Growth of bistros, dining platforms in city

Sometimes too much of a good thing is just way too much, and the city of Birmingham is faced with just such a conundrum of its own making.

An innovative ordinance in 2007 to develop bistros for the city, which included a requirement to have outdoor dining in order to invigorate the retail community and create greater walkability appears to be at a tipping point. Many of these establishments requested from the city, and were permitted, to build platforms for their outdoor dining in at least one parking spot in the city. The thinking was that, yes, it removed a parking space from circulation for six months of the year, but it enhanced the downtown by creating greater visibility not only for the dining establishment, but for the entire downtown business district. The goal was to have diners shop in stores before or after their meals.

Fast forward 18 years, and there are now restaurants of all kinds in Birmingham, 48 of which have outdoor components, and 15 with dining platforms. We understand there are applications in with the city for three more dining platforms, including more for W. Maple. Combined with redesigned streets downtown which eliminated parking spaces on Maple, Old Woodward, Pierce and Hamilton, the increase of dining platforms not only creates visual cacophony, but a true difficulty for shoppers and other visitors to downtown seeking parking.

A rundown of the outdoor segments indicates that the 48 include both those with liquor licenses, and those without. At a recent joint Birmingham City Commission/Planning Board workshop it was acknowledged that the dining platforms are costly for restaurateurs to build and maintain. But there is a cost to the image and welfare of the city, as well.

We recommend putting a hold on future applications for outdoor dining platforms as the planning board assesses the impact on the city as a whole, not just individual businesses. We also think that the question of whether the city has reached a saturation point when it comes to bistros should be addressed. We all remember the decline of Royal Oak when dining and drink establishments became too numerous.

As some quick added thoughts for planners to consider: perhaps establishments without liquor licenses should not be granted platforms. Further, the city should not allow a dining business to have outdoor seating and platforms in front of neighboring businesses. Part of assessing a property before opening is determining the outdoor space possibilities – not hoping you can crib your neighbor's.

The city would also be well served to do a survey of other municipalities around the country with similar ordinances to see how they are faring, and coping, which can then lead to a discussion of whether the city has reached a point that a moratorium on dining platforms and bistros would be in its best interests.