Portland State University PDXScholar Urban Studies and Planning Faculty Nohad A. Toulan School of Urban Studies and Publications and Presentations Planning 3-1-2013 Managing Activities at Wineries: Building and Sustaining a Place-Based Brand Ethan Seltzer Portland State University Mark Bernard Portland State University JP McNeil Portland State University Lori Parks Portland State University Follow this and additional works at: https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/usp_fac Part of the Entrepreneurial and Small Business Operations Commons, and the Urban Studies and Planning Commons Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Citation Details Seltzer, Ethan; Bernard, Mark; McNeil, JP; and Parks, Lori, "Managing Activities at Wineries: Building and Sustaining a Place-Based Brand" (2013). Urban Studies and Planning Faculty Publications and Presentations. 1. https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/usp_fac/1 This Technical Report is brought to you for free and open access. It has been accepted for inclusion in Urban Studies and Planning Faculty Publications and Presentations by an authorized administrator of PDXScholar. Please contact us if we can make this document more accessible: [email protected]. Managing Activities at Wineries: Building and Sustaining a Place-Based Brand February, 2013 Ethan Seltzer, Project Lead Toulan School of Urban Studies and Planning Portland State University [email protected] 503-725-5169 Project Team and Co-Authors: Mark Bernard JP McNeil Lori Parks | EXECUTIVE SUMMARY THE PROJECT n the fall of 2012, the Willamette Valley Winery Association, Oregon Winery Association, Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development, and Oregon Department of Agriculture requested the development of information needed to help inform discussions regarding the replacement for the soon-to-sunset HB 3280, Isigned into law in 2011. The charge for this work was to investigate the following questions: How have wine regions permitted and managed a range of uses and activities at wineries, some of which are indirectly connected to the making or selling of wine? How can wine region land use regulations contribute to sustaining the brand for a region? How can farmland winery codes best maintain compatibility with other crops and farming activities? To address this charge, a literature review was conducted, and case studies for the Napa, Sonoma, Santa Barbara, and Walla Walla wine regions were developed. LITERATURE REVIEW – SUMMARY FINDINGS The literature reviewed provides several useful insights: 1) Terroir matters. Terroir is also much more than soil, to nearby and appropriately located opportunities and refers to physical characteristics, production to enjoy resorts and restaurants matter. As has been methods, and place-based culture and history, and said, “It takes a village …” the intersections between them. 7) Quality is the hallmark of a wine region reputation, 2) Making the connection between land and wine is and a wine region with a reputation for quality can important to the reputation of the wine made in the enable regional producers to experiment and thereby region, and to consumer interest in that product. distinguish themselves within the region and from The more that consumers know, the more important producers in other regions. Wine is like art or music, geography becomes. not corn or soybeans. Variation is a good thing, and consistency can sometimes be a killer. 3) Protecting the reputation of the product includes protecting the reputation of the wine region, and in 8) Ultimately, establishing and sustaining the reputation this regard, Oregon’s protection of farm land through of a wine region requires collaboration and land use planning is important both for ensuring partnerships between producers, regulators, and the the right to farm and sustaining the nature of the local economy. All must be engaged and represented. working landscape. Reputation management is a governance problem. 4) Wine tourism matches artisanal products with 9) There is no magic. Direct marketing activities create authentic experience of place. By making the a gray area between activities which are clearly wine- connection during the visit, consumer loyalty is related and those that are not, and between those that reinforced and strengthened. Good times create the enhance access to the region and build its reputation basis for good sales over the long term. However, and those that overload the region and diminish its creating the “positive cellar door” experience reputation. The management of this gray area can requires not just good wine but a commitment to occur to some degree through regulating design and service and creating relationships with consumers, operations at wineries, but it can’t rely alone on something that may or may not be of interest to these techniques alone. growers and vintners. 10) Managing the quality and reputation of a wine region 5) Tourists buy more than wine. Wine-related products is the product of an ongoing conversation within – stemware, cork screws, winery ball caps, etc. - help the region, led by the industry. It is a long-term to reinforce and capture the connection between investment, like the vines themselves, and is more place and experience. accurately viewed as the legacy of a career, not the product of a vintage or year. 6) Tourists seek more than the winery experience when they are touring. Connecting the wine experience | 3 CASE STUDY RESEARCH – SUMMARY FINDINGS Case study research confirmed and strengthened many of these findings from the literature: 1) In all cases, counties rely on their comprehensive 4) Only Napa incorporates what might be considered plans and zoning codes to address winery issues. a quality standard in their ordinance. Napa requires Not all counties have winery-specific comprehensive that permit holders must source 75% of their grapes plan elements, but all have or will be addressing within the county, something of great interest to wineries in their zoning regulations. the industry and relatively easy to monitor. In all cases, counties address issues of operations (events, 2) In all cases, counties grant permits to allow uses processing, marketing, etc.) and design (parcel size, in agricultural zones that may pose conflicts to coverage, setbacks, etc.) in their permitting processes. primary goals for agricultural land preservation and the stability of the agricultural sector. Those 5) There is a broad range of activities allowed at permit processes provide an opportunity for public wineries. Napa is relatively restrictive, prohibiting involvement and for neighbors to have a role in restaurants and requiring that marketing, educational, working out permit requirements. In Napa, vineyards and other events directly serve purposes related to and wineries have become the only remaining selling and marketing wine. Sonoma, at the other commercial agriculture of any scale. When asked end of the spectrum, views any event at a winery about conflicts with other agricultural producers in as an opportunity to build the business, and allows Napa, the response was largely confusion with the weddings and other non-wine events, to name a few, question as it simply didn’t apply in that context. if, in the course of the permitting process, it becomes In Sonoma, there remain a range of agricultural clear that the site and the area can bear the impacts uses and offsite impacts, though not county-wide, of the proposed level of activity. are pronounced in some places, particularly with respect to traffic. In general, however, County 6) Many permit requirements are relatively easy to representatives in Sonoma report little conflict evade and difficult to monitor. For example, in Napa between wineries and other agricultural producers. most new wineries are able to offer tastings and tours As in Santa Barbara County, most reported conflicts only by appointment. However, a quick phone call in Sonoma are with rural residents, most of who are from the parking lot can create an appointment. not engaged in production agriculture. In Santa Requirements based on the relationship between Barbara rapid growth of vineyards and wineries has those involved in the event and the winery (for elicited calls for stricter regulation of winery events example, “family”) are impossible to monitor and seen as inconsistent with the county’s traditional enforce. Restrictions on parking can be managed ranching culture. That county is currently engaged with busses. In essence, it’s difficult to distinguish in a review of its winery ordinance because of through regulations alone whether what is being concerns regarding the impacts of events at wineries created is a winery or more fundamentally a tourist on surrounding rural residential neighborhoods. destination. In Napa, planners believe that the In Walla Walla, traditional agricultural producers two most effective regulations are the 75% grape were initially wary of the wineries emerging in their source rule and the regulation of the ratio of space for midst. However, the relatively small population accessory uses versus space for production purposes. in the county, its distance from major population 7) In Napa, the 1990 Winery Definition Ordinance centers, the fact that there are still only 1600 acres was brought before the county after being crafted in grapes, and the relative youth of the industry by growers, vintners, the county chapter of the and the effort that vintners have made to engage Farm Bureau, and tourism interests. Subsequent other agriculturalists