Eatery Plan Stirs Up Trouble Napoleon Cafe Won't Move To Chestnut Hill

September 16, 1996|By Laura J. Bruch, INQUIRER STAFF WRITER

Sit yourself down at one of the green faux marble tables at Napoleon Cafe to the intriguing prospect of French chocolate Chambord in a lovely neo-classical parlor dominated by a painted screen of the countryside.

It is, most assuredly, a setting of civility.

But oh what incivility it provoked as the owners tried to move their restaurant from a sturdy rowhouse neighborhood in Port Richmond to the classic confines of Chestnut Hill:

Name-calling. Profanity. Even, allegedly, a physical threat. In the bastion of genteelness, yet.

Story continues below.

The Philadelphia Commission on Human Relations was called. Mayor Rendell, a fan of the restaurant, offered to get involved.

But in the end, faced with a group of residents who opposed their liquor license application and who argued that a restaurant would bring more traffic, more parking problems and noise, Napoleon partners Daniel Charest, Dino J. Cataldi and Rusty Dalton have decided not to come.

``We can't do this anymore,'' Charest said last week from the Port Richmond cafe, which has been closed for vacation but (loyal patrons, note) will reopen Wednesday.

This tale of tempers lost and manners unminded started months ago, as commercial types scouted for businesses that could draw more people and panache to Chestnut Hill. Charest, a native of Quebec, and Cataldi, a native of Port Richmond, were contemplating a move themselves.

In 1989, they opened Napoleon Cafe in working-class Port Richmond. Et voila, despite a location not known for being on the cutting edge, the place became a success. But the massive tire fire in March that hurt Interstate 95 also hurt them, and they wanted more people to walk through the door.

Chestnut Hill's old post office at 10 W. Gravers Lane sounded like the perfect place to go.

The three partners proposed a 167-seat restaurant with a garden, neo-classical and art deco decor and ``white tablecloth dining.'' The site already had the appropriate zoning. All the partners had to do was get a liquor license.

No problem, right?

But this is Chestnut Hill, where residents have achieved reknown for standing up to the likes of Kay-Bee Toy and Bertucci's and where it is almost considered de rigueur to scrutinize a wannabe Hiller of commercial aspirations with the intensity of a scientist at his microscope. As it turns out, some of the residents living nearest to the proposed restaurant site didn't want it there.

1 | 2 | 3 | Next »
|
|
|
|
|