1. Regulation of Wineries, Distilleries, and Breweries Presented by: Christian Samples John Van Dyke

2. Presentation Overview The goal of our presentation is to: 1.Provide information of existing winery, distillery, and brewery ordinances in Idaho counties 2.Discuss regulation from the standpoint of external agencies, such as highway and health districts 3.Relay regulation from the perspective of local businesses 4.Make recommendations for the creation, implementation, and revision of ordinances

3. What we’ve done  Review of all 44 county ordinances in Idaho  Inquired of other regulatory agencies, such as highway districts, fire districts, and Southwest District Health Department  Spoke with local businesses surrounding their experiences with zoning and other regulatory agencies and their impacts to development  Reached out to several counties in Idaho and neighboring states for information

4. Map of County Governments Surveyed  More than 20 counties surveyed; slightly less than half responded  5 questions  4 states  Questions surrounded:  Desired changes in ordinance  Accessory/Ancillary Uses and Ordinance Requirements  Industry shifts over time

5. Before we begin…  Primary uses: Winery, Distillery, or Brewery  Accessory uses:  A use that is subordinate to the primary use  “While we’re doing this, why not do that too?”  E.g. tasting room, special events center, bed and breakfast  Ancillary uses:  A use that supports the primary use  “Ultimately, I need that to happen in order to do this”  E.g. bottle manufacturing, viticulture, parking, alcoholism

6. A Changing Industry  Shift to direct-to-consumer sales  Increasingly competitive market requires alternative approach to gain traction  Creates need for revenue diversification  Shift to multi-use facilities  Larger wineries are becoming more like events centers that happen to make wine  Accessory uses becoming more dominant than primary use

7. Existing winery, distillery, and brewery ordinances in Idaho counties

8. Rural Breweries and Distilleries  Most counties lack regulations for these uses  Brewery  Out of 44 counties, 3 have detailed regulations  Ada, Fremont, and Nez Perce  Distillery  Only 2 have detailed regulations  Ada and Fremont  Urban-centric uses?

9. Some Counties Are Drunk with Winery Regulations  Considered counties with winery listed on a use schedule, having a definition, and specific use standards  Use schedule contained winery as a separate use  Definition clearly defines winery  Use standards found regulate:  Multi-Use Nature of Facilities  Proximity Buffers  Scope and Scale

10. Some Counties Are Tipsy with Winery Ordinances  Counties that at minimum have winery on their use schedule, but:  may or may not define winery,  or have specific use regulations  Definition may have use standards tucked in  Lack of associated accessory or ancillary uses

11. But Most Idaho Counties Are Dry and Lack Specific Winery Regulations  Winery is not defined, is not on a use schedule, and has no use standards  Is lack of regulation associated with climate? Politics?  Where wineries are possible, does a lack of regulation helpful or harmful?  Can compatibility issues be mitigated in the absence of regulation?

12. Consistency vs. Flexibility  Detailed regulations provide for consistent development and mitigate compatibility issues, but do not provide decision-makers ability to accommodate scope and scale of project  Minimal or no regulations gives decision-makers flexibility to accommodate multiple land use situations but could invite politics and inconsistency into decision-making process

13. Regulation from the Standpoint of External Agencies

14. Highway District Concerns  Traffic impacts  Special events create temporary overcrowding  Freight  Employees  Parking issues  When insufficient parking is available, vehicles are forced onto public roads  Access Point Issues  Paved Aprons  Access Point Width and Spacing

15. Health Department Concerns  Water supply  Thresholds will Determine Need for Commercial Water System  E.g. Number of People in 60-day period  Waste water flows  Domestic versus Non-Domestic  Based on Chemical Values  Food services  Breadth of Services May Require Additional Licensure

16. Other Concerns  Information sharing is crucial  Letter of Intent vs. Entitlement Granted  Use Creep  New Building Permit  Communication between all parties  Pre-app meetings  Understanding External Agency Processes and Requirements

17. Regulation from the Perspective of Local Businesses

18. Business Feedback  Local land use regulation is not necessarily burdensome by itself…  11 different governmental organizations oversee operations  Tax and Trade Bureau  Idaho Alcohol Beverage Control  Idaho State Tax Commission  IRS  Health Department/FDA  DEQ  Highway Districts

19. Business Wish List  Wineries should simply be an allowed use  Wine tasting and limited retail should be allowed without any additional requirements  Promote Development Along Wine Corridor  Create ordinances that encourage agri-tourism uses such as:  “farm to fork” dining  Additional bed and breakfast establishments  U-pick food operations

20. Recommendations

21. Have Specific Goals in Mind  What are you trying to accomplish (health and safety, aesthetics)  Start with “why”  Proactive vs. reactive planning  Don’t make an ordinance a solution looking for a problem

22. But Understand the Ordinance Will Evolve  Over time, industry requirements change, necessitating different accessory/ancillary uses which may need to be addressed via ordinance amendments  Something may be missed, or possibly over regulation may occur

23. Codifying Accessory/Ancillary Uses Differently than Primary Uses  Accessory/Ancillary use may require additional attention so as to not take away from the primary use  Tasting rooms allowed in Agricultural zone  Require conditional use permit in AR zone  Not allowed in industrial zone  Fremont County Does Something Similar  Context is everything  Accomplished by zone, acreage requirements, square footage limitations, etc.

24. Connecting Scope with Scale  Limitations on scope may be required in order to prevent unintentional outcomes related to development  Example: one-acre vineyard with 5-bedroom bed and breakfast, holding weddings with up to 100 guests  Different standards for different levels

25. External agencies are your friends  Craft ordinances and conditions of approval keeping external agency requirements in mind  Communication between counties and agencies important  Encourage applicants to contact agencies early  Don’t be afraid to contact agencies on behalf of an applicant (hint: we speak a very similar language)

26. Communication can reduce confusion  Providing information that easily explains:  Definition of Use  Where use is allowed  Scope/Scale Special Requirements  How to traverse the process  Agency Contact Information

27. Don’t forget about public involvement  Involve the public as early as possible  Stakeholder feedback can paint a picture of an industry you may not get from Google or a site visit  Continue public involvement after ordinances are adopted (hint: feedback is important)  Document the process so it can be revisited with stakeholders in the future  Concerns, policies, procedures change over time  Documentation makes reevaluation easier

28. Each is Jurisdiction is Unique  Determining scope and scale should take jurisdiction’s unique attributes into account  Consistent regulation vs. flexible decision making  Politics  Public Opinion

29. Cheers and Thank you! Presented by: Christian Samples, Planner John Van Dyke, Planner