that's where I wound up. But what do the limited hours of NoMa's healthier restaurants mean for the NoMa BID's efforts to create a more vibrant neighborhood?

Presumably, as more residents fill the new apartments and condos around New York Avenue Metro, they will increase demand for neighborhood venues that offer a dining experience a cut above fast food.

Yet it is somewhat surprising that Tynan and Roti aren't open later, given how much residents of nearby Truxton Circle and Eckington have been clamoring for sit-down restaurants in their neighborhoods. With the opening of Rustik Tavern and the extension of Big Bear Cafe's hours, Bloomingdale now has two restaurants, and both are often crowded.

More eateries like Roti and Heidi's would fill a niche for a dinner that is better than fast food, but less expensive than a restaurant like Rustik. Perhaps one of them should try staying open until 9 or 10 pm one or two days a week, promote the special hours to the nearby neighborhoods, and see how many customers come in after 7pm.

Restaurants improved Barracks Row and have a similar opportunity to revitalize NoMa. The neighborhood has the potential to become a destination not only during the day, but after the offices close for the night as well.

The report differentiates dedicated specialty cupcake stores from mere bakeries that also sell cupcakes. Advocates for underserved communities have long argued that cupcakes from shops making 50% or more of their profit from other confectioneries are usually inferior in design and taste. This gives residents of those communities a major disadvantage in their everyday need to enjoy a small, sweet dessert.

This shameful sugar disparity became the subject of a recent DC Council hearing catered by Georgetown Cupcake.

Councilmember Mary Cheh responded to this crisis with legislation mandating cupcakes in public school cafeterias. Jack Evans advocated tax breaks for cupcake stores, arguing that DC is losing cupcake revenue to Maryland and Virginia.

Not to be outdone, Marion Barry introduced legislation providing tax incentives to cupcake retailers who set up shop in underserved wards, and Harry Thomas, Jr. has a bill mandating diagonal parking and asking DC to analyze building municipal parking garages around cupcake shops.

To address the problem, one nonprofit is trying to turn a school bus into a mobile bakery which will travel DC's underserved areas selling cupcakes.

Due to the sweet success of the Redistricting Game, we will also launch a "Cupcake Desert Game." The public will get the chance to map their own locations for desired cupcake stores and share them with friends. We will then pass on these crowdsourced locations to the DC Council to consider as "Cupcake Enterprise Zones."

Dessert-equity advocates argued this should be the District's highest priority because of its deep effect on communities. The blog DC Devil's Food for All wrote, "It is a fundamental right for every resident to be able to walk 10 minutes to buy a $4 cupcake."