Perry Street

[Sneakeater]

There's a new Richard Meier apartment building going up down the block from me.

I'm thinking that, in my neighborhood, they'll probably have a Kennedy Fried Chicken at street level.

[oakapple]

it most certainly is intended to be a version of a neighborhood restaurant.  that is the concept.

I also know for a fact that there indeed are residents of the towers that treat it as almost a sort of "room service" and that indeed there are people in the neighborhood that drop in on a regular basis.

←

Every restaurant in the world is literally in a neighborhood of some kind. And every diner in the world is somewhat more likely to patronize restaurants in his or her neighborhood than elsewhere. If those factors alone made Perry St a "neighborhood restaurant," then you could apply that label indiscriminately all over the place.

If "neighborhood restaurant" means anything, it means a restaurant that primarily attracts people who are already in the neighborhood for some other reason (they live there, they have business there, they are seeing a show there). I don't think there's any reasonable argument that Perry St is meant to make its living on that type of business. Those towers aren't big enough to support it. Rather, Perry St is drawing crowds from outside of the neighborhood, because it offers an excellent rendition of Vongerichten's cuisine at a much lower price point than the flagship.

Yes, of course people who live in that area use it too. That doesn't make it a "neighborhood restaurant," any more than Alain Ducasse is a neighborhood restaurant for the people who live on Central Park South.

Edited October 4, 2006 by oakapple (log)

[Sneakeater]

There's a new Richard Meier apartment building going up down the block from me.

I'm thinking that, in my neighborhood, they'll probably have a Kennedy Fried Chicken at street level.

←

Nah. That building wants to attract the gentry.

It'll be a Popeye's.

Edited October 4, 2006 by Sneakeater (log)

[Nathan]

There's enough money in a five block radius around Perry Street to easily support it.

Sure, it draws a crowd from all over...any restaurant with JG's name will. With that said, Sunday through Wednesday is going to be a pretty local crowd there. That's simply not true for Ducasse.

The menu format, the decor, and the format (heck, it serves brunch at a complete loss) all mitigate against it being a "destination restaurant"..the fact that it still is one says something about the quality of the cooking.

My point is: just because it would not be a neighborhood restaurant on most blocks is irrelevant to whether it is intended to be one on its block.

[docsconz]

There's enough money in a five block radius around Perry Street to easily support it.

Sure, it draws a crowd from all over...any restaurant with JG's name will.  With that said, Sunday through Wednesday is going to be a pretty local crowd there.  That's simply not true for Ducasse.

The menu format, the decor, and the format (heck, it serves brunch at a complete loss) all mitigate against it being a "destination restaurant"..the fact that it still is one says something about the quality of the cooking.

My point is: just because it would not be a neighborhood restaurant on most blocks is irrelevant to whether it is intended to be one on its block.

←

I ate there on a Monday night. The place was packed. Other diners included Bruce Willis and spearately Elle McPherson. Of course it is possible that they live in the neighborhood. Perry St. is much more than a neighborhood restaurant. I consider the definition as a restaurant worth going to if one happens to be nearby, but not worth specifically traveling to get to. I, for one, would specifically travel to dine there.

[Nathan]

actually, Bruce Willis eats there regularly, from which I surmise that he is a neighbor.

"I, for one, would specifically travel to dine there. "

I guess one could make the argument that if a restaurant is really really good it can, by definition, not be a neighborhood restaurant.

Edited October 4, 2006 by Nathan (log)

[docsconz]

actually, Bruce Willis eats there regularly, from which I surmise that he is a neighbor.

"I, for one, would specifically travel to dine there. "

I guess one could make the argument that if a restaurant is really really good it can, by definition, not be a neighborhood restaurant.

←

Bruce Willis does dine there regularly. He also dines at J-G regularly. I ran into him there the same week I saw him at Perry St.

The latter argument, though good does not necessarily follow. I think that the key ingredient to being other than a nighborhood restaurant is that the restaurant frequently attracts people from outside that neighborhood who travel into the neighborhood specifically to dine at that restaurant. A neighborhood restaurant can, in fact, be very, very good and still not attract outsiders for the express purpose of dining there.

[Nathan]

"A neighborhood restaurant can, in fact, be very, very good and still not attract outsiders for the express purpose of dining there."

example?

[Sneakeater]

On the understanding that this is all just stupid arguing over meaningless semantics, take a place like Little Owl.

It opens up, it seems pretty clearly to be designed as a place that caters to the people who live near there.

The foodie press/internet picks up on it. "Foreigners" start visiting.

The Times gives it two stars. The place explodes.

So are we saying that it was a "neighborhood place" when it opened, and then transitioned into a "destination spot" when it got publicized?

Or are we saying that it was always a "destination spot", but it took people a short while to find out about it?

I think the difference here is that Nathan is saying that Perry Street is a "neighborhood place" in that it seems to have been designed, to some not-insignificant extent, to cater to the neighborhood. Whereas Oakapple and docsconz are saying that it can't be a "neighborhood place" if it's also worth travelling to. Nathan, in other words, is focussing on the feel and function of the restaurant, and what you can infer from that about what market it was intended to serve. Whereas Oakapple and doc are focussing on quality, and whether it's sufficient to attract "outsiders". I think they're also saying that a place of the scale and quality and repute of Perry Street (which had a long pre-opening preview in New York Magazine, for God's sake -- and we all know those things don't happen by themselves) couldn't possibly be a mere "neighborhood" joint.

I don't have a horse in this race. So I'm not trying to make a rhetorical point, but merely trying to clarify things, when I ask doc and Oakapple if they think the phrase "overperforming neighborhood place" as applied to places like Little Owl has any meaning?

Edited October 4, 2006 by Sneakeater (log)

[Nathan]

Sneakeater:

that is an accurate summary of my point.

[chefboy24]

"A neighborhood restaurant can, in fact, be very, very good and still not attract outsiders for the express purpose of dining there."

example?

←

zoe, savoy, prune

frannie's and applewood , in brooklyn

[oakapple]

I think the difference here is that Nathan is saying that Perry Street is a "neighborhood place" in that it seems to have been designed, to some not-insignificant extent, to cater to the neighborhood.  Whereas Oakapple and docsconz are saying that it can't be a "neighborhood place" if it's also worth travelling to.  Nathan, in other words, is focussing on the feel and function of the restaurant, and what you can infer from that about what market it was intended to serve.  Whereas Oakapple and doc are focussing on quality, and whether it's sufficient to attract "outsiders".  I think they're also saying that a place of the scale and quality and repute of Perry Street (which had a long pre-opening preview in New York Magazine, for God's sake -- and we all know those things don't happen by themselves) couldn't possibly be a mere "neighborhood" joint.

←

I think there's a big difference between Perry St and Little Owl, and Sneakeater has nailed it. Perry St, with its hired publicists, Jean-Georges Vongerichten as chef, and broad media coverage, is aspiring to something far more. That it also happens to be suitable for its neighborhood is of course true, but almost beside the point.

Little Owl opened under the radar, and it so happens the foodies have discovered it.

[docsconz]

Regardless of the original intentions of a restaurant, if it has become a destination for outsiders it is no longer a "neighborhood" restaurant. sneakeater, you are right, this is entirely a question of semantics.

[Sneakeater]

"A neighborhood restaurant can, in fact, be very, very good and still not attract outsiders for the express purpose of dining there."

example?

←

zoe, savoy, prune

Not to fight about something we all agree is meaningless, but those three places absolutely attract patrons from all over. (Zoe maybe less than the other two.)

frannie's and applewood , in brooklyn

←

I'd almost say that Brooklyn is a special case, because other than Luger's and the River Cafe, I don't think there's a single restaurant in the entire borough that people from Manhattan are willing to cross the river for. (Even Saul, which has a Michelin star.) I think that's more a reflection on people in Manhattan than on the Brooklyn restaurants.

Edited October 4, 2006 by Sneakeater (log)

[Nathan]

"zoe, savoy, prune"

Zoe gets a heavily tourist crowd by virtue of its location.

Prune is most certainly a destination brunch...many people truck down from the UES etc. to brunch there.

You've got a point with Savoy. Though I think it was once more of a destination and has since been simply forgotten about.

"frannie's and applewood , in brooklyn"

Brooklyn doesn't count.

[Sneakeater]

Savoy is an interesting example of a restaurant that almost completely lost its buzz. I recently suggested to a girl that we go there, and she gave me this look like, "Who goes THERE anymore?????????"

Which is a bit odd, and sort of a pity, because it's still very good (if not very exciting -- excitingness being a somewhat overvalued factor for a restaurant, IMO). And it is sort of the foundational place for the New Brooklyn Restaurant scene.

Edited October 4, 2006 by Sneakeater (log)

[docsconz]

To put this back on topic, does everyone agree that given the above discussion that Perry Street is more than a "neighborhood restaurant" - i.e. that it is a "destination restaurant"?

[Nathan]

I would agree with the obvious:

that "neighborhood restaurant" is not the only descriptor that can be applied to Perry Street. other accurate descriptors are: "Jean Georges restaurant", "really good" and "destination restaurant"

[Sneakeater]

So one question -- you have to bear with me; I'm a lawyer and I sort of live for semantic disputes about categorization -- is whether or not "neighborhood place" and "destination" are mutually exclusive.

I've always treated them as if they were. Although I can see Nathan's point.

(I'd recommend that this be split into its own topic -- except I can't believe anyone cares about it but me.)

Edited October 5, 2006 by Sneakeater (log)

[docsconz]

So one question -- you have to bear with me; I'm a lawyer and I sort of live for semantic disputes about categorization -- is whether or not "neighborhood place" and "destination" are mutually exclusive.

I've always treated them as if they were.  Although I can see Nathan's point.

(I'd recommend that this be split into its own topic -- except I can't believe anyone cares about it but me.)

←

I don't think they are mutually exclusive at all. If I have a destination restaurant in my neighborhood, I will still go to it assuming that I can afford it.

If you really want to carry on this discussion and continue to apply it beyond Perry Street, I agree that another thread would be appropriate.

[ColleenD]

Had a great meal at Perry Street last night. No misses.

We were offered a creamy white beet/horseradish soup for an amuse bouche. We had the king oyster mushroom and avocado carpaccio and homemade mozzarella with basil, quince and pomegranite as apps. Followed by the beef tenderloin with butternut squash dumplings and grilled chanterelles and the crispy rabbit with soybeen puree and a chili sauce (think this is right--my friend doesn't get into the fine points of the menu quite as much...).

Everything was delicious and beautifully presented. We skipped dessert, but the peanut butter marshmellows with a toasted panko crust that came with the check were outstanding. They made me want to dig into the recipes on the marshmellow thread in the pastry forum.

[cchen]

Just had a great lunch at Perry Street. The dining room was virtually empty though, which I found very odd for a Friday lunch.

In any case, they've structured their lunch menu just like Jean Georges now, but at a lower price point. $24 for 2 courses + dessert from a list, $12 each additional course, plus an assortment of house-made sodas. The food was excellent - had a bluefin tuna burger and veal payard. For dessert, goat cheese cheesecake with concord grape sorbet.

[docsconz]

Just had a great lunch at Perry Street. The dining room was virtually empty though, which I found very odd for a Friday lunch.

In any case, they've structured their lunch menu just like Jean Georges now, but at a lower price point. $24 for 2 courses + dessert from a list, $12 each additional course, plus an assortment of house-made sodas. The food was excellent - had a bluefin tuna burger and veal payard. For dessert, goat cheese cheesecake with concord grape sorbet.

←

Sounds like an outstanding deal. The food is very creative and tasty, just a little more zen-like than J-G. That is to say it is a bit more austere and simple in its presentation, yet very delicious and satisfying.

[freshherbs]

Had a great meal at Perry Street last night.  No misses. 

We were offered a creamy white beet/horseradish soup for an amuse bouche.  We had the king oyster mushroom and avocado carpaccio and homemade mozzarella with basil, quince and pomegranite as apps.  Followed by the beef tenderloin with butternut squash dumplings and grilled chanterelles and the crispy rabbit with soybeen puree and a chili sauce (think this is right--my friend doesn't get into the fine points of the menu quite as much...).

Everything was delicious and beautifully presented.  We skipped dessert, but the peanut butter marshmellows with a toasted panko crust that came with the check were outstanding.  They made me want to dig into the recipes on the marshmellow thread in the pastry forum.

←

we went last night and i am happy to say that we considered everything you had but, having to make a choice, went in a complete opposite direction and also had a no-miss meal

started with the crispy poached egg with caviar and brioche. deelish--with a tangy horseradish sauce and fresh dill. competes with 'inotecas truffle egg toast for most savory egg dish ever. my wife had a snapper sashimi with a nice bright citrus touch. quite frankly, i barely tasted it...i was still swooning from the egg toast.

for entree i had the snapper with caramelized radishes, tarragon, and grapefruit. absolutely amazing--creamy fish, tart citrus, a little spice from the radishes--very complex and delicious. touched all parts of the tongue. my wife had the chicken, which was a sort of reconstructed whole chicken. on top was a thin crispy skin fried between two skillets. underneath was a very clean, juicy poached breast. on the bottom were small well-spiced (cumin? pepper?) grilled pieces. served with roasted baby brussel sprouts. quite nice.

dessert was a slightly nice quaint pear tart with root beer ice cream. absolutely loved the marshmellows too!

it was my birthday so it was very special...but still, might win as my best meal of the year

Edited November 20, 2006 by freshherbs (log)

[docsconz]

Had a great meal at Perry Street last night.  No misses. 

We were offered a creamy white beet/horseradish soup for an amuse bouche.  We had the king oyster mushroom and avocado carpaccio and homemade mozzarella with basil, quince and pomegranite as apps.  Followed by the beef tenderloin with butternut squash dumplings and grilled chanterelles and the crispy rabbit with soybeen puree and a chili sauce (think this is right--my friend doesn't get into the fine points of the menu quite as much...).

Everything was delicious and beautifully presented.  We skipped dessert, but the peanut butter marshmellows with a toasted panko crust that came with the check were outstanding.  They made me want to dig into the recipes on the marshmellow thread in the pastry forum.

←

we went last night and i am happy to say that we considered everything you had but, having to make a choice, went in a complete opposite direction and also had a no-miss meal

started with the crispy poached egg with caviar and brioche. deelish--with a tangy horseradish sauce and fresh dill. competes with 'inotecas truffle egg toast for most savory egg dish ever. my wife had a snapper sashimi with a nice bright citrus touch. quite frankly, i barely tasted it...i was still swooning from the egg toast.

for entree i had the snapper with caramelized radishes, tarragon, and grapefruit. absolutely amazing--creamy fish, tart citrus, a little spice from the radishes--very complex and delicious. touched all parts of the tongue. my wife had the chicken, which was a sort of reconstructed whole chicken. on top was a thin crispy skin fried between two skillets. underneath was a very clean, juicy poached breast. on the bottom were small well-spiced (cumin? pepper?) grilled pieces. served with roasted baby brussel sprouts. quite nice.

dessert was a slightly nice quaint pear tart with root beer ice cream. absolutely loved the marshmellows too!

it was my birthday so it was very special...but still, might win as my best meal of the year

←

It sounds like a very differrent menu than when I was there in September. While the menu I had was great it is nice to see that they are not resting on their laurels.