barolo

I need to catch up: Friday - bran muffin and coffee Saturday - grilled rib eye steak, tomato and basil salad (picture below), pattypan squash and onion cooked with white wine, potato and green bean salad with mustard vinaigrette, peach and blueberry cake from August Gourmet (picture below). Sunday - takeout spicy tuna roll, V8, a peach Monday - lentil salad, pan fried salmon, sliced tomato Tonight - left over lentil salad, left over bratwurst, steamed green beans

Fair comment - but how, short of appointing you Food and Beverage Inspector, do we get better concessions in the Parks?!?!

I thought you'd challenge me on the cruise ship comment, Jamie. Of course, there are cruise lines and passengers that focus on food. But I'd wager that they are in the minority. I'm not arguing that we should ignore them or discount their importance, just recognize that many tourists - and locals - are perfectly content with mediocre food, a drink and a great view at a reasonable price. I noted in your comments about Watermark that many of your exit interviewees were pretty happy with their experience, including the food. Price point does matter, to locals and to many tourists. I had that experience recently with visitors - we were constantly looking for relatively inexpensive places with a variety of foods that would appeal to the multi-generational nature of the group and, of course, showcased Vancouver's natural beauty. The big-box (good label, by the way) restaurants mostly do a good job of dealing with this type of group. In fact one of my guests specifically requested a return to Bridges because of a good experience with a large group on a previous visit. We had a pretty good meal. I wouldn't choose to go to Bridges Bistro normally because I save my limited dining out dollars for a different kind of experience, but it worked well for the group as a whole. I think a visitor could do much worse. Of course I'd be much happier if we had more restaurants with food as beautiful as the view. But how many of them would be sustainable through the winter months? I don't have the knowledge of restaurant financing and operations to do more than speculate but it seems to me that there is a real juggling act of pricing vs quality to succeed in Vancouver. I read the article on the Joe Fortes makeover in BC Business and found it an interesting read. That type of upgrading or refreshing seems like a viable and business savvy option for many of our long-time stalwarts in Vancouver. I would like to see the Parks Board take a more active interest in the quality of the food offerings on Park lands - I mean the concessions as well as the restaurants.

Why the hell not, I ask? Look across from Bridges to "C" and Nu, sitting pretty like a perfect set of lovelies, challenging Bridges to a duel across the water with food, wine, and service. It's no contest, right? But unfortunately, it's the deep-fried, unadventurous palates of the Gap masses that matter. That their culinary resumes move forward in steady, blinkered, fart-propelled inches doesn't. Burger and fries. Burger and fries. Burger and fries. What a pretty view, Norman. Now rub my belly and pay the bill. I've spent my first years in Vancouver witnessing a scene evolve at an accelerated pace. The dining public are getting better educated and more adventurous, trying new and exotic flavours that were formerly milkbones for the rich and dainty. Some restaurants have captialised on this broad advance, either by driving the engine of progress or sitting in the caboose. Look at Noble and Earl's! Even the so-called sub-par restaurants you mention haven't escaped the quickening. Waterfront or not, those that suck in the tourists like Disney pimps are milking the same teat of West Coast rapture, of love and affection for the local, the new, and the imaginative (for the record, the Fish House is excellent, as is the Cannery. The Sequoia is OK, or at least puts forward the pretense of effort, while other waterfront places such as Lift (there last night - packed!) have vastly improved since their weak-kneed start back in January). I so very badly wanted to enjoy the food at Watermark because I think its an ambassador of our town, and far more so than say...Sandbar. From the moment construction began it became, like it or not, emblematic. And what it is telling visitors right now is that Vancouverites have the culinary maturity of Chef Boyardee dressed in Abercrombie and Kitsch. ← If you look at Watermark's menu (I haven't had the food) it seems to me they are running in Bridges Bistro territory (only Bridges doesn't really even go Asian), so why be surprised that they are not C or Nu or Lift - they aren't trying to be. I'm not as sure that they will be that different from Sequoia Grill and Fish House in a few months (I can't agree that Fish House is excellent - but that is a quibble - same old menu year after year). So you are saying it is more than the food, it is the menu and the feed-the-masses concept that is wrong? Right from the beginning I had fewer expectations from Watermark than many here did, and I don't see it being so crucial to Vancouver's reputation, so all the fuss about its start up troubles seems a litte hyperbolic to me. Makes for entertaining reading though.

Agreed. The City of Vancouver has leased this important real estate to a private operator. Tourist-heavy restaurants do have an additional responsibility, in my opinion, especially this one. Unfortunately though our waterfront restaurants are largely MOR and, consequently, less. Much less. I certainly am saying that a relatively expensive but poor dining experience can absolutely sour impressions, especially for cruise tourists with but one night to spend. At least that's what the cruise tourists sitting beside us at Watermark had to tell us. After accomodation, dining out is the next largest expenditure that many tourists make. In many tourist trap restaurants there is a 'burn and turn' mentality--i.e. burn the mahi mahi and turn the table. I'm sure that you and other conscientious servers go to extra lengths to ensure dining pleasure for visitors. That was certainly my impression of the service at Watermark. But even a cheerful, well-trained and professional server couldn't redeem the kitchen's shortcomings. It has a ripple effect up and down the food chain. You can well imagine what the hotel GM whom we dined with had to say--he immediately called his concierge desk. "Drinks Only" recommendation he said. Because it would reflect poorly on his own operation, he can ill afford to recommend restaurant experiences that might be sub-par. And so on. I believe that if they (hypothetical tourists) were to go to West that they would likely leave with a more favourable impression. But the same holds true for Phnom Penh, Go Fish, The Banana Leaf, Hapa, C, The Kolachy Shop and a thousand others at various price points. I just hope that they don't shoot the messengers. As I stated upthread, David Richards is a terrific manager and Lynda Larouche an accomplished chef used to high volume. But the kitchen opened before it was fully set and the menu realistically appraised. Some of the menu items are already back in for re-engineering--good on them for revisiting the drawing board. That shaken beef, it seems, was definitely not stirring. ← 1. We "need" it to be excellent? More excellent than the Stanley Park restaurants or Bridges Bistro or the restaurants at the corner of Davie and Denman or the one on the top of Grouse Mountain? There's a ton of tourist-oriented view restaurants in Vancouver, I can't see Watermark as the one that makes or breaks our reputation. Yes, they are all sub-par, but does anyone seriously look at the menu at Watermark, Bridges or any of those places and expect anything more than middle of the road food. A person seriously interested in food isn't going to go to one of these places in the first place unless he or she hasn't done homework. 2. Cruise ship food isn't exactly stellar, somehow I think it will be pretty easy to tweak the Watermark menu to please the average cruise ship passenger. Based on my admittedly limited experience on cruise ships, I don't see the average passenger as being overly food oriented. As far as I could see, they appreciate steaks, ceasar salads and other menu "standards" and large portions.

I tend to agree with Odysseus that it would have to be a very serious transgression before I would ever write a letter about a service issue in a restaurant. It is just seems out of proportion to the kinds of issues that are common in restaurants -- as Chufi says "things that can happen". Certainly starting with an attitude doesn't help to resolve a situation. Mostly I just mention the problem and, since they are usually minor issues, as long as they make some effort to resolve it, that is the end of it. Many servers are obviously trying, but not well trained, and I'm pretty willing to cut them some slack. Afterward I may decide not to return to that restaurant, but the decision would be based on the whole experience - food, price, my history with them, as well as service etc. What "works" is being pleasant while raising the issues, having some empathy for the person on the other side of the issue and, if you want something specific done to address it, being clear about it. There's lots of good restaurants in my city, I'd just go elsewhere in the future if the experience was particularly bad or I didn't feel like they made a sincere effort to address my concerns. Life is short, cut your losses and move on.

That's a good point, but if it's natural for seeds and spores to be carried by birds and animals, then I think it is the same if a spore from a chanterelle came over on Captain George Vancouver's Boots. As long as it thrived here and has become part of the forest without endangering other species, then it seems pretty indiganous to me. Besides, when you walk through our rain forests, doesn't it feel like mushrooms were pretty much invented there. ← Well I can't speak for every mushroom out there now, but I know that mushrooms were a part of indigenous peoples diets in this region.

Yes, they are better - dare I say, better than my own! (and they're pretty darn good, and exactly the same variety). I chalk it up to something in the soil.....but they truly are amazing - try and you shall see! Nothing I've tried in any other market even comes close - in fact, I was so desperate for an heirloom, I paid $7.50 for one at Whole Foods last weekend. ← Second, many folks (Maw aussi) put the heady flavour of Milan's tomatoes up to the rocky soil that bears their fruit. Like the best grape vines, the tomato plants have to struggle to promote that fruit. Another factor I find attractive is their low cost. The other day we took a pound of haricots vert, some huge Walla Walla onions, several zukes and a kilo of tomatoes for $10. But certainly Milan's personality and reputation enter into the equation as well: It's not uncommon to bump into a chef in the fields at Stoney Paradise, down on his hands and knees, searching for tomato perfection. As a rule, he won't have to look very long. I daresay there's a recognition factor attached to Milan's 'brand' as well, i.e. knowing that you're eating the same lusty globes that are being served in some of the best restaurants around the town. ← I made a detour to the market on the way to work this morning in time to pick up a pint of Sungolds (1 per customer, that's nice to share them around), so now I can agree that, yes, they are better. So I am officially a convert. I've been snacking on them all day at the office and may not have enough left to make even a small salad for dinner.

My first post here. Bouillabaisse (from frozen leftovers), two slices of toasted french bread, green salad, a peach.

Are Stoney Paradise tomatoes really so much better than any of the other heirloom, organic, etc tomatoes available at farmers' markets around the city? Or is there a status factor associated with buying a "branded" tomato? I'm curious because I've bought tomatoes that taste pretty good at the markets for a couple of weeks now, but the arrival of Milan's tomatoes seem to engender a response close to that which follows the release of a cult wine. Anyone done a blind tasting?

I had cattail at Raincity Grill a couple of years ago. Liliget Feast House on Davie probably features indigenous plant foods, but when I look at the menu: Menu Liliget Feast House I don't see much specified.

Markets are at their peak now. Here's a few shots from the West End Market yesterday.

To be called Mistral with a south of France bistro theme, I am told.

Wow, that is pretty awful. I agree that the regulation sucks, but the restauant could have handled things better, to say the least. Well said.

Thanks. I usually walk or cab to restaurants so drinking and driving isn't really an issue for me, but I can understand why a restaurateur wouldn't be all that enthusiastic about buying a special machine to recork a bottle for the occasional customer.

I beg to differ as tomatos came from the new world. A US source. http://www.tomatofest.com/ also http://www.heirloomtomatoplants.com/ ← It is true that tomatoes originated in South America, but I believe they were widely eaten and cultivated in Europe before North America. I don't know if more cultivars were developed in Europe but it is my understanding that tomatoes were not widely grown and eaten in NA until the 1800's, long after they were widely accepted in Europe. Here's a link: Tomato history

Central Bistro with Deborah et al as described above. This is a good little neighbourhood spot - open all day, friendly service, lots of food and drink options at very reasonable prices, it should do well. I won't go through the whole meal, but the pea soup and the desserts stood out for me. The linguine was good, but a little too heavy for me on a summer night - I should know better. Thanks to Deborah for organizing a fun evening and Holly and Harry for good food and service. With some visitors looking for views: Fiddlehead Joe's for breakfast: service was a little slow to get started but helpful and friendly after that, coffee was abysmal, toast came with jam, honey and peanut butter in those little rectangular peel-off top packages - didn't go well with the designer china. The non-toast eater was happy with his scramble. The menu featured way more alcohol than food which I thought odd at 10:00 am, but the two men beside us were sharing a bottle of Cava so maybe it is not so odd. The weather and view were wonderful. Lupin's Cafe, Grouse Mountain: awful chicken panini thing, the kid's hot dog was really too large and awkward for a small child to eat, but she liked it. However, service was very helpful and friendly, and the view helped.

Yes, I agree with you. I don't mind paying a small premium for wine by the glass as long as they are not offering up their week old crap, but of course I'm going to highlight a good deal like the Brasserie's. I think there could be more creativity around wine by the glass without if becoming business liability. Also agree that the take home policy is good thing, although I often forget about it when I'm making my decisions. And come to think of it, I've never had a server suggest that I could just buy a bottle, drink a couple of glasses and take the rest home when I've been pondering the by-the-glass list. And yes, while 100% was touted as the traditional markup, it has probably moved up from there in most places.

I've always understood 100% to be the "standard" markup here, although they can range a lot higher and lower. From a consumer perspective I, of course, say the lower the better. As for what should be on the list, I'd say that depends on the restaurant and the menu. The last thing I want to see is a generic wine list. A "thoughtful and interesting" selection, as suggested by bigdaddy, which reflects the restaurant menu, and is updated regularly, sounds about right. I'd rather see a small well-chosen list than a sprawling list of old standards, half of which are not even available. Off the top of my head, Umami's wine list strikes me as a small well-chosen selection, as does CRU's. I appreciate a good by-the-glass selection. Even more appreciated are consumer friendly by-the-glass policies. One policy that stands out for me is Brasserie l'ecole's (they also have a good beer list): anything on their list is available by the glass so long as you order two glasses (per table). The price of a single glass of wine is 1/5th the cost of a bottle, so there's no penalty for drinking by the glass. And it should go without saying that I really don't like getting a glass of wine from a bottle that was opened last week and has sat on the counter since then. Finally, some good advice from a sommelier or a well versed server is most welcome, upselling is not. I notice local restaurants are starting to offer more consumer friendly wine lists with CRU's list standing out in that regard. Pairing suggestions on the menu are a good idea and I suspect a smart business practice too.

Agree complertely!

I eat alone fairly often for various reasons and rarely have felt uncomfortable. Sometimes I'll be offered a seat at the bar but if I'd prefer a table, I'll ask for a table and it doesn't seem to be an issue. And I wouldn't insist it was very busy and I'd be preventing a group of 4 from being seated for example. Sometimes I am asked where I would feel most comfortable sitting. I don't usually read as I, like Pan, tend to want to relax and observe the scene instead, but sometimes I have been offered reading material by a waiter. Sometimes the staff will chat with me a little more than they would if I were with a companion and we have some interesting conversations. Sitting at the bar I've enjoyed the interaction between the waitstaff and the bartender, especially when they appeared to forget that I was a customer. I have sometimes noticed what seems like discomfort or surprise at my single status, but when I make it clear that this is not, in my view, an unhappy or unwanted situation, the staff lighten up. As for adventure, all I can offer is that I have had some wonderful meals dining alone at restaurants here in Vancouver and elsewhere. The only adventurous part was the food.

Fantastic news, Andrew! Congratulations and best wishes.

The Cellar door at Sumac Ridge has (had? ..when I was there anyways) a full-on liquor license, as it was a golf course clubhouse before it was a winery. There is no excuse for not serving beer in wine country. ← Tell that to the regulators.

I'm pretty sure most BC winery restaurants are prevented by regulation from serving alchohol other than wine. I believe estate winery designation means that you can only serve your own wines.

Random on Davie just west of Jervis is closed. There's lots of activity going on behind the covered windows and rumours are that a Bin-like restaurant is the next incarnation of the space. Anyone have any details?