Spork: As Useful as the Name Suggests

Spork is a relatively new eatery on Valencia near 21st St. It's been high on my list to try for the whole two months it's been open. Unfortunately, until last night, I've had a severe mental block from actually entering the doors. While Spork seems to have the right combination of interesting, well-priced cuisine, a fun wine list, and a hip, alluring vibe, the problem has been that I wasn't able to get past the memory of a KFC being in the same location a mere six months ago. While KFC might be an erstwhile guilty pleasure (especially the biscuits), I could not imagine that the layers of reconstituted chicken and grease could possibly be gone from the walls. It turns out that I was considerably overdue making my first Spork visit, and KFC remnants are a distant memory.

The interior of Spork is very tastefully conceived and manages to be both modern and comfortable. My wife particularly likes the server uniforms, which I found to be a peculiar-yet-noteworthy observation. The tables and booths are spread out in diner-like fashion, yet I can see that it would still have a very lively buzz on crowded nights.

The menu is that undefinable cuisine that seems to be ever-growing in popularity, with a bit of Italian, some California/New American, and shades of Asian/Japanese. For instance, our starters were a yellowtail sashimi with a Japanese citrus custard and wasabi vinegar, while the other was a gnocchi gratin with fennel sausage. It was an odd mix that worked well. The flavors aren't the least bit delicate, but in this case it keeps the meal interesting. And at the low price point ($13-$18 for entrees), that's the approach that makes the most sense and they execute it well.

The mix of entrees is also quite interesting. They offer a steak and an "inside-out burger," as well as a pasta dish, "mussels and pork with a spork," and a seabass. Our very nice hipster waiter steered us toward the mussels and the seabass and we weren't disappointed. The sweet corn and shitakes that came with the seabass was a highlight, while we did note that the broth for the mussels could've used more time on the stove.

Overall, my feeling leaving Spork is that it covers a niche that has been generally underserved in San Francisco: interesting, tasty entrees in the mid-$10s in an atmosphere that feels new, lively and vibrant. I had a hard time thinking of restaurants that were similar in that basic description, Chow and Street being two, though the comparison with both is very loose. Regardless, KFC is a distant memory.

House of Prime Rib Has Seen Better Days

There was a time in my life when I would've told you that the House of Prime Rib on Van Ness was my favorite restaurant. I loved nearly everything about it. The menu is so simple that you have your order memorized by the second time you go there ("English cut medium, mashed" was all I'd say). The way the courses are set up in advance for you, it makes a meal there very pleasing and ritualistic. I've said before that the salad is my favorite anywhere. The bread is unbeatable. The way the prime rib, au jus, mashed potatoes, creamed spinach and Yorkshire pudding meld together is masterful. I love the way the martini comes with the shaker in a nice cold glass.

BUT... I somehow no longer have the same warm feelings about the place. Perhaps I'm getting older. More likely, I think, The HOPR is getting older. The format remains the same. The bread is still the best bread in San Francisco. The martinis still come the same great way. But now there are all sorts of obstacles to my HOPR enjoyment.

The first and biggest one is health concerns. No meal makes me feel more unhealthy - fast food included. I wake up the next morning with my feet swollen to size 15 from the sodium. A friend coined the term "meat sweats" based on meals there, explaining the disgusting sensation you get overnight after a meal there. And invariably I ooze the smell of the creamed spinach for days. In recent visits (all told, I've been there probably 50 times over eight years) I've switched up my order to include putting the au jus on the side and special-ordering steamed spinach. I still feel unhealthy, however, and vow to only go there if absolutely forced by some large group event I must attend. I've even considered ordering the fish of the day, though I've never actually gone through with such a pathetic plan.

Beyond the health issues, the HOPR (properly pronounced, "Hopper", by the way) has lost a lot of lustre for me in other areas too. One problem I have is around the wine. I wouldn't begrudge them the $30 corkage fee if either they had a great wine list or they waived corkage if you buy a second expensive bottle. Neither scenario is even close, so the $30 corkage does really sting.

Another thing that really bugs me now is the rising prices combined with the lack of investment. When I first went there in 1999, the price of the English Cut was around $22. Now it's $37 (granted, your salad and everything else is included). But they only do one thing! All their sides are the same, and their agreements with suppliers were probably set in 1968 and they're paying the same prices for their ingredients (hyperbole alert... please note). The place may as well be a mint the way they print money. Now I don't begrudge the very nice Betts family making a very nice living, but it does really bother me that the carpet and upholstery is the same dowdy crap they last installed in the 70s. If I'm going to pay through the nose for my meal, please don't make me sit in a disgusting booth coated in three decades of meat stench.

I could go on with the complaints. The staff isn't nearly as well-trained as they used to be. The clientèle is not the same bunch of old-school San Franciscans that it used to be. The salad is now more about the MSG than it is about the beets and dressing. And on and on.

I'm rooting for the HOPR to make a return to glory, but I'm not counting on it. In the meantime, I'm going to do my very best to avoid the meat sweats. I'll tackle my alternative locations for great beef in another post.

Perbacco

I really appreciate seeing aggressive, ambitious projects downtown, whether it's a fancy new restaurant, the Rincon Towers project, the new Moscone Center, or anything else. Downtown needs a constant influx of investment and innovation to stay vibrant and relevant. As San Franciscans, we've been generally lucky in this regard. In particular, I also appreciate when a worn-out, has-been restaurant with a great location gets a full face-lift and new life.

Perbacco, the now-year-old Italian that took the place of the old Gold Dust next to Tadich Grill, fits this mold, and thus I'm glad it's there and open. However, the follow-through of the restaurant itself doesn't quite live up to the promise and appearance. While it remains an interesting spot to try, flaws with the food, service and pricing make it a place one would have a hard time rushing back to.

The interior is wonderful. A long bar at the front is very inviting, with a brick backdrop, the now-stylish downward-slanted mirrors and great lighting. The scene is active and vibrant. Behind it and above is a two-level dining room that's also very well-lit and the tables are the perfect distance apart for creating a comfortable dining experience while keeping the feel active enough to be fun and potentially even a bit rowdy. Whoever designed this place had a clear vision, looked at every detail, and made few mistakes.

The same eye for detail doesn't quite get to the staff however. They seem somewhat disorganized, forgetting either us or our orders a few times over the course of our three visits. One time we were seated upstairs with only two other parties around (boring compared to the downstairs) and it was clear that they forgot we were there and didn't assign anyone to us. That made me feel really big and important. When ordering wine from their expensive and expansive wine list, the sommelier was less than interested in finding us some fun, interesting value in the $40-$70 range, presumably because the price point wasn't worth his time. I'm sure he's very knowledgeable given the large list and what others have said, but I prefer talking to someone who's simply excited about wine and what they've put on the list and shows it without pretension.

The food is good but not great. In all three visits, I was much more excited about the appetizers and first courses rather than the entrees. The house-cured salami is a definite highlight, and I'm not the only one who noticed, apparently. The entrees were acceptable but uninspired. My overall reaction to the food was that everything (except the salami) could've been a notch or two better, and that the prices are about 20% too high as a result. The pasta is not quite a fresh or flavorful as you'd hope for. The meats not quite so skillfully prepared as you'd expect for the prices.

So given all this, my final recommendation is that it's worth an exploratory visit, but you might want to stick to drinks and appetizers at the bar to start. Given other viewpoints I've seen, I may be in the minority. I love the overall effort to do something so ambitious downtown, but the ambition doesn't quite meet the final delivery for me.

Spencer's House

I have to say, I was shocked and amazed to hear that Chez Spencer was celebrating its 5th anniversary this year. This unlikely and upscale French restaurant is located on 14th St. near the Best Buy, tucked away from the street by a garden, then a dining patio, and finally in a fairly industrial building that appears to have been a warehouse.

The amazement I had about it being around for five years came from a few things. First of all, it's an excellent restaurant all around and I only heard about it for the first time about a year and a half ago. I prefer to blame that on their inept PR rather than admit that I just wasn't paying attention. More importantly, the interior is quite hip and I don't believe it's the least bit outdated. If you were putting together a fine French restaurant in a converted warehouse this year, it might look a lot like Chez Spencer. And lastly, both their food and their service still have that extra effort and edge you typically see at a restaurant that's aggressively trying to make a positive name for itself on the SF scene.

Let's be clear though, that while the food is very good, it's not cheap. They offer a six-course tasting menu for $80 that looks like way too much food to me. We opted for the a la carte menu which is designed to be three courses with entrees in the high $20s and low $30s. Our dining highlights included a smoked duck breast for a second course and the venison entree. The venison was a "Pan Seared Venison Tenderloin" with juniper berry-peppercorn jus. The meat was sliced very thin and appeared to be nearly carpaccio-like in its rareness, but when tasted it was clearly cooked through and not at all gamey. One theory we discussed is that it may be cured for days with a salt rub. Whatever the process, the result was amazing and some of the best meat I've ever had.

Also of note are the martinis. They have a nice specialty cocktail list, of which one option is their special martini. It's served in a tumbler that is mostly filled by one, single giant round ice cube. The ice is so big that it barely melts yet keeps your martini very cold. It's a very nice touch and something very unique. Beyond cocktails, the wine list is very French and has good options, though I'm a bit sick of restaurants pulling the old $30-corkage-fee move. However our group brought one bottle and purchased another nice one and they waived the corkage, so at least they're not unreasonable.

All in all, Chez Spencer gets a big thumbs up from me. It's a great place for a date, to meet friends, or even do a civilized family dinner. I'll be back.

Tidbits, Updates and Reconsiderations

I've noticed that quite a few items I've written in the past are sorely in need of an update. And since this blog is the journal of record for all things food in this town, I think it's my duty to set the record straight on a few things.

- I've found chicken that's worthy of adding to my Destination Chicken post from August. farmerbrown has some of the better fried chicken I've ever tasted. And the mac and cheese that comes with it isn't to be sneezed at either. The chicken meat is quite flavorful.

In fact, the restaurant overall is a great find and a great addition to the SF dining scene. First of all, the decor is quite fetching. It's dimly lit without being dark and the tables are arranged in such a casual way as to elicit the good aspect of lounge dining while still having the structure most would want with a good meal. The only complaint I'd have is that writing "farmerbrown" in lights on some of the columns in the dining room feels a little contrived and over-branded.

The cocktails are spectacular, and are a nice departure from both the SF standards as well as the developing trends in town. I had a blood orange margarita (okay, a few of them) that was dripping with fresh fruit and the tumbler was salted with a spicy salt. The food was equally as good, and also very well priced. One highlight was the spareribs appetizer that's done more savory-Southern-BBQ style than the equally good slow-cooked, fall-off-the-bone style.

Lastly, I'm not sure whether to be annoyed or amused that they decided to make "farmerbrown" one word and not capitalize it. You make your own call there. I do know that it feels very awkward to start a sentence with it.


- My opinion of Range hasn't changed one bit, but some of my reasons for liking it so much have.

First of all, I made the mistake of picking out specific staff members, when in reality nearly everyone that works there is exceptional at their job. I haven't met a bartender there that I wouldn't consider in the top 2% of bartenders anywhere (both skill and personality). Every waitperson is completely buttoned-up and uniformly friendly and warm. Credit co-owner Cameron West for great hires.

Second, I love the way that they care about their local clientele and take care of them and make them feel at home (yes, myself included, but also from what I've heard from others). I wish more restaurants did this.

Lastly, I love how since they got their Michelin star they haven't mailed it in one bit. They still have the same top-level commitment to a great dining experience.

- I have a winner for my worst dining experience of the millenium: La Rondalla. I recently went for a birthday and it was so incredibly bad that it's actually a fond memory. It's a special thing when literally every possible aspect of a dining experience comes apart at the seams. From getting seated, to our waitstaff, to our disgusting margaritas, to having to pay for those margaritas at our table separately from our dinner bill in cash right away, to frozen entrees that were only 50% heated up, to being brought water but not enough for the whole table to have some, to disgusting, dirty tables, to etc, etc, etc. You get the picture. It was laughable, and quite memorable.

Sidenote here: La Rondalla makes Puerto Allegre look incredible. Long ago I wrote a mixed review on Puerto Allegre that to this day accounts for an inordinate percentage of the traffic on this site (If you Googled some version of "Puerto Allegre" to find this, raise your hand now... it's uncanny). Well, considering Puerto is competing with La Rondalla, I take back anything bad I wrote about Puerto. In comparison it's a shining star.

Shopper's Refuge: Eating and Drinking Near Union Square

For people that live in the nether-reaches of Northern California and make an annual shopping trek into downtown San Francisco every year, they have usually scoped out their favorite spots to find respite from the crowds years ago. John's Grill, Cheesecake Factory, Max's and Scala's are common examples, but the list is endless. Typically this shopper found their spot in 1985 and hasn't branched out since then. They read travel guides like this and like to take the glass elevators at the St. Francis. The food at their spot is typically bad and the drinks over-priced, but it doesn't matter because this profile of shopper is looking for the good time and the memory only. I know, because in the early 90s I was this shopper.

But for those discerning locals looking for a little something more from their respite, here are my recommendations of places to check out:

Postrio Bar - This is probably my favorite spot to stop for a snack and a cocktail. It's not the restaurant, mind you, but just the bar that has its own food menu. Their appetizers are quite good and reasonably-priced. On a recent visit we had dueling tartars of steak and tuna - both of which were excellent. Their pizzas are quite good, as are their sandwiches. They have a sausage plate that I particularly enjoy that comes with some excellent housemade mustard for $11. Even the expensive stuff on the menu is under $20. The cocktails are very good, while classic, and you always have the option of ordering off the extensive main restaurant's wine list.

Overall, this is my go-to spot in the area, however it's so small that I considered not writing about so as to not give it more publicity and make it more crowded for myself. Then I remembered that I have a regular readership that barely cracks double digits and it doesn't matter ("Hi Mom! We're number one!"). Still I'd feel better if you'd just keep this one to yourself. Thanks.

Nordstrom Cafe Bistro - Forgotten amid the opening of the new Bloomingdale's side of the mall and all food that came along with it is the cafe at the top of Nordstrom. This place has all the necessary ingredients: a basic-but-fun menu, solid cocktails, a view, no waiting, etc. Basically, it's the poor-man's Rotunda at Neiman-Marcus but with the bonus that they don't take themselves so seriously. My go-to food item here is the Asian Chicken Salad. It's exactly what you'd expect from something called an "Asian Chicken Salad."

Sidenote: While these is quite a bit of good food in the basement of the Bloomingdale's side of the mall, the crowds are so horrendous that I can't give it a recommendation of any kind. Going down there and trying to eat is looney for at least the next year.

Johnny Foley's Irish Pub - Located on O'Farrell and Cyril Magnin, this place executes on the Irish Pub theme quite well. The burgers are good, using good meat and handmade patties. It's all reasonably-priced. Plus, this place has a few strong advantages over most others. First, it's spacious which means that you have room to set down your shopping bags and your not tripping over everyone else's bags. Second, you can catch up on sports scores if you're shopping on the weekend. Lastly, while there you can always chuckle over the bizarre and contrived story that they tell about the real Johnny Foley found on their site.

Tunnel Top - If you're shopping into the evening and are just looking for a drink and an escape from the crowd I profiled above, I like the Tunnel Top above the Stockton Street Tunnel. At night, it's more of a hip-hop-meets-mid-level-ad-exec crowd. I know this isn't for everybody, but I'm a fan.

Seasons - The bar in the Four Seasons is great (like Postrio, I'm promoting the bar and their separate menu here, not the restaurant itself). The cocktails are very good here, it's extremely spacious and comfortable, and it's quiet. You get olives and wasabi peas with your drink, which somehow is a huge draw for me. The bar menu is very good, including a great burger (which should be great for $18). This place is like the quieter, more-expensive version of the Postrio bar with big comfy chairs.

Shalimar - I'm not the biggest fan of Indian cuisine, but sometimes I crave it for some reason. Those that really know their Indian, or at least claim to, say there's much better around SF than Shalimar. I like it however, and it's also the cheapest snack I've mentioned on this list. The downside is that it's on Jones a couple blocks and a world away from the relative safety and cleanliness of Union Square.

Others - I wish there was more good walk-and-eat street food downtown, but there just isn't. The hot dog stands are pretty gross, even for hot dog stands, and places like Blondies Pizza I'm not a big fan of. I like Grand Cafe and Cortez a bit. You can always go up to Bush St. and do the Belden Place scene. There's a great little bar on Maiden Lane called Otis. There are good options around, but you need to do some hunting to find them.

Offensive side note: If I were on the ball, I would've written this post about three weeks ago when it actually would've helped people. Instead, I'm writing about where to find good food and drink in Union Square a week before the traditional holiday shopping season ends. We're already halfway through Hanukkah, which could make this post tangentially anti-Semitic. But I'm going to write it anyway and hopefully it will live on and be relevant next year (assuming of course that Al-Qaeda still lets us have "holidays").

All Bad Service Isn't Created Equal

One of the common complaints we all say and we all hear (especially in San Francisco) is that a restaurant disappointed because of "bad service". A quick tour of Yelp will validate this. While the descriptor itself definitely conjures up a clear image of what the diner felt like while dining, it's terribly limited in its accuracy. There are different types of bad service that occur for different reasons and discerning between them can give you a better idea of whether or not to give the restaurant a second or third chance.

I see two categories of poor service - systemically-bad service and bad service created by individuals. When it involves individuals, this is a restaurant that generally has its act together, but you happened to get a server or staff member who's generally apathetic or incompetent. This can bum out your meal, but this is a correctable problem for the restaurant. Systemically-bad service is what results from a poorly-managed restaurant that is either disorganized or chronically understaffed. This is a much tougher problem to fix, and often makes hard-working waitstaff look unfairly incompetent.

To give a quick football analogy, in one case your offense doesn't move because a receiver drops passes, and in the other case the offense didn't move because the offensive coordinator put together a bad scheme and everyone was in the wrong place. Same result - very different causes.

As example of systemically-bad service, there are two breakfast restaurants in Noe Valley that are pretty good examples. One, Pomelo, attempts to serve a very large crowd with only two waiters and no busboys. It appears that these two are the owners and they're either cheap or unable to hire from some other reason. They run around frantically with a sort of ants-in-their-pants look about them. The effort is there, but the end result is that it takes way too long for everything to occur at that place. Many people like this place, but I can't get past what a missed opportunity it is.

Another example is Toast, right down the block. They're quite new, and I generally like them, so I think they'll get things ironed out quickly enough, but they have the opposite problem - too many servers. They have a bunch of young girls running around and nobody knows what they're supposed to be doing. Whether it's waiting on a table, getting water, or clearing dishes, they have to have a conversation every time about it to see who's going to do it. The result is highly inefficient and you never really know who to ask about anything. One good staff meeting could clear this up. I hope it happens.

There are plenty of examples of poor service by individuals, and you all know what it looks like so I don't think I need to go into a bunch of examples. A recent dinner at Foreign Cinema comes to mind, but there are oodles of these.

There is, however, a combination of these two types of service that creates the absolute perfect storm of miserable dining. This occurs when you have apathetic inexperienced staff managed by idiots. The staff is disorganized, leading to poor morale for an already-incompetent staff, the management doesn't know how to fix it, and on and on. Polkers on Polk St comes to mind (even though I love their food). There are others, but I'll stop picking on people.

Usually an honest smile and some attempt at an effort makes everything alright in the end. But recognizing the cause of "bad service" can help you make a more-informed determination on a restaurant.

Flat Tire: The Michelin Guide in San Francisco

It's high-time that I weighed in on the Michelin Guide's rankings of Bay Area restaurants. I've been thinking about it for a couple weeks now. Overall, I'm just glad that the guide has expanded here and provided another critical voice. Clearly, they made some errors, both in fact and opinion, and those errors have been well-documented. However, they succeeded in spurring discussion and probably in selling guides as well.

For those that aren't familiar, here's a brief rundown of the Michelin Guide. They try to review/describe every notable restaurant. A very few restaurants get stars, and just getting a single star is a very notable achievement. Two stars is a huge achievement. Three stars is world-class/elite/rare. This star system is the snobbiest of the snobby (in a good way) as shown by how few restaurants are even given stars. Service seems to be valued at a premium, as is French cuisine. I'm told that value plays a factor – I don't see that in practice, but I'll use that criteria to gripe about their rankings in some cases.

For those that haven't seen it, here's a list of who got stars in the Bay Area:

• 3 stars - French Laundry
• 2 stars - Aqua, Michael Mina, Manresa, Cyrus
• 1 star - Chez Panisse, Fleur de Lys, La Folie, the Dining Room at the Ritz-Carlton, Rubicon, Bushi-Tei, Quince, Range, Acquerello, Masa's, Gary Danko, Boulevard, Fifth Floor, Sushi Ran, Chez TJ, Auberge du Soleil, La Toque, Bouchon, Bistro Jeanty, Terra, Dry Creek Kitchen, Farmhouse Inn & Restaurant, K&L Bistro

So here's my take on it.

I'm not going to offer opinion on French Laundry because I haven't eaten a full meal there, though clearly its reputation precedes it and no one is surprised in got three stars. Given that standard, and the idea that Daniel and others in New York didn't get three stars, I can't credibly argue that any other restaurant should've gotten three stars with French Laundry.

That said, the one place I would've assumed was in that class was Gary Danko. I've eaten at just about every fine Frisco establishment, and Danko rises well above them all in my estimation. Thus, since I can't argue for three stars, I can at least say that its an abomination that they didn't get two stars.

GD approaches both its food and dining experience with a decidedly Californian flair, which is perhaps what did them in for the Michelin audience. If so, this exposes the fundamental flaw of the Guide – that overseas snobs are telling locals what's good for them and encouraging tourists not to fully embrace the local food scene. And I say “snob” in only the most positive way. Anyway, I can't see any scenario where Gary Danko didn't deserve at least two stars, and I could likewise make a strong argument for others as well.

Which brings me to the four restaurants that did get two stars.

Manresa is in San Jose. I don't eat in San Jose at dinner time. I'd sooner take a cab to Palo Alto than eat dinner in San Jose. I'm sure it's wonderful. South Bay people can go ahead and enjoy it and not worry about me taking their reservation.

Cyrus I've heard great things about but haven't been. The locals up in Sonoma County have strong opinions about their local restaurants and are exceedingly tough critics on their own establishments. I know, because I grew up there. Cyrus gets the universal seal of approval from everyone up there. Gourmet did a nice feature on their cocktails this past month (which they don't offer online). Basically, their bartender Scott Beattie does the whole cocktails-as-cuisine thing and is apparently the best around at it. I know other bartenders who know him and consider him the guru. Adding that to an already great restaurant is a nice bonus. I'll be at Cyrus dining sooner than later. (Dry Creek Kitchen, which got one star, does NOT pass the locals' test, by the way)

Michael Mina and Aqua are not nearly as good as most of the restaurants that got one star. Aqua is a straight-up has-been. Mina probably hasn't been inside that kitchen in four years, and the food has definitely slipped since its peak in 2000. He doesn't even list Aqua on his website. The namesake restaurant in the Westin has the feel of a chain, which isn't an odd phenomena at all, since it is a chain. There are now Mina restaurants in Dana Point, Atlantic City, San Jose, and Las Vegas (four of them) and he's all over the food channel. I don't begrudge him for branching out and making a buck, but neither restaurant belongs in this category. Some of the restaurants with one star have true craftsmen (and women) working every day in those kitchens making unbelievable food and creating a wonderful experience, and putting Aqua and MM above them is an insult.

Which restaurants are insulted, you ask? As I mentioned, Gary D was definitely deserving of two stars, as is Fleur de Lys, Masa's and Boulevard. The fact that Chez Panisse didn't get two stars goes directly back to my point about the Guide not understanding the local cuisine. And though I haven't eaten at these places, I hear that the Dining Room at the Ritz, Terra and La Folie should've been given a shot.

Now that I've been sufficiently negative and done my afternoon Frano-phobing, there are a couple things I feel very good about. If you've read me in the past, you know that I love Range, and I'm glad to see they were recognized with a star. Personally, I would've given them two (especially with value as a factor), but that's just me and I understand why others may not. Similarly, K&L Bistro in Sebastopol is an absolute gem, and I'm glad to see them get recognized.

I'm also a bit intrigued that Bushi-Tei got a star. I haven't been there but have walked past them near Japantown numerous times. I've always wondered what the hell it was, and I've never heard people talk about it. Either the Michelin Guide's local consultant knows the place well and used his one “I'm-giving-it-a-star-dammit” card on it, or it's a secret gem. Either way, that's cool and I want to try it.

The only one-star place I have an issue with is Fifth Floor. I think the food is uninventive, the décor is dated, the service is stiff (but professional). Basically, from a food perspective, they take standard ingredients, basic combinations, and then soak it all in butter. I suspect that they got their star simply based on their price point and their reputation, but since value is supposed to be counted, I would've taken them off my list.

So what missed the cut and should've been included? Not much, but here's a short list of places I would've considered:

• Harris' (no steak on the list, and this is probably the best so it gets a star by default)
• Isa (the one place off the list I'd say was really robbed)
• Kokkari (maybe too inconsistent, but can be top-notch)
• Piperade (truly quality Spanish cuisine)
• Town Hall (I'm not totally sold, but it's better than many on the list)
• Slanted Door (slipped from the glory days, but the décor counts for something)