Supes tell staff to
draft
boutique winery ordinance
By Joe
Naiman
The Alpine Sun
Winery owners in unincorporated San Diego County are one step
closer to a zoning ordinance amendment that would allow boutique
wineries to operate without use permits.
A 5-0 San Diego County Board of Supervisors vote Dec. 5
directed county staff to return to the supervisors within 120
days with an ordinance that would allow tasting rooms and
on-premise wine sales by right for boutique wineries accessed by
public roads while establishing conditions for boutique wineries
accessed by private roads.
A separate 5-0 vote directed county staff to explore
the feasibility of establishing viticultural zones in San Diego
County. The proposed boutique winery ordinance only applies to
properties with A70 and A72 agricultural zoning and was
specifically designed to avoid boutique wineries in areas with
residential zoning, but grapes are also grown on properties with
S92, or general rural, zoning.
S92 zoning allows for residential and agricultural use
and is intended to provide controls for land with rugged
terrain, watersheds, dependence on groundwater, susceptibility
to fire and erosion, or subject to other environmental
constraints. Grapes have been touted as a low-water crop
suitable for water-restricted situations.
"It sounds like this might be a reasonable solution,"
said Supervisor Dianne Jacob. "This looks to me like a pretty
good compromise."
The existing zoning ordinance defines two types of
wineries. A Wholesale Limited Winery allows production of up to
7,500 gallons annually and is allowed by right in agricultural
zones, but the zoning ordinance does not allow retail
activities, tasting rooms, or special events. A Winery is
allowed by right in industrial zones but is required to have a
major use permit in agricultural zones and in certain
residential and special purpose zones. Tasting rooms, special
events, and retail sales can be allowed under the conditions of
a major use permit.
A February recommendation created four new categories
of wineries: Boutique wineries produce no more than 12,000
gallons per year, small wineries produce up to 55,999 gallons
annually, medium wineries produce under 100,000 gallons, and
large wineries produce at least 100,000 gallons. The ordinance
under consideration only covers boutique wineries.
Sales, tasting, and special events were proposed to be
allowed by right at boutique wineries, with an administrative
permit for small wineries, with a minor use permit for medium
wineries, and with a major use permit for large wineries. One
tasting room of up to 30 percent of the production facility's
area or 2,000 square feet (whichever is greater) would be
allowed for all wineries, and up to 30 percent of the tasting
room area would be allowed for non-wine retail sales.
Boutique wineries would not be allowed to host special
events and could hold up to four marketing events per year. The
marketing events would be limited to between 10 a.m. and sunset.
Retail sales would be allowed seven days a week between 10 a.m.
and sunset; 75 percent of the wines sold must be from
San Diego County grapes and 35 percent of the wine must
be from the winery operating the tasting room, although there is
an exemption for new wineries.
Harvesting and wholesale sales (with state approval)
are already permitted uses in agricultural areas. The county
currently has more than 40 bonded wineries.
If access to the winery uses any portion of a private
road, an administrative permit (which includes public review)
would be required if more than ten parcels are accessed by the
private road. If ten or fewer parcels are accessed, a road
maintenance agreement must be in place. The road must be paved
to a width of 14 feet or greater, and any unpaved road must be
at least 14 feet wide at its narrowest point and have a maximum
grade of no more than four percent.
Members of the Farm Bureau are on both sides of the
private road issue, so the Farm Bureau has taken no position on
private road restrictions. Al Stehly of Valley Center
represented the Farm Bureau at the hearing.
"The Farm Bureau is firmly in support of anything that
moves agriculture ahead in San Diego County," Stehly said. "I
think you have created a road to success, so to speak."
Opponents fear intoxicated drivers returning from — or
traveling between — tasting rooms on private roads and hazardous
public roads. They also noted that in addition to increased
traffic concerns, property owners usually share equally in the
cost and labor of maintaining a private road and owners of a
private road may be liable if a visitor from the tasting room
has an accident while driving on that road.
"The county is shifting their responsibilities to the
public," said Ramona resident Don Kovacic.
Kovacic suggested alternatives such as streamlining the
permit process while retaining public review or subsidizing the
costs of major use permits. "Instead the county has decided to
shift the burden of increasing tourism through wineries to the
general public. It's a bad idea," he said.
Property owners with private road easements are liable
regardless of whether homes exist.
Many private roads include children playing, horseback riders,
and often little signage or lighting.
Kevin Dorst of Ramona noted that some private roads are
less than ten feet wide at certain points. "The drinking of
alcohol in these tasting rooms is not in the best interest of
the public," he said.
Jacob sought to give county staff specific direction on
drafting and ordinance. "Anything we do in terms of an ordinance
is not in concrete forever," she said.
 E-mail
the Editor
|
|
