“ I wanted to create an excellent neighborhood restaurant, where friends could meet... enjoy simple, homemade food with a glass of wine... and walk out with some change in their pockets and the desire to come back."
This was Margot's mission and she accomplished that and more. It's always difficult to see a great restaurateur (especially a woman) go and yet a sea of mediocrity exists all around us. We have restaurants that microwave their food that somehow they find an audience and yet a woman with great talent and culinary passion to see fatality by this recession. I am sorry to see her go. I worked with her just two weeks ago at a charity event for the Sexual Assault and Crisis Center. She never said a word. She handled this very emotional chapter with grace and class. We hope she resurfaces again when the riff-raff that have opened fade away and leave room for people that are serious about food. If you're involved in zoning in Stamford, please make note and realize these recent closures are not just the economy but an inevitable reaction to too many restaurants allowed in a town where the population has not grown, the retail is not growing but the restaurants are continuing to open one after another. It's a band-aid for landlords but not good for the big picture of Stamford. We need all of these residential projects completed, some storefronts rented to interesting retail and then maybe we can support the restaurants we have.
Since Restaurants are considered "commercial", it is not the zoning board, but actually a change in charter that would need to be done. At this point any commercial site can have a restaurant and now the chains nave descended, I thin that is more of an issue than anything.
ReplyDeleteCheap easy food becomes the main stay and food worth the money slides away (sorry Napa, that includes you and a number of very fine places to eat in Stamford).
It is zoning because 15 years ago the liquor licenses were only allowed within a certain radius of each other. They lifted this to allow for a thriving restaurant scene and indeed, it came but no one thought about the next phase. When is enough enough? Or when have they now hurt the market? Greenwich is still this way today. You can either limit liquor or food licenses which is handled by zoning. When we opened our wine shop we applied for a zoning change to allow more wine retail. Funny that retail is protected but not restaurants. We all know that what draws retail stores to even consider a location is strong foot traffic and busy restaurants. Well, they are losing both and they will then lose the chance in gaining strong retail. What will Stamford become? Chains, movie theatre, Burlington, Target and a mall...sounds like White Plains to me. It doesn't have to be cheap food that's the main stay it just has to be controled as they control every other aspect of the master plan.
ReplyDeleteThere's really nothing wrong with Target, Burlington, and a mall. They all serve a need in the community -- if they didn't, they wouldn't be here. Whether we like it or not, our city is more like White Plains than it is like Greenwich.
ReplyDeleteI agree that we need our residential buildings completed, but even if they were completed, are there people waiting around to move in? I think the reason the building progress has slowed (stopped?) is because there no longer appears to be a ready market of residents.
A strong master plan supported thru zoning would be a good thing and there's a lot of discussion going on in the city about what the future of Stamford should be. Stamford's dream role as "Wall St North" seems to have disappeared, so what's next?
However, zoning shouldn't exist to protect people from having to eat "cheap food" - if people are choosing to patronize the "cheap food" places that microwave their food rather than a chef with "great talent and culinary passion" I'd suggest that it might be because the chef hasn't been able to demonstrate to her customers that her talent and passion produce a product that is more valuable than the "cheap food" place down the road.
Napa - your info is just plain wrong! Zoning has nothing to do with it and even the liquor commision does not have anything to do with it. I am an authority in the issue. Greenwich is actually no different than Stamford, as long as it is commercial, you can put a restaurant there.
ReplyDeleteIt's always unfortunate to see a locally-owned restaurant go under. Napa's right, though, that Stamford needs some interesting retail. Unfortunately, the landlords won't play ball, and would rather have an empty storefront and a tax write-off than a unique tenant that adds character to this town.
ReplyDeleteThis is obviously a heated subject. Time will tell. Whitemist, I wish I could convince you that this is really the case. Greenwich has finite number of liquor licenses allowed based on population. That's why you really don't see more opening unless existing locations. They have been able to draw strong retail and a great mix. About 15 years ago, this was the case when there was only JR's, Rory's and IL Falco but they lifted this restiction to allow growth of the downtown. This brings us to today. I am on the board of the DSSD and we have this debate frequently enough that my facts are correct. The thing with "chains" is they have the ability to sunsidize locations and the marketing dollars are spread over multiple properties. Very different picture than a single operation. I have no problem with Target, in fact, I shop there often. I just wish we could get more than box retail and draw some small shops like the few that are on Bedford Street. I know there are a few landlords that try but there are a few that simply rent for the sake of renting without a big picture in mind. Just my two cents. BTW-Galangal on Atlantic Street closed.
ReplyDeleteEven though I only enjoyed Margot's once, I was sad to see her go. I don't know enough about zoning or charters in Stamford to join this heated discussion, but just wanted to publicly commend the indie restaurants in Stamford that go out on a limb and offer something special that keeps young, vibrant people coming back. I used to dine out a lot more, but these economic times have me cutting back a lot. Just hang on until the economy picks up and I'll be back!
ReplyDeleteI just saw this posting today and wanted to thank you for this warm tribute. Having the respect from the folks from Napa is a great honor.
ReplyDeleteIn retrospect I do think that there is a point about the unlimited liquor licensing available in this town. That and no real zoning plan, at least not surrounding downtown, i.e. Bull's Head. That particular shopping center is even cannabilizing itself now with an overabundance of restaurants about to open.
Most of all I want to thank Napa and the others here who have shown great support for me and what I tried to do. I am now working in New York City where what I tried to do at my cafe with everything made fresh and on premise is more widely understood. But there were those of you in Stamford who got it- and to those wonderful people, I thank you again.
-Margot Olshan
The best of chefs are artists. Unfortunately Stamford has only few and they should be treasured. Many, many potential customers travel to Greenwich, New Canaan, Westport and even New York when they're looking for fine food instead of staying home.
ReplyDeleteWe should have our own cadre of fine chefs and restaurants to attract people to our area for food and shopping.
The great chef's talents run deep and they lay in the creation of menus, recipes,superior preparation and the understanding of wines. These artists, as in other fields (writing, painting,music etc.) rarely have sharp business instincts. They are vulnerable to exploitation by landlords, bankers, etc. and too often they are -- making a risky business even riskier.
We'd have a healthier fine restaurant scene and an inflow of business if landlords and bankers had the wisdom to make a concerted effort to attract the best chefs to our community rather than take advantage of the ones they have.