Cafe on Clinton closed?
Cafe on Clinton wasn't open last night (Valentine's day) or for brunch. Is it done?
Would be sad, though the service had gotten pretty bad.
I was thinking the same thing. I live not too far from there but haven't eaten there since my wife and I saw a HUGE you-know-what during our dinner. We never went back.
I m surprised they hung on this long, i went twice in the past six months and the food was truly bad each time. Never had food so over salted...ever, and I love salt. The service was just as bad as the food. I was rooting for this to be a solid neighboorhood place, but bad is the only to describe it.
re: Hungry Brooklyn Mike
Agree- talk about fucking up a good thing. I mean, this place has BUILT-IN appeal (great location, adorable space, no real competition on a residential street, etc.) yet STILL somehow managed to be bad.
It's heartbreaking, really.
Hopefully something opens in it's place and gets it right.
(Uh, I don't know why it wouldn't let me edit my original post but instead piggy-backed my 2nd edit onto the 1st version. Whatever...
Prediction: whatever restaurant opens- if done right- will be filled a la Watty and Meg.
W & M replaced Cafe Carciofo- which was awful, yet located in literally a perfect, heaven-sent spot. I mean, you'd have to WORK to fuck up in that location (which CC dutifully did). W & M comes in and BAM! -- filled to capacity most nights.
I predict the same thing would happen with any even halfway-decently-run restaurant in the Cafe on Clinton-space. It's just such a perfect locale.
Location doesn't always equal guaranteed success...I mean look at how many great places on Smith St. that went under for no good reason! and you can't beat that location!!!
W&M LOOKS filled to capacity because they only have 7-8 tables, the rest is taken up by the bar, I can't even afford to go there and give it a try, because its so overpriced! I hope whatever replaces cafe on clinton is reasonably priced and has good food! I don't care how pretty it is!!!
I disagree- location is everything.
I don't think "Smith Street" is a good location- in fact, I think the opposite. When I say "location" I mean literally down to the specific block, not "street" or "neighborhood."
Watty and Meg is on a beautiful, tree-lined corner, one that just makes people comfortable. The sun gets blocked and yet there's nice light, if that makes any sense. In the summer it's cool and comfortable and in the winter dark and romantic. Also, it's open on two sides and has no real competition on the idyllic brownstone side of Kane, and as for Court Street, well- there is no shaded/pretty area on Court Street except for the one they occupy. And c'mon- there are more than seven tables- they have seven tables on the street, for God sakes. Plus there's that back room. The place is always packed.
And this from a guy who's not even a fan of W & M. In fact, I don't actually like the restaurant-- yet I would never say it's ugly or that the vibe is bad; indeed, I think it's location is far and away the best thing about it.
As for Cafe on Clinton: it is/was similar in that it's located on a beautiful block, with a park right next door, no competition (Ted and Honey isn't a serious restaurant), and just a cool vibe. People wanted to hang out there.
Location is huge- think about it: the odious, execrable Cafe Carciofo was only able to survive as long as it did because of its physical surroundings.
Same thing for Cafe on Clinton.
I think whoever gets that space has a potential goldmine on their hands as long as they don't fuck it up.