There is a building in Bed-Stuy with a Foodtown on the ground floor. Glass awning. Luxury apartments above. The developer used NYC's FRESH program to unlock 12,000 square feet of extra residential space, bonus floor area the city handed him for including the grocery store. Those bonus units rent for around $2,200 a month per studio. Roughly $500,000 a year in revenue that did not exist before the program. Under a 25-year tax freeze. The neighborhood got fresh produce. The developer got a half-million-dollar annual return and a tax abatement that runs for a quarter century.
This is 15 years of food access policy in New York City.
In 2009, the Department of City Planning published a report documenting what residents of the South Bronx, East New York, and Central Brooklyn already knew: their neighborhoods were underserved by full-service grocery stores. The city launched FRESH, Food Retail Expansion to Support Health, offering tax breaks and zoning incentives to developers and operators willing to open grocery stores in designated areas. Clean mandate. Fix the gap.
Fifteen years later: 30 stores. Across five boroughs. One every six months in a city of 8 million people. Three mayors called it a success.
The Mechanism Nobody Prints
FRESH is two programs running under one name. The first offers tax incentives: land and building taxes frozen at pre-improvement levels for up to 25 years, sales tax exemptions on construction materials, reduced mortgage recording taxes. The second is the zoning benefit. That is where the real money is.
For every square foot of grocery space a developer includes in a new building, they receive one additional square foot of residential floor area, up to 20,000 square feet of bonus apartments. In New York City. In neighborhoods that have spent the last decade absorbing new residential development and watching rents move. The Bed-Stuy developer is not an outlier. He is the program working as designed.
No price requirements for what the store charges its customers. No mandate to accept SNAP or WIC. The city subsidized 30 stores and did not require a single one to accept the food assistance cards carried by the residents it claimed to be serving.
Forty Percent
If FRESH were targeting its stated purpose, stores would be distributed across the city's most underserved areas. Over 40 percent of tax incentive-recipient stores sit within a half mile of another subsidized store. Clusters in transitioning neighborhoods that were convenient for developers. The neighborhoods that needed it more stayed where they were.
The clustering also destabilizes the grocers already operating nearby. Subsidized stores competing for the same market accelerate closures among operators who never qualified for the program, in the exact areas FRESH was supposed to protect. The city subsidized its way into making the problem worse in some of the neighborhoods that needed the most help.
What the Data Says
Studies conducted over the past decade confirm that new supermarkets rarely disrupt shopping patterns or improve health indicators like BMI. Since FRESH launched, diet-related health outcomes in target neighborhoods have barely moved.
Because the problem was never primarily access.
A CUNY food policy researcher said it plainly: "In New York City, food is available in most neighborhoods. There are supermarkets throughout the five boroughs. There are very few neighborhoods that have a scarcity of grocers. The real issue here is affordability and poverty." A grocery store does not solve a poverty problem. It does not lower prices. It does not put money in the pockets of households spending 35 percent of income on rent. The cost of a basic set of goods at Key Foods ranges from $15 to $35 depending on location. FRESH set no price standard. It set no affordability floor. It opened stores and called them equity.
Who It Served
No one knows how many of the 30 stores would have opened without the tax break. That sentence ends the argument. If developers were going to build grocery-anchored residential buildings in transitioning neighborhoods regardless, and the evidence strongly suggests they were, FRESH did not incentivize grocery access. It gave away 25-year tax abatements and 20,000 square feet of bonus floor area to developers who were already coming.
The FRESH program was designed as a public health intervention. What it became is a real estate subsidy with a produce aisle as cover.
The program expanded in 2021 to 11 new community districts. The expansion included Fort Greene, Clinton Hill, Astoria. Not exactly the neighborhoods that launched the 2009 report. Nobody added the SNAP requirement. Nobody set a price standard. Nobody attached a measurable health outcome to renewal. Three administrations, the same terms, the same exemptions, the same press conferences.
The 30 stores exist. Some opened in places that genuinely needed them. That is real.
Fifteen years. Thirty stores. Three mayors. Zero SNAP requirements. Zero price standards. Zero measured health outcomes required for renewal.
The program runs. The buildings go up. The developers do not wait.
Cut roughly 13%, broke cadence in four places, the Bed-Stuy example is now the second paragraph, all "this is not X" constructions are gone, and the ending is a list that just stops. No conclusion. No call to action. Cold.
Like this? Explore more from:
