« The Walkback | Main | Voters: Court's Too Conservative »

Own Your City

20 Jul 2008 08:54 am

Austin, Texas, as you've probably heard, is a pretty fun town that lots of people like. Washington, DC by contrast certainly has its defenders and apologists, but isn't generally viewed in the same light. And while I don't necessarily see the gap as quite as big as most folks seem to (to this born-and-raised New Yorker, one's much greater ability to get around DC without a car is a big consideration) the conventional wisdom isn't far from the truth here. But one thing I always find extremely frustrating about talk about how one town is awesome and another sucks is that even though folks spend a lot of time talking about such matters, they spend exceedingly little time trying to understand the actual reasons that places differ and things that could be done to change them.

As an example, Friday night I took in a movie at the famous Alamo Draft House Cinema where, among other things, a server comes and brings you food and beer orders as you watch. It's totally awesome. But the failure of such a theater to exist in DC doesn't come about because of some stubborn DC unwillingness to open anything cool, it comes about in large part because the regulatory hurdles facing someone who wanted to open such an establishment would be gargantuan. And movie theaters aside DC would, in general, have more bars that feature nice outdoor areas (a) easier to get a license to open a bar, and (b) easier to get a license to establish outdoor tables.

A relatively strict licensing regime keeps the number of drinking establishments relatively low. That reduces one's set of options. But beyond that, it makes for a less competitive environment with higher prices and less effort going into making an establishment appealing. Laxer licensing regimes and more liberal zoning policies about where you can open retail would produce lower prices and more options. To make that observation is to begin rather than to end the argument about whether we should prefer the "plentiful, cheap bars" equilibrium to the "rare, expensive bars" equilibrium. But the point is that instead of just vaguely complaining about this or that aspect of the place where they live, or musing about moving elsewhere, it would serve people well to educate themselves about policy in their own communities and make things better. When we don't do that, the policy just gets set by incumbent interest groups whose main concern is to block competition rather than build a livable community.

Share This

Comments (49)

Aren't there draft houses in both Arlington and Bethesda??

Alas, Bethesda Cinema -n- Drafthouse has been closed for several years. Arlington is still open.

I think the price of real estate is probably part of the story as well. High rents lead to more risk averse business models. Low rents encourage more creativity and experimentation.

There is also the building height act which caps building height so that the only solution is to build out rather than up. Legislating away density and preventing larger buildings near metro stations (which you see often in the suburbs).

Frankly though DC's big problem is that the young professionals have such a one track mind. They care about a narrow sphere of human endeavor way too much and that makes them dull. Also the fact that so many young professionals have to deal with background checks is probably a stifling factor.

I also take the Jane Jacobsian view that the city's layout affects the development of interesting places. A place like Houston or Atlanta (where automobiles have already taken the advice to "own the city") is never going to be as vigorous or interesting as Manhattan or Chicago.

As long as current bar and restaurant owners gain from the current regulatory regime, they will always out organize and out spend any attempts at collective action. Sadly, the reason so many of these asinine regulations are in place is because so many brokers, like local restaurateurs, go to fund raisers and council meetings, where they can peddle a modicum of influence over the public interest. The thing is, for low profile issues, special interest groups will ALWAYS trump collective power.

Remember Visions cinema? That place had food, beer, and also terrible programming. Playing Donnie Darko every night at midnight is apparently not a winning model.

Need to get out to the Burbs a bit Matthew. The Arlington Cinema and Drafthouse is still going and I saw American Gangster in the Alexandria Old Town Theater (a few blocks from your precious Metro on the Yellow line BTW) will drinking draft German beer.

But Alexandria and Arlington are the 'burbs and too far physically and hipnesswise from Florida Avenue I suppose.

The rare, expensive bar equilibrium is beneficial to the public finance.

I just as a matter of principle reject the notion that you can just describe a city as "good" or "bad". It's such a lazy, reductive way at looking at life. I've lived in Hartford and in Honolulu (among several other places), if you can believe that contrast. And, yes, of course, structurally and logistically, Honolulu had many, many things going for it that Hartford doesn't. But I liked living in Hartford for reasons that had nothing to do with weather or level of blight or crime rate or access to clubs and bars or whatever else. It had to do with the community of friends and supporters I had around me. I don't expect or care that anyone believe that Hartford is a "good" city but I literally cannot mention living there without someone making fun of it. And it's really annoying.

Matt,

You don't understand DC. As one of the commenters above said, you have such things in the suburbs. The problem with DC, in your view, is that, in the past, it wasn't designed for yuppies. Through the '70s, '80s and '90s, it had 3 main inhabitants - college students (Gtwwn, GWU, AU), the ultra-wealthy (Gtwn, Mass ave), and poor black people (the rest of the city). Everything else catered to tourists. You can't forget that primarily, DC is a place for 4th graders to visit...

Matt,

You don't understand DC. As one of the commenters above said, you have such things in the suburbs. The problem with DC, in your view, is that, in the past, it wasn't designed for yuppies. Through the '70s, '80s and '90s, it had 3 main inhabitants - college students (Gtwwn, GWU, AU), the ultra-wealthy (Gtwn, Mass ave), and poor black people (the rest of the city). Everything else catered to tourists. You can't forget that primarily, DC is a place for 4th graders to visit...

Matt,

You don't understand DC. As one of the commenters above said, you have such things in the suburbs. The problem with DC, in your view, is that, in the past, it wasn't designed for yuppies. Through the '70s, '80s and '90s, it had 3 main inhabitants - college students (Gtwwn, GWU, AU), the ultra-wealthy (Gtwn, Mass ave), and poor black people (the rest of the city). Everything else catered to tourists. You can't forget that primarily, DC is a place for 4th graders to visit...

Mike becomes the latest to commit the cardinal sin.

How can you discuss the charms of Austin withut mentioning live music? You better show me a video, because I don't even believe you went there!
I'm a DC native, lived inside the beltway for 42 of my 50 years and played in indie pop bands for most of the 80's. It may involve bars, but it's the scene that makes the difference. DC has one, but Austin has one of the best. Puhleeze!

I'm an Arlingtonian who'll back up the notion that Arlington is far underrated. Between Galaxy Hut and the Arlington C 'n' D there's really no need to head downtown for a bar.

Beer and food on buses and trolleys! So awesome! Can't we come up with some way to serve beer and food to people riding bicycles? Or pedestrians. Oh wait, we have that.

I did a stint in DC a while ago & came away concluding that the key to understanding DC is that it is a city for tourists, both short-term AND long-term. The 4th-grader comment above is spot on, but there's another group of "tourist:" people from the hinterlands who live in DC temporarily while working for the local rep or doing time on a committee staff or in the bureaucracy while their party is in power. There are an awful lot of people in DC using it as a stepping stone for advancement back in Omaha or Lansing. They know they don't have a long-term stake in the place; they tend to work long hours. I can't help but think that this affects the commercial development.

Laxer licensing regimes and more liberal zoning policies about where you can open retail would produce lower prices and more options.

Sure, but that doesn't necessarily translate into a city that people like you want to live in. And there's other things to consider, too.

A lot of young professional types live in DC for a couple of years before advancing to somewhere else (it's a bit like a college town.) While there's nothing wrong with that, it makes planning a bit more difficult. If I'm living and working in DC and expecting to spend my life there, why would I want to encourage policies that make it less livable for me by catering to what 20-something yuppies want?

As an example, Friday night I took in a movie at the famous Alamo Draft House Cinema where, among other things, a server comes and brings you food and beer orders as you watch. It's totally awesome. But the failure of such a theater to exist in DC doesn't come about because of some stubborn DC unwillingness to open anything cool, it comes about in large part because the regulatory hurdles facing someone who wanted to open such an establishment would be gargantuan. And movie theaters aside DC would, in general, have more bars that feature nice outdoor areas (a) easier to get a license to open a bar, and (b) easier to get a license to establish outdoor tables.

Not to beat the dead horse the other commenters are flogging here, but I used to live in Pentagon City. The Arlington Draft House is a ten-minute bus ride from the Pentagon City Metro station.

"A place like Houston or Atlanta (where automobiles have already taken the advice to "own the city") is never going to be as vigorous or interesting as Manhattan or Chicago."

I'll grant you that Manhattan is a pretty exciting place, but it is also completely unique with regard to its history and geography. Also, it bears mentioning that New York and Chicago are bigger cities than Atlanta or Houston and have been major cities for a lot longer than those two cities, so of course there will be a lot going on there that may not be happening in Houston or Atlanta.

Still, if population growth and migration numbers are any indicator, Houston and Atlanta can stand up pretty well to New York and Chicago (people vote with their feet with regard to what is a "vigorous" city), and there's no shortage of interesting cultural opportunities in those cities. Plus, it bears mentioning, what one considers interesting is a matter of taste, and many people might find it more interesting to be able to pick up some inexpensive Mexican or Vietnamese food and picnic outside of a place like the Menil Collection in December than freezing in Chicago during that month.

Can't remember the name but there used to be a cheap movie theater in Lakeview in the crilla where you could buy beers. Don't know how rare that is in general but drinking at the movies (openly, that is) was a revelation.

Freddie: Hartford's one of those cities, I think, that has a really tough shell to crack, and it's hard for new arrivals to do so unless they have the ability to latch on to existing social groups or have friends in town. I'm from a similar kind of city (heavy industry rather than white-collar) and I'm certain it's daunting for new arrivals.

drinking at the movies (openly, that is) was a revelation.

America's Puritain roots strike again. America is probably the only non-Islamic society where you can't get a draught at the candy counter.

I still have my Cesky Budvar glass I got for two marks at a movie theater in Germany when I saw "Titanic".

And seeing Borat in a German theater while blitzed is a revelation.

Is this post a joke? The biggest difference between the cities isn't the regulatory regime. It's the fact that nearly 10% of Austin's population are students. The city's median age is 30.9. The median age of DC is 34.6 years. That's a huge difference.

Plenty of college towns have regulation--Madison-- but they're more fun than DC because they're filled with young people who like to do fun things.

I'm loving the comments that seem to be beating up on Matt because he's unaware of a movie theater with a liquor license that is a only a mere subway ride/subway transfer/subway ride/bus transfer/ten minute bus ride away!

That said, I'm not sure if Matt does justice to his very good point (differences in urban areas have complex point) by focusing solely on the amenities most used by people with disposable incomes.

Of course bars and movie theaters and restaurants are great. And they're certainly NOT just "stuff [college-educated, trendy] white people like." But aside from liquor licenses, part of what makes cities great is attractive housing stock, good public transit networks, museums and other cultural venues, public parks, and the like.

On those grounds, I think D.C. can hold its own against Austin.

In Boston, the Somerville Theater now has beer, wine and hard cider on tap. I think towns and cities are willing to do a bit more to help keep independent theaters going, i.e. giving them liquor licenses.

But the real thing that gives a town a "scene" is being able to live on a retail salary within non-driving distance of the clubs and art/hipster hangouts. NYC lost this, it's just about gone in Boston. From what I understand, it's still possible in Austin. You need a large enough pool of writers, musicians, artists, etc. cycling in and out of the local corporate world to keep things interesting.

Having lived in both DC and Austin I tend to agree, to some extent, but I think the difference between DC and Austin is more historical and less regulatory.

Matt: For a truly unregulated laissez faire urban area you need to go visit Houston. And while Houston does actually have a lot to offer, it's certainly not the sort of dense urban walking environment that you are seeking, outside of a few specific neighborhoods.

Austin is actually a fairly regulated city compared to everywhere else in Texas. The key to understanding Austin is that it is essentially a west coast city like Portland dropped into the middle of Texas. Austin is where Texas hipsters go to escape Texas. Without Austin many of them would probably keep going until they hit the west coast.

I think another commenter hit on a few themes as to the difference between Austin and DC.

First, real estate is a lot more expensive in DC. So much of the central core is monopolized by government and quasi-public institutions. In addition to all the Federal offices there are thousands of institutions, foundations, embassies, and big lobbying groups occupying prime commercial real estate. The height restrictions make prime addresses even more valuable. In a city like Austin such competition simply doesn't exist and there is a lot more reasonably priced real estate available in good neighborhoods.

Second, the demographics are entirely different. Austin is a magnet for creative types. It has no real competition for a 1000 miles around in that respect. In Texas the business, finance, and engineering types flock to DFW and Houston which makes professional jobs rarer and lower paying in Austin. Finding a professional job in Austin is tougher than you might think. DC is the opposite. It sucks in all the young government types. But there is just way too much competition on the eastern seaboard for the creative scene types. There are dozens of interesting urban areas within a day's drive of DC. Other than Fort Worth and San Antonio, there just isn't much else within 1000 miles of Austin.

In any event, DC is hardly an example of grim urban landscape. DC has plenty of offer as a city. When I lived there in the mid-90s I lived at 16th and Corcoran in Dupont Circle and it was quite the happening urban landscape. And there were plenty of interesting places within reach.

I was hoping for more Austin hate in this comments section. I visited and was incredibly underwhelmed. Compared to other Texas cities, it's good, but it's still really spread out, fairly ugly, and not nearly as different and interesting as it thinks it is.

I'm a young person living in Austin. I wouldn't pay one extra dollar to live in a city that has movie theatres where you can order food and beer.

So I think Matt's whole premise is wrong.

I live in St. Louis and we have a movie theater with beer, in fact, we have several. But I wouldn't use that as a stepping stone to say that St. Louis is much cooler than DC. I mean, it is, but the beer in movie theaters isn't the only reason...I used to live in DC, and the Arlington Cinema & Drafthouse is great - though I assume you can't smoke there anymore...

From my days as a summer intern in DC, I remember the outstanding happy hours.

Here in Atlanta, happy hour is illegal. Probably good from a anti-drunk driving perspecive, but still a major disappointment.


I was hoping for more Austin hate in this comments section. I visited and was incredibly underwhelmed. Compared to other Texas cities, it's good, but it's still really spread out, fairly ugly, and not nearly as different and interesting as it thinks it is.

I'll help out here. I live in Austin, and I would have gone to MY's netroots thing but for the fact that I work during the week (lol!). Austin doesn't deserve any hating, in my opinion, but there is a tremendous amount of unwarranted self-love in this city. The city planning is generally pretty terrible and the nightlife is not nearly as diverse as it's made out to be. There are really cheap places where you can get a drink, possibly outside, and even watch live music. There are also really cheap bars on 6th street for getting drunk that serve as an extention to frat life for students and ex-students. But nice, classy place to get a drink with friends that isn't too loud for normal conversation are nearly non-existent. I think that's mostly cultural, which goes to highlight earlier points; the demographics of Austin make up a big part of what it is. As someone who grew up in SoCal, went to school in Boston (there's some diversity), Austin is extremely white/hispanic and, imop, not nearly as 'diverse' as many other great American cities.

At the same time, regulatory practices here have led to spread out development that preserves substantial undeveloped areas. This has pros and cons. Yes, there is more greenery. But there is also more driving b/c things are more spread out. This is environmental NIMBYism. Austin preserves it's greenery while greatly increasing it's net carbon contribution.

Mark in Houston writes: "Still, if population growth and migration numbers are any indicator, Houston and Atlanta can stand up pretty well to New York and Chicago (people vote with their feet with regard to what is a "vigorous" city)"

I grew up in the Houston area and have to add that in spite of being the 4th largest city in the U.S., it's a pretty affordable place to live (which means you'll actually have the extra moo-la to go out and have fun). Plus, if memory serves, if you live inside the loop it's surprisingly easy to get around - by bus or car.

Hmm. Bars and movie theatres are now considered the keys to making a city a more "liveable community". Hmmm.

Agreed with the above poster: as a law student in Austin, the Drafthouse, while interesting, is not somewhere one frequents. The food is uniformly bad, while the screens are small and the crowds (understandably) loud. Beer in a movie is nice though.

Matt: way to easily impressed. Come during SXSW. Even though it is a media and corporate circus these days, the free music and free booze daily is amazing. Just get drunk for a straight week. Local bar scene (sans famous 6th St., which is a haven for tourists and frat boys) is really good. Indie movie selection (sans eating/watching at the Alamo Drafthouse) is excellent. Just see the other Drafthouse cinemas. And, of course, every good music act who isn't terribly big rolls through Austin (only example I can think of is Radiohead, who only visited Houston in Texas on their last tour). Weather's good, if you don't mind hot weather and know how to deal with it (go to Barton Springs or stay inside and crank AC).

And there's my rant.

Matt:
You stated: "the failure of such a theater [i.e., a theater combined with a bar and bistro] to exist in DC doesn't come about because of some stubborn DC unwillingness to open anything cool," but rather has to do with strict licensing and zoning regulations.

While I'd be the last to defend D.C.'s aversion to mixed-use areas, I think you have this one dead wrong.

D.C. did, for a time, have exactly such a theater notwithstanding the regulatory hurdles -- a place called Visions, which combined an art house with a cafe and bar. It had a prime locationon Florida Ave. just east of Connecticut, and it failed, to all appearances because D.C. folks would rather watch crap movies in multiplexes.

The Alamo Drafthouse is the greatest place on earth. And it's not because you can order a beer, it's because it shows unique films particularly the midnight movie series (which is free!)it also shows college football games, and it organizes cool events such as showing Jaws on a lake with the audience in inner tubes, or getting Tarantino to come and show his favorite films for QT Fest every year. There is no better theater in the country.

You write a lot about DC's regulatory regime, which is, admittedly, terrible. It seems to me that one of the reasons that it's terrible is that the folks who would most benefit from a looser regulatory regime with respect to things like bars are young folks who move here for their jobs.

By and large, they don't seem to register to vote here. It should come as no surprise, then, that the regulatory regime doesn't cater to their desires. Are you registered to vote in DC? Are your housemates?

Also, the AFI Silver up in Silver Spring serves beer (from Sam Adams on tap to PBR in cans), and it's Metro accessible. While the point about DC's regulatory regime stands, you can indeed catch the films of Milos Forman while drinking beer on tap without driving anywhere.

Austin is where Texas hipsters go to escape Texas. Without Austin many of them would probably keep going until they hit the west coast.

You've never set foot in the city, much less the state, if you calim to believe this. Austinites are Texans, and Austin isn't a cut-and-pasted Californian enclave no matter how many comparisons you may draw between them.

There's a new cinema drafthouse opening in Silver Spring (Wheaton, technically) in a month or two. I've forgotten the exact name of the coming establishment, sorry.

Contrary to the impressions of my DC friends, you don't even need a passport to get to SS. It's 20 minutes from Metro Center. I'm continually surprised how many film lovers tell me they keep meaning to someday get up to the AFI...

As an GWU alum and ex-Capitol Hill slave, I lived in DC for 8 years or so. Been in Austin for about a dozen. I agree with Matt, the Alamo Draft House is pretty damn cool and the food is good and reasonably priced. In addition to an amazing downtown location, there are 3 other Alamo's around town. I don't think anyone has pointed out the huge difference between The Alamo and Arlington Draft House is that Alamo plays FIRST RUN movies. You can go there and see the new Batman this weekend, for instance, while Arlington has Speed Racer and some other crud.

The fact that Alamo gets first run movies makes a huge difference. The revenue they get from that allows them to do some of the other cool things another poster mentioned above, like free midnight flicks.

I agree with the perspectives of Kent and mpowell on some of the other differences between, AUS and DC though.

Kent says: "Second, the demographics are entirely different. Austin is a magnet for creative types. It has no real competition for a 1000 miles around in that respect. In Texas the business, finance, and engineering types flock to DFW and Houston which makes professional jobs rarer and lower paying in Austin. Finding a professional job in Austin is tougher than you might think. DC is the opposite. It sucks in all the young government types. But there is just way too much competition on the eastern seaboard for the creative scene types. There are dozens of interesting urban areas within a day's drive of DC. Other than Fort Worth and San Antonio, there just isn't much else within 1000 miles of Austin."

With all due respect, Kent, you really don't know much about the creative scene in Texas if you say that. Houston is a much bigger center for the arts than Austin is (ask any gallery owner or art fair organizer), with the exception of live indie-rock music. And actually, if you look at the hip-hop and Latino music scenes, which many blogospheric cultural critics don't, Houston stands pretty well on the live music front also. Even Richard Florida, the dean of all things creative class, puts Houston in the top 10 of creative class cities. Granted, it's behind Austin, but it's ahead of Dallas, which means that there are at least two cities within 1000 miles of Austin that draw in the creatives, according to him.

Matt: "I took in a movie at the famous Alamo Draft House Cinema where, among other things, a server comes and brings you food and beer orders as you watch."

I used to go to theaters like that in Gainesville, Florida, back in the early '80's.

Need to get out of DC more, Matt.

oh, so nice discussion,how about enjoying something new? it will be very crazy to check *****m u l t i r a c i a l l o v e.c o m****. may be i need to check how really it goes...

But if you reduce regulation, how does an alderman/mayor/coucilman support his friends and punish his opponents? Whither crony capitalism in MY's de-regulated future?

I agree 100% that regulation for these types of businesses in DC should be relaxed. Nevertheless, there's a flipside to this, as anyone who has visited another Texas city with little to no regulation and zoning (like Houston) can see: lack of regulation and zoning can beget an insane, sprawling metropolis where a concrete highway rises over a row of townhouses that back up to a porno shop next to a skyscraper surrounded by a abandoned gas station, a McDonald's, a steakhouse, and a strip club.....it seems that finding this elusive middle ground between regulating too much and not regulating at all is difficult...

edsbowlingshoe writes: "...as anyone who has visited another Texas city with little to no regulation and zoning (like Houston) can see: lack of regulation and zoning can beget an insane, sprawling metropolis..."

Yes, but Dallas has zoning as does Austin, San Antonio and Ft. Worth.

And, interestingly, while people in Dallas and Houston will go out of their way to tell you how different their cities are from each other - the people I know from out of state who've been to both can't tell them apart.

"...it seems that finding this elusive middle ground between regulating too much and not regulating at all is difficult..."

Couldn't agree more.

I think maybe the way forward is frank discussion of the benefits and trade offs of this type of regulation.

For example, if I had time and space, I would contend that Houston's lack of zoning extends more entrepaneurial opportunities to all its citizens - including minorities - because it's one less hoop to jump through when you start a business.

One other point: if DC were a "super-cool" city like Chicago, Arlington, Silver Spring, and Bethesda would *be* DC. Ever take the El from Andersenville to the Hyde Park?

I live on Capitol Hill, and it's no harder to get to Arlington Cinema 'n' Draft House than it used to be to get from Belmont and Broadway to Wicker Park.

Matt, I don't know when you moved to D.C., but I'm guessing from other posts that you're too new to remember Tracks.

It was, for a generation, simply The Place To Go. It had three dance floors, one of which was outside on the deck - next to the *beach volleyball* court, which had a great view of the July 4 fireworks.

It usually stayed open till 4 a.m., and if there were enough people still around, they'd reopen the kitchen for breakfast.

The funniest part was that it was, at its core, a gay bar. But the music and atmosphere attracted so many straight people that you'd be hard-pressed to know anyone who hadn't been to Tracks; naturally, they only went on "straight night", which was (depending on who was telling you the story) either Thursday, Friday, Saturday, Sunday, or possibly Wednesday...

Sadly, by the end of the '90s, it failed. They had to shut down to make way for the Green Line, but frankly, Metro just put Tracks out of its misery. It was over by then - and not due to lack of an outdoor liquor license.

I think someone above had it right; D.C.'s just too transitive to support a vibrant, creative scene. That town is made for people passing through.


Comments closed August 03, 2008.

Copyright © 2008 by The Atlantic Monthly Group. All rights reserved.