Backyard Coffee and Jazz in Kyoto

> on the vibrant business and street culture in Japanese cities and the seemingly very, very low barriers to entry for regular people to participate.

An astute observation that allowing markets to operate without onerous licensing schemes and regulations often has wonderful upsides, allowing quirky and niche interests to survive and even flourish.

A similar situation was true of Melbourne's small bar scene vs Sydney's. Sydney's more expensive/onerous licensing requirements were prohibitive for tiny bars. Whereas Melbourne's licensing was more permissive and less expensive, resulting in an abundance of quirky and interesting venues. Possibly my favourite example was a tiny indy video game bar (it shut down during covid, I think). https://barsk.com.au/skgames/?p=done

A similar situation in the US can be seen in Boston. Historically terrible nightlife and for easily explained reasons. Liquor licenses are distributed by the state at a capped amount that can potentially be increased each year, meaning the majority of new businesses wanting to have alcohol sales will need to purchase an existing liquor license from another business, often at an exorbitant price (over 500k USD on average I believe)

This makes it extremely difficult for any new businesses to start, and massively advantages large chain businesses that have the ability to make the initial investment in securing a license, versus small or quirky businesses which just have no chance getting started.

Looks like https://maps.app.goo.gl/sa5JdGPMoZKiUiUP7 in Osaka is still going, though I remembered it being called "spacebar", a fantastic male for a retro gaming bar.

North Americans: the city planners are ruining your life in ways you didn't even know could exist.

I'm all for reducing permit requirements, but realisitically these would be used by McDo and Starbux to externalize more costs while increasing their quarterly profit. Really, you need to have something that is trusted and rational without corporate corruption, which Japan nominally is. The US is going the opposite direction from that.

This makes so much sense to me. I've always thought Boston's nightlife was terrible when compared to places in Texas. You go to Austin and there are the most random bars, clubs, and restaurants. Most have their own quirks and personality, making it so no one place is exactly like the other.

It's my understanding that houses in Japan are zoned to allow a percentage of the space to be used for a low-impact business, like the coffee shop in the article, and that bigger businesses are allowed on the bigger roads and in dedicated commercial/industrial districts. Also most houses can be converted to triplexes, too. This helps with density, encouraging more businesses nearby, less need for cars, better quality of social life, etc.

I see what you mean about the potential for abuse - maybe Big Money would buy all the houses and run small businesses from them? But regulations or taxes could be used to dissuade them. Theoretically, anyways.

I wondered if Japan does anything along those lines to avoid the problems you mentioned, but google ain't what it used to be and I wasn't able to find specifics.

It's kind of the other way around: McDonalds will find a way to operate in pretty much any kind of environment. They have the deep pockets and knowledge to do so. They have restaurants across the world, including in very tricky places like Venice, Italy.

It's the small, local guy who with low margins who is not going to thrive in an environment where it's very difficult to get past all the hurdles to even start up.

American city planners influenced the construction of an elevated highway through the middle of Seoul in South Korea. Years later, that monstrosity was demolished. https://youtu.be/wqGxqxePihE

Why do you need a liquor license for nightlife. There is more to life than just drinking alcohol.

Because the economics of it are such that there's where you get your money. How much cover charge are you willing to pay to go out to a club playing local talent on a random weeknight? A cover charge that would actually cover costs at a venue with no bar would be exorbitantly expensive. This is why many places with cheap cover have a drink minimum.

Businesses that sell alcohol make a lot of money, businesses that don't tend to go out of business.

Wish it weren't so (I don't drink alcohol, personally), but that's the economics of it.

Yeah, this is actually a problem for venues now that younger generations drink less alcohol.

People will drink a beer every set in a show, but they’re less likely to do that with coffee, soda, THC drink, or any other beverage except water, which most bar venues offer for free.

Sure, and offering gambling is another good way to make a lot of money. Yet, we don't see every business offer gambling to its patrons.

You can sell other drinks, food, entertainment, services, games, etc. Alcohol isn't the only thing people are able to do at night. There are plenty of activities that are possible.

Because you can't drink caffeine at night and we don't have any competing depressants.

Japan has both McDonalds and Starbucks. Also, McDonalds is a franchise so "they" are not making most of the decisions here.

(Btw, I like US McDonalds better than Japan's, but maybe I'm the only one that thinks this.)

> I see what you mean about the potential for abuse - maybe Big Money would buy all the houses and run small businesses from them? But regulations or taxes could be used to dissuade them. Theoretically, anyways.

This isn't actually possible because owning a lot of houses is not a good business. That's why almost all landlords are small-time and not corporate. Houses are depreciating assets, so if you own more of them it's just more chances you'll have to pay for a roof replacement.

In particular in Japan, houses are worth less than nothing and you may have to pay to demolish yours if you sell it! (Less true than it used to be because construction quality has gotten a lot better.)

"Night life" tends to refer to bars and clubs, and regardless of your personal stance on drinking the majority of people going to bars and clubs expect to be able to drink alcohol.

Some more context for Japan's land use (it does not differ prefecturally; some local regulations like kyoto and building colors)

The basics of Japan's Land use rules in english (only 8 pages; mostly tables/pictures and very straightforward): https://www.mlit.go.jp/common/001050453.pdf

- In the "Control of Building Use by Land Use Zones" you can see how even the most exclusive of zoning enables "Houses with other small scale function", Clinics, Schools or stores with very small footprints.

- Structures are restricted by the shape, shadow, and floor area.

- No mention of "single-family" housing.

A map (of Tokyo) overlaying the gradient of zoning from least to most permissive. You can see how the up-zoning follows the major roads: https://tokyochizu.github.io/zoning.html

I think another factor is real estate: a population shrinking by more than half a million people per year eases some of the pressure on rent and land value...

When I lived in New York City (before COVID), I saw many local businesses get priced out of my neighborhood, only to be replaced by high-margin chains like Starbucks/H&M/etc. They were the only ones who could afford the rent!

It’s weird, I’ve travelled for work and pleasure more than pretty much anyone I meet (I’ve visited 90 countries, worked in 21, lived longer term in 5. Currently settled West Coast US) and I’m somewhat of a fast food connoisseur lol - KFC, Domino’s, BK, Pizza Hut, etc are all without exception better in Europe and Asia with the exception of ,in my opinion , McDonalds. Maccies is better here as a rule. Sure you get the shitty franchisees sometimes but generally speaking!

This is a semi controversial opinion so, it’s interesting you feel the same way!

Yes, because you won't go out of business if you don't offer gambling, whereas you will if you don't offer alcohol.

Can you say what makes USA McDs better? Definitely curious!

Japan is full of licenses and regulations, it is almost the exact opposite of the free market utopia you're imagining. You're not even allowed to buy a car without a permit that proves you have a parking space for it.

What Japan does different is that it has sensible zoning laws that are designed around foot traffic rather than car traffic. Why don't you have small shops like this in the U.S.? Because of minimum parking space requirements for cars.

And that running businesses out of homes is frequently illegal, another casualty of zoning.

You certainly can drink caffeine at night. But maybe that's just a sign I am too habituated to caffeine, because I can drink it and have no ill effects on my sleep schedule.

Thank you - I rushed to the comments section to mention Melbourne's bars.

Re 'more permissive and less expensive' - I think there was a time (20 years ago?) when Melbourne city would give a license basically anyone. There were bars in old convenience stores, out the back of record stores & barbers. Just so much fun.

‘Free’ refills?

> You're not even allowed to buy a car without a permit that proves you have a parking space for it.

I would cross out "even" in that sentence, and then step back and admire it. This is one of the best things about Japan. For some bizarre reason there is an implicit assumption (at least in many places in Europe, especially Central Europe) that 12m2 of public shared city space should be reserved for your metal box on wheels and that it's somehow a right.

There are some pretty awesome small, unique bars in Boston, but there could be so, so many more if the liquor license laws and rent prices were more reasonable, though.

I understand that to be one of the differences in approach to zoning, zones and buildings are considered on a spectrum of "impact". A high impact building like an industrial plant shouldn't be too close to low impact buildings like a single dwelling. But because it's a spectrum you get a natural mix of low, medium, and high impact buildings. A large residential complex might be considered medium impact and so can go next to a shopping complex that is also medium to high impact etc.

I would imagine that a great deal of Tokyo's megalopolis fits nicely in the medium impact zone, allowing housing, small scale manufacturing and commerce to mingle in an organic way.

Can I ask you about the use of Maccies, is it a term you've used for a while? Do you remember where you first picked it up?

It is a somewhat hot topic in Australia, where we've always called it Maccas, but somehow Maccies has entered the lexicon here too.

>> on the vibrant business and street culture in Japanese cities and the seemingly very, very low barriers to entry for regular people to participate.

> An astute observation that allowing markets to operate without onerous licensing schemes and regulations often has wonderful upsides

I suspect you are reading too much into this line from the article. Japan is a country full of bureaucratic regulations to the extent that it's often stifling -- especially compared to the US.

The overall lowered barrier to entry is largely a result of zoning laws differences between Japan and the US. In the US, zoning laws are largely permissive (you CAN build this here) where zoning laws in Japan are restrictive (you CANNOT build this here). This leads to huge differences in urban planning where Japan favours mixed-used development whereas the US has huge swaths of contiguous blocks separating residential and commercial zones.

Add to that, the cost of visibility is higher in the US because transportation is already car-centric. Small shops thrive on pedestrian traffic, which there is little of in the US outside core urban environments. NIMBY culture has killed much of urban diversity in America.

It's not really the planners given that planners have no real power and just do what they're told. The problem is that the elected decision makers are beaten down by established rich homeowners and shy away from and all conflict. So we have a cascade of shy conflict aversion as lazy and uninterested elected officials defer endlessly to planners, and planners who don't want to cause drama for their elected bosses and get themselves fired capitulate and do the safe thing that the wealthy established homeowner class pushes for.

I've thought the same thing. Would love if other people were into that.

I'd ask you to consider the following thought experiment. If the regulatory barriers are lower to establish a nightlife business establishment without alcohol as an option, and a large number of people want to do activities without alcohol, why do these businesses not exist in significant numbers?

It's certainly not a novel concept to open a cafe or a late night board game location. If they were sustainable businesses economically, which barriers currently exist that prevent them from being present in cities to the same extent as bars?

It's not a big difference but Japanese burgers are smaller (of course) but the buns aren't small enough. So there's just way too much bread in my experience.

Also, US has a mango pineapple smoothie that's really good. I refuse to look up how much sugar is in it.

I am not here to nit pick about this post, but this made me think:

    > owning a lot of houses is not a good business

Generally, I agree. What do you think makes commercial (office) buildings different? Probably 90% are owned by insurance companies, private equity, and pension funds. My guess: Scale matters. Also, maybe I am blinded by big cities, but second tier cities and below might have lots of small fry landlords that own one or two small commercial buildings

Your last link of zoning density is incredibly cool. Did you create it?

    > They have restaurants across the world, including in very tricky places like Venice, Italy.

You raise a great point. Their internal property consulting unit must be incredibly sophisticated, mixing international best practices with local, specialised knowledge. It would be interesting to hear some detail about how McD's selects their locations.

I know McD's has a mix of company-owned and franchise stores in the US. Is it the same in Japan? I don't know anything about how Starbucks works.

    > Maccies is better here as a rule.

Shots fired! No joke: Why do you feel that way? Also: Better than McD's in Japan?

It's Space Station. Still a great vibe and going strong (thankfully), I visited it half a year ago.

It is insanity. In Amsterdam, houses go for €9,000 per square meter. So a parking space should cost around ~ €9,000 × 12m2 = €108,000. Meanwhile parking permits for inhabitants go for €500-€750 per year. It's the cheapest real estate available.

> You're not even allowed to buy a car without a permit that proves you have a parking space for it.

And this is how you end up with excellent public transport, no SUVs, and like the lowest traffic death rate in the world.

> without onerous licensing schemes and regulations often has wonderful upsides

If anything Japan is the opposite.

Full of licenses and regulations doesn't mean that the licensing requirements for bars in particular are onerous.

An example is where I'm from, in Canada. Licensing for cars is easy. Business licenses are easy enough, if they're non-physical.

But opening a bar means at least $50k of licenses/compliance costs. To have a bar, you need to serve food. To serve food, there's minimum requirements for all sorts of things from electrical to ventilation to plumbing. So you need to apply to the city to do a study and plebiscite in the neighborhood to determine no one objects to your bar. You need to have an engineer sign off on your design and the fire department to sign off on that. Liquor license is $$$.

And that's before even bringing up the cost of the lease (1 year rent as deposit) or the actual construction costs (last I checked, over $400 per square foot).

Alcohol doesn't just make more money because it has huge margins. It has decent margin, high profit per unit, and a magic trick: it makes people less cautious about spending more.

I have no interest in a second coke or a third coffee. I can drink tea for days, but if it feels pricey I probably only have one or two. Real estate is expensive if that's your customer profile

Do houses and land cost more, or less, there than the US?

It would help if traveling into the city for work would take also 45m, instead of 2h jumping across train, tram and bus connections, and this on a good day, when they aren't missed by "pick random DB excuse of the day".

Requiring proof that you have a parking spot should not be an issue. If you have a car, you need to put it somewhere right? Parking is generally private in Japan, so it comes at a premium. In western countries people expect that the government provide sufficient parking spots, but that's not necessary the most efficient allocation of valuable land.

Vietnam has so much street food and coffee shops that McD and Starbucks cannot compete. That being said, Vietnamese zoning is pure anarchy and it would be too much for any Western country.

That’s the whole point of zoning

Unfortunately most people don't seem to understand that over regulation can end up benefitting bigger more established businesses, simply because it raises the barrier to entry.

It's the difference between drivers paying for their own parking or having it subsidised by non-drivers, along with the various issues caused by motornormativity (when you design around cars, you exclude walking/cycling etc).

Texas alone is twice the size of Japan with 1/4 of the population.

There’s little need for efficient allocation of essentially infinite space outside of urban areas constrained by geological features. And in those places parking comes at a premium too even in Western countries.

I've heard it called Maccie or Macky D in the UK for at least 15 years

One of the most known examples happened in Germany after WWII.

After the war Germany had lost quite a lot of businesses, infrastructure, industry and farming. Also obviously lots of manpower. Produce was scarce and inflation was extremely high, so it was actually quite difficult to purchase anything even though people had money. the Allied Forces introduced price control on almost all essential good in order to stop inflation. That obviously did not work at all and most goods were actually traded in the black market, so you could actually buy bread by paying with cigarettes.

A German economist, Ludwig Erhardt advised to remove all price and legal controls and to replace the old mark by a new one, but the Allied Forces only agreed to the latest, so a new currency was introduced, the Deutsche Mark, replacing the old Reichsmark. That had no effect whatsoever. However, Mr. Erhardt, from his position as Director of Economic Administration, decided unilaterally to remove of the price fixing and other regulations. And literally overnight, German streets filled with sudden and unplanned pop up markets, everyone started to sell anything they didn't need, just by the street or from their front yard.

In 1949 Erhardt became Minister of Economy for 14 years, and later, in 1963, Chancellor.

But why?

(semi-rhetorical, but that's exactly the discussion we're having here, whether people should be allowed a backyard coffee shop)

> There’s little need for efficient allocation of essentially infinite space outside of urban areas constrained by geological features.

Is that why highways that are 26 lanes wide are needed?

* https://roadstotravel.net/usa-katy-freeway/

> Houses are depreciating assets

.. which sit on top of the ultimate appreciating asset: land.

> That's why almost all landlords are small-time and not corporate.

https://wustllawreview.org/2023/12/27/corporate-consolidatio...

"Ownership of the nation’s rental housing stock is in transition. The approximately twenty million rental properties in the United States, and fifty million rental units within those properties, have been steadily shifting from individual to corporate hands".

Rent is profitable and the housing shortage is difficult to solve.

Ah, yes, DB: I am aware of their reputation and, sadly, they also run some services in the UK where reliability and timeliness of service is also already shaky enough without their further assistance.

You have my sympathy.

I favour public transport when possible, but until goverments create reliable infrastructures that go beyond the lucky ones able to afford rents in city centers within the radius of good transport connections, or not having to go by bycicle to work while collecting km/miles as training for The Tour, most folks will go with the car option.

Fruit machines aren’t uncommon in pubs and late night takeaway places in the UK.

> Because of minimum parking space requirements for cars.

This is not true. In a big city there are plenty of locations without parking or rely on public street parking. The issues are the onerous zoning, licensing and insurance requirements.

Yes, it just uses the shapefile from the tokyo open data site.

https://catalog.data.metro.tokyo.lg.jp/dataset/t000008d00000...

It's a quarto site so if you navigate to the repository of the github page you can see the python code used to generate the map/choropleth.

It also helps that apparently in general street parking is banned (possibly at least in big cities) due to disaster considerations - eq. for easy access for rescue personnel after a major earthquake or Typhoon. Not to mention tightly parkiong cars potentially being a fire spreading hazard in such a scenario.

In comparison, even here in Europe there are tight rows of cars in almost every street, reducing space for greenery, eating up sidewalks, making street crossing dangerous and sometimes even making the street hard to navigate for the cars themselves, not to mention making quick stops for taxi drivers or food & grocery delivery cars almost impossible.

Land rights conversion. I believe if 2/3 of homeowners (living in a low-density area) agree to a proposed readjustment, then the rights of the land belonging to all homeowners are thusly converted. Oddly makes sense as the end-product, in turn, allows for greater density whilst retaining much of the aesthetic of said-land.

Alcohol is famously super high margin, though. People will pay like $5-10 for a 54¢ shot of Costco vodka or rum at a comedy club and another $5 if you mix 10¢ of cola into it, you simply can't get the same margins out of even very expensive feeling food which usually needs more labor and prep.

In addition, alcohol lowers the bar for entertainment. Comedy, music, dancing, none of it has to be as good to satisfy if people are at least a bit tipsy, which makes the performers happier, and the customers happier.

Office buildings are different because companies have more money and lower standards (for acceptable density) than residents.

Almost no single-family houses in the US are rental properties. That's talking about apartments.

> Rent is profitable and the housing shortage is difficult to solve.

If a home is being rented out it's not contributing to the housing shortage though.

I'm not sure, but I know everything about CRE is totally different from residential.

Office buildings are generally larger, and the tenants are more professional and more likely to pay for maintenance themselves.

They might not be saying it's perfect in all cases, maybe just giving the line of thinking that landed us at Katy highway :-)

Missing the point. As long as an area has a shortage of housing rentals will likely remain a good investment.

That said I have to disagree that the housing shortage is difficult to solve, at least in a technical sense. It's due almost entirely to poor urban planning and infrastructure management. The problem is entirely political.

Then again, political issues can be some of the most difficult to make progress on so perhaps I agree after all.

Plenty of restaurants don't have alcohol. Night clubs are a different story.

Externalities. But I'm not a fan of the neighborhoods that have nothing but houses for miles. Gotta balance it a little more.

If this is one of those sought-after business zones in a rich area, there are only X slots to fill, and somehow it's decided who gets them. Take away liquor licenses, and the barrier will be rent instead. If you want lower barriers, there simply has to be more real estate available in that one area.

It's usually like this in other cities, the rich areas have high-investment establishments that play it safe. Maybe that's ok if you want something mainstream and/or high-end.