Live music proponents express optimism, caution at potential expansion of venues

Boosters in the local music and creative communities are optimistic, if cautious, about the potential for new music venues and art spaces to open throughout Austin, now that the land use code is set to include formal definitions for both building types.

After years of discussion and debate on the issue behind the scenes, the Planning Commission last month approved the definitions for both uses, which City Council had requested a year ago. The approval means the language is headed to Council next month for final consideration, which would give city staff the task of setting up the application and approval process for opening a music club or arts space in areas where they previously faced a high regulatory and planning burden.

Recently, a map has circulated that illustrates how more than 12,000 additional properties around the city will become eligible to hold a music venue – almost seven times as many lots as historically qualified for that use.

Dave Sullivan, a member of the city’s Cultural Trust Advisory Committee and a longtime advocate for local music, told the Austin Monitor the changes likely will result in a noticeable uptick in venues around the city. That will probably be followed by closures, he added, as music fans respond to what’s being offered in terms of bookings and business operations.

“I look at (the map) with great caution. … Just because you say that you can put a music venue in all of these hundreds of new retail-zoned areas does not mean it’s going to happen. And it’s going to depend on the market,” Sullivan said, noting that the Cultural Trust and Economic Development Department will need to continue to offer small-business education courses for new venue owners.

“There’s a possibility that we’ll see several young operators come along, but it’s been the tradition that people who get into running a bar (or) music venue or running a restaurant often do it out of the love for that, as opposed to having good financial skills,” he said.

Sullivan praised work being done at the Economic Development Department to look at how to create walkable or short-distance cultural and nightlife districts, akin to the Red River Cultural District or the cluster of clubs and music venues in South Austin near the intersection of Menchaca Road and Slaughter Lane.

As a member of an Urban Land Institute Austin group on creative space preservation, Sullivan said his talks with developers about the potential for capitalizing on planned city incentives for music venues or art galleries have produced both hesitation and interest. He said developers worry about putting unproven entities on the ground floor instead of a proven use, like retail or a restaurant, despite data that proves creative uses lead to higher revenue generated from the other floors.

Much of that data on the mix of creative space and development has been gathered by Matt Kwatinetz, director of New York University’s Urban Lab and a former consultant for economic development matters in Austin. He told the Monitor that in addition to making creative spaces a community benefit – similar to affordable housing or parkland dedication to allow developers more density in their projects – Austin could model practices in New York that provide financial assistance for venues or arts spaces that require expensive buildouts for soundproofing.

Kwatinetz said Austin’s definition of a live music venue also has been carefully tailored to lower the regulatory bar for clubs with smaller capacities, rather than for theaters or spaces built to accommodate crowds of 1,000 or more.

“Oftentimes, the requirements for venues wind up being tied to the largest possible size venue instead of the uniqueness of some of the middle-market stuff, and that’s particularly important in the music scene in Austin, where they can’t always do all the things that a big arena does,” he said.

Kwatinetz added, “It’s nice also when they can set it up enough that (opening a venue) becomes an as-of-right thing, as long as you satisfy conditions instead of having to apply for a special permit.”

Photo made available through a Creative Commons license via Pexels.

The Austin Monitor’s work is made possible by donations from the community. Though our reporting covers donors from time to time, we are careful to keep business and editorial efforts separate while maintaining transparency. A complete list of donors is available here, and our code of ethics is explained here.