BYOB

I truly enjoy BYOB restaurants in the Chicago area and had a great experience at Tweet on Sheriday Road. The service was excellent, and the owner, Michele Fire, quiet a schmoozer. The menu was varied and the fresh ingredients standouts! Bringing one's own wines also was fun and kept the tab at a reasonable level-about $30 per person for appetizers and entrees. Any other recommendations for BYOB spots?

most thai places in the city.

tango sur, tango miel, brasa roja (i think).

think cafe

chic cafe

coast sushi

bacci pizzeria

kabul house

lt's grill

la humita..

medici

go to www.metromix.com, dining, check the "BYOB" box and click search. that'll turn up nearly 200 other places.

note that it is somewhat out of date: it lists noon-o-kebab twice (once for each location). the elk grove location has been closed for at least a year, and the albany park location got its liquor license a few months ago and is STRONGLY anti-byob now.

-ed

Hi,

This is a related situation though not a direct answer to your query. I live in Highland Park where restaurants tend to have a liquor license. However, there is a little taqueria where they did not have a license. I was meeting some Chowists, where I know adult beverages are a welcome addition.

When I made my first BYOB inquiry to the staff, I got a deer in the headlights look and a request to return when the owner was available. When I returned the owner had already been alerted about this lady's unusual inquiry. He agreed we could BYOB with the provision we brought with us a receipt proving the adult beverages were obtained at a 3rd location. They were also not prepared to provide glassware, so I brought glasses and stemware from home.

If you are prepared to protect a restaurant, or humble taquerias, legal interests, then most places would accomodate your BYOB. Of course, there will always be times your bottles will stay in the car.

FYI, the cooperative taqueria in HP was:

"Los Mogotes" de Michoacan
2069 Greenbay Road
Highland Park, IL
Tel: 847/432-5667

"Los Mogotes" de Michoacan
4959 N. Kedzie Avenue
Chicago, IL
Tel: 773/463-5612

Whenever someone's looking for good BYOB, I point them at Friendship Chinese. I believe Frienship is the best, most interesting Chinese food outside of Chinatown. The atmosphere is nice and Chef Alan prepares all of his food with care.

Friendship
2830 N Milwaukee Ave.
773-227-0970
Friendship on EatChicago.net

I almost forgot Lovitt, a very small restaurant with excellent dishes from fresh, local ingredients (many organic). Lovitt encourages BYO.

Lovitt
1466 N Ashland
773-252-1466
http://www.lovittrestaurant.com
Lovitt on EatChicago.net

Resurrecting this topic ... I love BYOBs, and I've posted on several of them elsewhere on this board. But I've also read posts where some were disappointed that a place was BYO. How do others think about this? For me, I love 'em ... and I always keep a bottle of "emergency" (i.e. cheap but drinkable) wine in my car trunk (well insulated - red in summer, white in winter) in case I stumble along a new (to me) BYOB.

Typically do restaurants charge for BYOB? I was at Ringo Sushi on Lincoln and Altgeld and they charged us $3.50 for wine (they brought a glass and the bottle was already open) and $1.50 for a beer we brought (didn't use a glass).

A lot of places charge corkage; it's usually a pretty good indicator of whether they encourage (if it's modest) or discourage (if it's outrageous) BYO.

I think we have gone thru this before. I am almost positive (with either the emphasis on almost or positive, I am not quite sure), that if a place does NOT have a liquor license, then they cannot charge for byob.

One interesting/anonmoly for BYOB seems to be the Polish gem, Halina's. On one hand, the food seems so well suited for some booze, especially a bottle or two of vodka, but on the other hand, you NEVER see any of the other customers with the heavy stuff--Halina's sells a lot of their pink "kompote" drink though. The one time I brought in some beer, they tolerated it, but it just did not seem to fit in. Can anyone add to this, ie. do Polish people typically not expect to have drinks with dinner?

Another failure, btw, with BYOB was La Quebrada. They were fine with us bringing in wine, but the heavy plastic glasses did little to accentuate the drinking process.

Rob

The last time I was at Halina's, Rob, a table full of Poles brought there own wine and vodka (it looked like they were coming from a funeral, though). The server provided wine glasses of the gaudy variety.

Hi,

In Highland Park, when I inquired about bringing liquor to a small Mexican place with no license, they advised: bring your receipt to prove you did not acquire your liquor here. I have never heard that request before though it seems very reasonable. It protects the owner's interests, which should always be considered.

They also preferred we bring our own glassware, which was fine because this more a fast-food joint than a sit down restaurant.

Vital Information wrote:I think we have gone thru this before. I am almost positive (with either the emphasis on almost or positive, I am not quite sure), that if a place does NOT have a liquor license, then they cannot charge for byob.

Rob

Not sure if you're right on the legal issue here, but the folks who brought us Tomboy, South (formerly The Room), and Speakeasy Supper Club have a whole business model built on upscale BYOB dining. And they definitely include a corkage fee on the bill.

Vital Information wrote:Another failure, btw, with BYOB was La Quebrada. They were fine with us bringing in wine, but the heavy plastic glasses did little to accentuate the drinking process.

Rob

Rob,

You eat at enough BYO's that you should invest in a pair of the Riedel 'O' series glasses for you and Sheila. They are the shape of the Riedel Vinum series glasses, minus the stems. Not only do they really improve your wine over drinking from a tumbler with a thick rim, since they're stemless, they don't stand out. I've had too many nice bottles show so poorly due to jelly jar glasses (or tiny, really crappy stems) at BYO's. They come in a small cardboard box that you can use to transport them. While I wouldn't want to use a stemless glass at home, they are great for this purpose.

Bed, Bath, and Beyond has them for $19.99 and use one of the 20% coupons that are always in the mail.

If you don't like them, Gary will give you $2.95 .

Best,
Al

Al Ehrhardt wrote:If you don't like them, Gary will give you $2.95 .

Al,

$3.95.

That is an excellent idea, looks like a trip to Bed Bath and Beyond is in order.
(~shudder~ I am just not a bed bath and beyond type of guy)

Enjoy,
Gary

Mr Wiv,

Just a suggestion. I have a pair of the Cabernet and the Pinot Noir glasses. I know you are a Pinot guy from way-back. Ellen, and any lady for that matter, might find the Pinot glasses a little uncomfortable to hold because they have a fairly large circumference. Take a Cab and a Pinot out of the box, in the store, and see what you think.

Either way, you will love them for BYO's.

Best,
Al

G Wiv wrote:That is an excellent idea, looks like a trip to Bed Bath and Beyond is in order.
(~shudder~ I am just not a bed bath and beyond type of guy)

Enjoy,
Gary

It can be more fun than you think. Last time (long time ago) I was at BBB was to purchase their best cotton bath towels on sale. It's great fun to ask for pinking shears at the register so you can cut off the selvages right there (they typically have nylon or some other abrasive thread in them). This horrifies the cashier and nearby onlookers. I just casually explained they weren't for the bath but rather were for washing/waxing my cars and cheerfully walked out the door.

For inexpensive wine glasses, I love my Spiegelaus. You can get them in 6-packs on amazon for cheap, or for $10 each at Pottery Barn. Nice big bowls (sp?) and slightly thicker crystal for more reliable dishwasher behavior.

Kan Zaman's new incarnation at 617 N. Wells was BYOB as of about 6 weeks ago. Awesome Lebanese food.

well fed wrote:

Vital Information wrote:I think we have gone thru this before. I am almost positive (with either the emphasis on almost or positive, I am not quite sure), that if a place does NOT have a liquor license, then they cannot charge for byob.

Rob

Not sure if you're right on the legal issue here, but the folks who brought us Tomboy, South (formerly The Room), and Speakeasy Supper Club have a whole business model built on upscale BYOB dining. And they definitely include a corkage fee on the bill.

I once got involved in a (way too lenghty) discussion on this matter over at CH, and ultimately the answer was that nobody on the board seemed to really know the answer. Being a lawyer and given to asking such spoiler questions, I asked a poster who said something more or less like what Rob is hypothesizing above, to provide a citation to the relevant Illinois statute or Chicago ordinance. Nobody had the cite handy, and I didn't have the energy to do more than go to the Dept. of Revenue's webpages on liquor license requirements. In my (very limited and cursory) research, I saw nothing there to indicate you needed a license for BYOB - the emphasis is clearly on licensing those who intend to sell alcohol, not just serve it. But absence of evidence is not evidence of absence (I think that's how that goes) ... although it's an odd idea, maybe places like Tomboy, etc. actually obtain but DO NOT USE their liquor licenses, except to avoid the BYOB entanglement? At $2,200/year for a restaurant liquor license, it seems unlikely but possible, if BYOB is going to be "your thing."

JimInLoganSquare wrote:although it's an odd idea, maybe places like Tomboy, etc. actually obtain but DO NOT USE their liquor licenses, except to avoid the BYOB entanglement?

Jim,

Not trying to argue with you, but there is no way anyone would go through all of the agravation involved (much less the fees) with getting a liquor license in the city of Chicago, to NOT use it.

There are rules (and inspectors to enforce them) attached to licenses. If there is no license, who would be in charge of writing and enforcing this?

Best,
Al

... which of course is why I characterized it as an "odd idea" -- I don't believe it is likely, myself. Also, the fact is that while the Dept. of Revenue would probably have the jurisdiction to bust non-licensed establishments that charge corkage fees for BYOB (assuming that IS what the law says ... which as established above, who knows?!?), the liquor licensing and enforcement rules are prettly clearly set up to enforce the rules against people who sell liquor for a profit, not restaurants with corkage fees. Further, unless the law expressly states otherwise, common sense would indicate (O.K., I realize that just means "in my opinion") that a BYOB restaurant that charges is NOT selling liquor; it is renting out clean glasses and providing a server to help pour your wine, to enhance your experience of the food.

So basically we have 4 categories: (1) licensed restaurants that allow BYOB with a fee; (2) licensed restaurants that allow BYOB without a fee (hurrah -- there aren't many; (3) unlicensed restaurants that allow BYOB for no fee; and (4) unlicensed restaurants that allow BYOB and charge corkage. I think that category 4 is the only one anybody has any questions on. While I'm still home sick, I'll take some time to look into it and try to put the matter to rest.

just my .02 on the topic:


The restaurants that are not licensed and charge a corkage fee are not really calling it a "corkage" fee per se. They typically call it a "service charge" and that is for providing nicer glassware, ice buckets, etc., as they do at The Supper Club and South. The places that are unlicensed and do not charge corkage are not really providing much as far table service, places such as Lovitt. When we go to Lovitt, which we love btw, we typically bring our own stemware, cheap versions of the basic Riedel bordeaux glass. A third unlicensed restaurant category is the Chicago restaurant with a liquor license pending and they typically already have nicer glassware and do not charge corkage.

winebabe wrote:just my .02 on the topic:


The restaurants that are not licensed and charge a corkage fee are not really calling it a "corkage" fee per se. They typically call it a "service charge" and that is for providing nicer glassware, ice buckets, etc., as they do at The Supper Club and South.

Is it really just a matter of what you CALL it? Most laws aren't written that way, you know (Robin Hood: "I call it bringing down the Man!" -- The Man: "Sorry, but we call it larceny. See the statute. Go directly to jail ... ")

Here's a question. Does the "service" covered by the "service charge" at places like The Supper Club and South include (1) removing the cork from the bottle and/or (2) pouring the wine from the bottle into the glass you drink it from? If so, I see no difference between this and corkage. In that case, assuming these guys are operating legitimately, without a liquor license (and I have no reason to suppose they are not) then I must conclude there really is no law stating that only restaurants with liquor licenses can charge for BYOB. If all it took to avoid a $2,200/year liquor licence fee was to CALL what you are doing something other than "corkage" (even though clearly that is what it is), then I just give up. Through the looking glass, Alice ...

It is illegal to sell alcohol without the appropriate license. Period. That is the violation, unlicensed sale. Providing glassware, even opening and pouring is not sale. For a very simple example, think of the underage checkers when you buy alcohol in a grocery store. They can handle the product, they can pull it to within range of the scanner, they can bag it. They just can't push the button on the cash register that consumates the transaction.

As for some of the things people in restaurants, both BYO-friendly and not, say on the subject, is it hard to imagine people making up a suitable law to excuse something they do or do not want to do?

A restaurant's refusal to allow carry-in alchol has the same legal weight as a dress code. In other words, any establishment can refuse service to anyone on any basis except a prohibited one, such as racial discrimination. A restaurant that doesn't wish to permit the consumption of alcohol on its premises can refuse a patron service on that basis, but it has nothing to do with the alcohol control laws.

So, Chuck, to summarize: Any restaurant in Chicago can allow BYOB, regardless of whether it has a liquor license. At its sole discretion, that restaurant can charge a corkage fee, or provide the service without a fee, regardless of whether it has a liquor license. Whether or not the restaurant is licensed to sell alcohol is completely irrelevant to its ability/choice to allow BYOB (with or without a fee). Most important (and the issue du jour in this thread): A Chicago restaurant without a liquor license can charge its BYOB customers a corkage fee, provide the glasses, remove the cork, pour the wine and wish you well, all without any violation of applicable law occurring from that transaction (assuming the server is 21 years or older). Correct?

cowdery wrote:As for some of the things people in restaurants, both BYO-friendly and not, say on the subject, is it hard to imagine people making up a suitable law to excuse something they do or do not want to do?

No. And that's why I ask the hard questions, Chuck. People "make up" supposed laws to justify almost anything they do or do not want to do. As a lawyer, it always amazes me how brazen people can be in this regard. And when you call them on it with a very simple question ("Oh, really ... what's the citation in the ILCS or the Chicago Muni Code?"), they are struck dumb.

So, Chuck, to summarize: Any restaurant in Chicago can allow BYOB, regardless of whether it has a liquor license. At its sole discretion, that restaurant can charge a corkage fee, or provide the service without a fee, regardless of whether it has a liquor license. Whether or not the restaurant is licensed to sell alcohol is completely irrelevant to its ability/choice to allow BYOB (with or without a fee). Most important (and the issue du jour in this thread): A Chicago restaurant without a liquor license can charge its BYOB customers a corkage fee, provide the glasses, remove the cork, pour the wine and wish you well, all without any violation of applicable law occurring from that transaction (assuming the server is 21 years or older). Correct?

That's how I read it and I know of nothing to the contrary. In fact, the server wouldn't even need to be 21, since the age is required only for conducting sales and, of course, consuming the product.

If you carry alcohol into any establishment and consume it yourself, the responsibility for that action is entirely yours, as is the privilege to do so, absent any statute to the contrary. The establishment can prevent it only by denying you entrance and service, as is their right.

There have been some legal efforts to reverse this presumption. Maryland law forbids consumption of alcohol in public places unless explicitly authorized by a government entity. I believe Florida is considering such a law as well. One rationale is to stop people from tailgating--at least with alcohol--at sporting events. Whether an unlicensed restaurant would be considered a "public place" would depend on the wording of the statute but, at any rate, Illinois has no such law.

The model is laws banning smoking in public places. Of course, there is no "second hand drinking" rationale, but you can anticipate the arguments that are made in support of such a law.

If you carry alcohol into any establishment and consume it yourself, the responsibility for that action is entirely yours, as is the privilege to do so, absent any statute to the contrary. The establishment can prevent it only by denying you entrance and service, as is their right.

Last week, I arrived to the Pakistani restaurant Chopal on Devon a few minutes in advance of Erik M. While I was reading the menu, Erik phoned ahead asking me to inquire if liquor was allowed in this restaurant. I checked with the management who declined liquor based on their Muslim beliefs. I rang Erik back before he bought the beer he was considering.

Kman wrote:I just casually explained they weren't for the bath but rather were for washing/waxing my cars

Kman,

Humor must not be BB and B's strong suite. I tried a little joke of my own and, not only didn't I get the wine glasses, but ended up having to wash the manager's car with a mushroom brush.

Note to self: Impromptu Iron Chef cooking demonstrations using BB and B's equipment are not appreciated, especially when the secret ingredient is natto.

Enjoy,
Gary

Nice thread

Yes, we have been through this before but there seems to be so much confusion it bears repeating.

Here is my two cents worth, or about $550 if you check my billable hours for the client.

I actually went down to the Chicago Liquor Control Board (basement of City Hall or Daley Plaza, a bit confusing once you are in the subway tunnels).

I was told that the city considers it a violation of Illinois statute and Chicago ordinance to: ANY WAY AID IN THE DISTRIBUTION OR CONSUMPTION OF ALCOHOL WITHOUT A BEVERAGE CONTROL LICENSE IN A PLACE OF PUBLIC accommodation. I was told that meant no glasses, no opener, no pouring. Now granted, that was from the clerk behind the counter but I have no doubt that is the letter of the law.

More importantly, she told me that a restaurant without a license cannot obtain dram shop insurance and runs the risk of claims that are not covered when liquor is consumed in an illegal manner.

Now, for the lawyers here especially, you should know that the law and enforcement are independent. Spitting on the sidewalk, for all I know, may still be illegal in Chicago. In fact, in Chicago, if law and enforcement have a relationship it is sometimes contradictory.

I have assumed that lack of enforcement is a compromise for various reasons. Much like the ability to run an over-crowded nightclub without enough fire exits or install a porch on a building that doesn