Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/11/2021Staff: Committee Members: Jacqui Kitchen, Assistant City Manager Councilmember, Bruce Freeman – Chair Councilmember, Bob Smith Councilmember, Patty Gray Special Meeting of the Planning and Development Committee of the City Council – City of Bakersfield Thursday, March 11, 2021 12:00 p.m. City Hall North – Conference Room A 1600 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield CA 93301 A G E N D A 1. ROLL CALL 2. ADOPT NOVEMBER 17, 2020 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT 3. PUBLIC STATEMENTS 4. NEW BUSINESS A. Committee Discussion and Recommendations Regarding Boutique Wineries in Downtown – Kitchen/Boyle B. Committee Discussion and Recommendations Regarding Shipping Container Architecture – Kitchen/Boyle C. Discussion and Committee Recommendations Regarding Adoption of the 2021 Committee Meeting Schedule - Kitchen 5. COMMITTEE COMMENTS 6. ADJOURNMENT SPECIAL NOTICE Public Participation and Accessibility March 11, 2021 Planning and Development Committee Planning and Development Committee Special Meeting March 11, 2021 Agenda Page 2 On March 18, 2020, Governor Gavin Newsom issued Executive Order N-29-20, which includes a waiver of Brown Act provisions requiring physical presence of the Committee members or the public in light of the COVID-19 pandemic. Based on guidance from the California Governor’s Office and Department of Public Health, as well as the County Health Officer, in order to minimize the potential spread of the COVID-19 virus, the City of Bakersfield hereby provides notice that as a result of the declared federal, state, and local health emergencies, and in light of the Governor’s order, the following adjustments have been made: 1. The meeting scheduled for March 11, 2021, at 12:00 p.m. will have limited public access. 2. Consistent with the Executive Order, Committee members may elect to attend the meeting telephonically and to participate in the meeting to the same extent as if they were physically present. 3. The public may participate in each meeting and address the Committee as follows: •If you wish to comment on a specific agenda item, submit your comment via email to the City Clerk at City_Clerk@bakersfieldcity.us no later than 5:00 p.m. Wednesday, the day before the Committee meeting. Please clearly indicate which agenda item number your comment pertains to. •If you wish to make a general public comment not related to a specific agenda item, submit your comment via email to the City Clerk at City_Clerk@bakersfieldcity.us no later than 5:00 p.m. Wednesday, the day before the Committee meeting. •Alternatively, you may comment by calling (661) 326-3100 and leaving a voicemail of no more than 3 minutes no later than 5:00 p.m. Wednesday, the day before the Committee meeting. Your message must clearly indicate whether your comment relates to a particular agenda item, or is a general public comment. If your comment meets the foregoing criteria, it will be transcribed as accurately as possible. •If you wish to make a comment on a specific agenda item as it is being heard, please email your written comment to the City Clerk at City_Clerk@bakersfieldcity.us. All comments received during the meeting may not be read, but will be provided to the Committee and included as part of the permanent public record of the meeting. S:\Council Committees\2020\Planning and Development\11_November Page 1 JK:pa Committee Members Staff: Jacqui Kitchen Councilmember, Bruce Freeman Chair Assistant City Manager Councilmember, Willie Rivera Councilmember, Bob Smith REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE Tuesday, November 17, 2020 12:00 p.m. City Hall North – Conference Room A 1600 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, CA 93301 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT The meeting was called to order at 12:00 p.m. 1. ROLL CALL Committee members present: Councilmember, Bruce Freeman, Chair Councilmember, Bob Smith Councilmember, Willie Rivera City Staff: Christian Clegg, City Manager Anthony Valdez, Administrative Analyst Joe Conroy, Public Information Officer Virginia “Ginny” Gennaro, City Attorney Josh Rudnick, Deputy City Attorney Christopher Boyle, Development Services Director Phil Burns, Building Director Paul Johnson, Planning Director Jose Fernandez, Development Services Technician Additional Attendees: Members of the Public 2. ADOPT SEPTEMBER 22, 2020 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT The report was adopted as submitted. /S/ Jacqui Kitchen DRAFT S:\Council Committees\2020\Planning and Development\11_November Page 2 JK:pa 3. PUBLIC STATEMENTS None. 4. NEW BUSINESS A. Committee Discussion and Recommendation Regarding Reasonable Accommodation Ordinance – Boyle/Kitchen Development Services Director Boyle provided a PowerPoint presentation summarizing the Reasonable Accommodation Ordinance memorandum included in the agenda packet in response to a referral made by Councilmember Rivera at the September 9, 2020 City Council meeting. Committee Chair Rivera made a motion to present the ordinance to the Planning Commission for public hearing. The motion was unanimously approved. B. Committee Discussion and Recommendations Regarding Vacant Building Ordinance – Boyle/Kitchen Development Services Director Boyle provided a PowerPoint presentation summarizing the Vacant Buildings & Chronic Nuisance Properties Toolkit memorandum included in the agenda packet in response to the referrals made by Councilmember Gonzales at the February 19, 2020 and July 15, 2020 City Council meetings. Committee member Freeman asked if staff could prepare a draft policy to allow evaluations of properties based on receivership, foreclosure, and purchases to address chronic nuisance properties. City Attorney Gennaro and City Manager Clegg agreed that a policy could be drafted and prepared by staff. Committee member Freeman made a motion directing staff to prepare a draft policy on the use of receiverships, foreclosures, and purchases for problem properties and present it to the Committee at a future meeting. The motion was unanimously approved. 5. COMMITTEE COMMENTS None 6. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 12:40 p.m. DRAFT MEMORANDUM March 11, 2021 TO: PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE Bruce Freeman, Chair Bob Smith Patty Gray FROM: Christopher Boyle, Development Services Director Paul Johnson, Planning Director SUBJECT: Boutique Wineries This report is in response to a referral from Councilmember Gonzales at the November 18, 2020 City Council requesting the Planning and Development Committee explore micro, or boutique, wineries in the downtown area. BACKGROUND In 2018, City Council adopted an ordinance adding new definitions for Brewery or Distillery, Large and Brewery or Distillery, Small and identifying these as permitted and conditionally permitted uses. At that time, wine was specifically excluded as part of the definition. In 2019, amendments to the ordinance were adopted to remove the requirement for a bona fide food service from the small breweries. Councilmember Gonzales noted the success of 2nd Phase Brewing in the downtown area and requested the same consideration for boutique wineries. The Bakersfield Municipal Code currently provides for wineries in the M-2 (General Manufacturing) zone with approval of a conditional use permit. Winery is not, however, defined in the code. The wine industry considers vineyards as a plantation, of any size, that grows grapes meant to produce wine. A winery is a licensed property/facility where the grapes are crushed, fermented, treated, filtered, and bottled. So, a vineyard can have a winery that produces wine from the grapes it grows, but it can also sell its grapes to outside wineries and purely act as a grape-grower. Conversely, a winery can operate without having a vineyard, by making its wine with grapes brought in from outside vineyards. The definition of a boutique winery varies. Mariam-Webster defines boutique as “a small company that offers highly specialized services or products.” According to O’Connel Family Vineyards, the wine industry has generally settled on “boutique winery” as a small vineyard producing less than 10,000 cases annually. What the industry does agree upon is that a boutique winery is highly specialized, limited production, and personalized from start to finish to create a masterpiece in each bottle. Gallons Cases Barrels San Diego (County) Boutique 12,000 5,046 200 Agriculture No Fresno (County) Minor Winery 2,500 1,051 42 Agriculture, Industrial Yes San Joaquin (County) Small Winery 3,600 1,514 60 Agriculture, Industrial No Placer (County) Boutique Facility 5,945 2,500 99 Agriculture, Farm, Forestry, Industrial, Heavy Commercial No Butte (County) Small Winery 17,835 7,500 297 Agriculture, Foothill Residential, Timber Mountain No Madera (County) Micro Winery 5,000 2,103 83 Agricultural Yes Santa Clara (County) Small-Scale 23,780 10,000 396 Agriculture, Hillside, Rural Residential No Napa (County) Small Winery 20,000 8,410 333 Agriculture No Winery Type Production Limits Table 1 - Winery Research (Other Jurisdictions) Jurisdiction Zones Zoning Permit Rqd Jurisdiction Winery Type Production Limits Zones Zoning Permit Rqd Fresno Winery n/a Industrial, Business Depends on Zoning Riverside Winery n/a Industrial, Commercial, Mixed-Use Depends on Zoning Stockton Alcoholic Beverage Sales Establishment (wine shop) n/a Commercial, Port, Public Facilities Yes San Bernardino Winery-Microbrewery n/a Industrial, Commercial Yes Modesto Winery n/a Industrial No Oxnard Wine Production Facility n/a Industrial Depends on Zoning Ontario Beverage Manufacturing n/a Industrial, Airport No Fremont Winery n/a Industrial Yes Glendale Winery n/a Industrial Yes Pasadena n/a n/a Kern County Winery n/a Industrial, Agriculture Depends on Zoning Table 2 - Winery Research (10 Comparable) OTHER JURISDICTIONS Staff researched other jurisdictions to determine how they address boutique wineries; referred to by different names (i.e., boutique, micro, minor, small). It should be noted that these County jurisdictions also provide options for large, industrial, and farm wineries. The differentiating factor is established by a specified number of gallons or cases of wine produced annually. See Table 1 for limits on the smaller wineries. Although each jurisdiction in Table 1 has its own municipal code definition, a winery was generally defined as: An agricultural processing facility for converting grapes and other fruits into wine through the process of fermentation, aging, bottling, storing, and distribution. Research of 10 comparable cities and Kern County reflect they also reference wineries within the respective municipal code; however, their codes are absent on production limits. Some jurisdictions establish limits on the amount of alcohol available to each customer on a daily basis to avoid classification as a “bar, lounge, etc.” See Table 2. Page 2 STATE LICENSING AND PERMITTING The California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control (“ABC”) regulates and licenses the manufacturing of wine at the state level, through the Type 02 licenses: Type 02 - Winegrower (Winery): A winegrower must have facilities and equipment for the conversion of fruit into wine and engage in the production of wine (Section 23013). Federal Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) regulations permit a winegrower to use the facilities and equipment of another winegrower to produce wine. This is commonly referred to as an “alternating proprietorship.” Separate winegrower licenses are issued to each legal entity manufacturing wine under its own bonded winery permit. Wine must be made from the fermentation of agricultural products to which may be added brandy that is distilled from the same agricultural product from which the wine is made. Thus, neutral grain or other distilled spirits cannot be used to fortify wine – only brandy of a specific type. No more than 15% added flavoring or blending material may be added. (Section 23007). o Section 23013. "Winegrower." "Winegrower" means any person who has facilities and equipment for the conversion of grapes, berries or other fruit into wine and is engaged in the production of wine. o Section 23007. “Wine” means the product obtained from normal alcoholic fermentation of the juice of sound ripe grapes or other agricultural products containing natural or added sugar or any such alcoholic beverage to which is added grape brandy, fruit brandy, or spirits of wine, which is distilled from the particular agricultural product or products of which the wine is made and other rectified wine products and by whatever name and which does not contain more than 15 percent added flavoring, coloring, and blending material and which contains not more than 24 percent of alcohol by volume, and includes vermouth and sake, known as Japanese rice wine. Nothing contained in this section affects or limits the power, authority, or duty of the State Department of Health Services in the enforcement of the laws directed toward preventing the manufacture, production, sale, or transportation of adulterated, misbranded, or mislabeled alcoholic beverages, and the definition of “wine” contained in this section is limited strictly to the purposes of this division and does not extend to, or repeal by implication, any law preventing the production, manufacture, sale, or transportation of adulterated, misbranded, or mislabeled alcoholic beverages. The ABC also includes a variety of other wine-related licenses that may be relevant to this discussion; however, are primarily limited to sales and not manufacturing: Type 16 - Wine Broker (engages as an agent in the sale of wine on behalf of another) Type 17 - Beer and Wine Wholesaler (must sell to retailers generally) Type 20 - Off-Sale Beer & Wine (for consumption off the premises where sold) Type 22 - Wine Blender (operates a wine cellar, but does not engage in production) Type 41 - On-Sale Beer & Wine Public Premises (consumption on or off premises where sold) Type 59 - On-Sale Beer & Wine Seasonal (same privileges as Type 41 but for a specific season) Type 81 - Wine Sales Event Permit (for any licensee holding a Type 02 license) Type 85 - Limited Off-Sale Wine License (sales not conducted from a retail premises open to the public) DOWNTOWN BAKERSFIELD AREA Wineries are generally considered an agricultural processing activity, in-part because they are normally associated with an on-site vineyard. However, as noted above that is not always the scenario. The attached Figure 1 shows Page 3 that Downtown Bakersfield is predominantly zoned CC (Commercial Center), CB (Central Business District), with areas of M-1 (Light Manufacturing) along the eastern areas. It is worth noting that microbreweries are considered “by-right” uses in the C-2 (Regional Commercial), CC, CB, and M-2 (General Manufacturing) zones, and require a “conditional use permit” in the M-1 zone. Similar to microbreweries, boutique winery wastewater discharge is generally high in sugar, alcohol and temperature, often contains solids, and has generally low pH. Therefore, primary considerations are related to low pH with additional concerns to the “load” or the amount of Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) and Total Suspended Solids (TSS). The higher the load, the more it costs to treat. Additionally, winery operations produce a significant amount of wastewater (ex. 4-6 gallons wastewater per 1 gallon of product). City Public Works would require a flow meter at each site to monitor discharge into the sewer system. Specific operational requirements can help ensure compatibility with adjacent uses and avoid potential impacts. These may include, but are not limited to: Maintain a valid California Department of Alcohol and Beverage Control license; Maintain an approved Wastewater Discharge Plan; Maximum annual production quantity; o This could be consistent with wine industry’s production: 10,000 cases or approximately 23,780 gallons o For reference: Large Distillery = more than 100,000 gallons; Small Distillery = 100,000 gallons or less Obtain San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District permit. o Applicable if determined wineries’ odor require special filtration OPTIONS Staff requests that your Committee digest the information within this report and any testimony associated with the Committee meeting itself and provide direction regarding further consideration of this topic. Three options available are: 1.Option 1: Research Amendment to Municipal Code. The Committee may direct Staff to further explore the option of allowing boutique wineries in the downtown area. Staff would conduct additional research and prepare a draft Ordinance. Should this option be selected, it is recommended the draft Ordinance address the following: a.Add Boutique Winery to the list of definitions. The definition should include specific development criteria, similar to the criteria that was developed for “large” and “small” brewery/distilleries in 2017; including quantity limits, addressing on-site vineyards vs manufacturing, incorporate other local/state permitting requirements, etc. (See attachments 3 and 4) b.Add Boutique Winery as a permitted use in the C-2 (Regional Commercial) zone. c.Add Boutique Winery as a conditionally permitted use in the M-1 (Light Manufacturing) zone. d.Add Boutique Winery as a permitted use in the M-2 (General Manufacturing) zone. 2.Option 2: No Further Action. 3.Option 3: Alternative Direction from the Committee. Page 4 NEXT STEPS Staff will take the direction of the Committee. ATTACHMENTS 1.Downtown Bakersfield Zoning Map 2.California ABC License Types 3.Planning & Development Committee Memo – Microbreweries, October 3, 2017 (Memo only; attachments available upon request) 4.Planning & Development Committee Memo – Microbreweries, November 7, 2017 (Memo only; attachments available upon request) Page 5 Figure 1. Downtown Bakersfield (Central District) California ABC License Types 01 - Beer Manufacturer 02 - Winegrower 03 - Brandy Manufacturer 04 - Distilled Spirits Manufacturer 05 - Distilled Spirits Manufacturer's Agent 06 - Still 07 - Rectifier 08 - Wine Rectifier 09 - Beer and Wine Importer 10 - Beer and Wine Importer's General 11 - Brandy Importer 12 - Distilled Spirits Importer 13 - Distilled Spirits Importer's General 14 - Public Warehouse 15 - Customs Broker 16 - Wine Broker 17 - Beer and Wine Wholesaler 18 - Distilled Spirits Wholesaler 19 - Industrial Alcohol Dealer 20 - Off-Sale Beer & Wine 21 - Off-Sale General 22 - Wine Blender 23 - Small Beer Manufacturer 24 - Distilled Spirits Rectifier's General 25 - California Brandy Wholesaler 26 - Out-of-State Beer Manufacturer's Cert 27 - California Winegrower's Agent 28 - Out-of-State Distilled Spirits Shipper's Cert 29 - Wine Grape Grower's Storage 40 - On-Sale Beer 41 - On-Sale Beer & Wine - Eating Place 42 - On-Sale Beer & Wine - Public Premises 47 - On-Sale General - Eating Place 48 - On-Sale General - Public Premises 49 - On-Sale General - Seasonal 50 - On-Sale General Club 51 - Club 52 - Veteran’s Club 53 - On-Sale General Train 54 - On-Sale General Boat 55 - On-Sale General Airplane 56 - On-Sale General Vessel 1000 Tons 57 - Special On-Sale General 58 - Caterer's Permit 59 - On-Sale Beer & Wine - Seasonal 60 - On-Sale Beer - Seasonal 61 - On-Sale Beer - Public Premises 62 - On-Sale General Bona Fide Public Eating Place Intermittent Dockside Vessel 63 - On-Sale Special Beer and Wine Hospital 64 - Special On-Sale General for Nonprofit Theater Company 65 - Special On-Sale Beer and Wine Symphony 66 - Controlled Access Cabinet Permits 67 - Bed and Breakfast Inn 68 - Portable Bar License 69 - Special On-Sale Beer and Wine Theater 70 - On-Sale General - Restrictive Service 71 - Special On-Sale General for a For-Profit Theater within the City/County of S.F. 72 - Special On-Sale General for a For-Profit Theater within the county of Napa 73 - Special Non-Profit Sales License 74 - Craft Distiller 75 - Brewpub-Restaurant 76 - On-Sale General Maritime Museum Assc 77 - Event Permit 78 - On-Sale General for Wine, Food and Art Cultural Museum, and Educational Center 79 - Certified Farmers' Market Permit 80 - Bed and Breakfast Inn – General 81 - Wine Sales Event Permit 82 - Wine Direct Shipper Permit 83 - General On-Sale License to Caterer 84 - Certified Farmers' Market Beer Sales Permit 85 - Limited Off-Sale - Wine License 86 - Instructional Tasting License 87 - Special On-Sale General License for Specific Census Tracts in the City/County of S.F. 88 - Special On-Sale General License for a For-Profit Cemetery with Specific Characteristics 99 - On-Sale General for Special Use Page 1 B A K E R S F I E L D Community Development Department Jacquelyn R. Kitchen, Community Development Director MEMORANDUM DATE: October 3, 2017 TO: PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE Bruce Freeman, Chair Bob Smith Chris Parlier FROM: JACQUELYN KITCHEN, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR SUBJECT: Referral No. 770 (Ward 2) Definition of Microbrewery in Downtown Bakersfield At the June 7, 2017 City Council meeting, Councilmember Gonzales made a referral to the Planning and Development Committee to review creation of a definition of a “microbrewery” in Downtown Bakersfield. BACKGROUND According to the California Craft Brewers Association, there are currently 850 “craft” brewers in California that contributed $7.28 billion to the State economy in 2015, and provide more than 51,000 jobs throughout the State. A 2012 Economic Impact Report shows that the industry contributed $850 million in local, state and federal taxes. Full-scale breweries and distilleries are already a permitted use in industrial zones in Bakersfield; however, the emergence of the smaller, independent “craft” industry has led to increased interest in the possibility of establishing “micro” breweries/distilleries in Downtown Bakersfield. DEFINITION The Brewers Association defines four distinct “craft” beer industry market segments, using a “barrel” as the unit of measure (31 U.S. liquid gallons). 1. Microbrewery. Brewery that produces less than 15,000 barrels per year with 75 percent or more of its beer sold off-site. 2. Brewpub. Restaurant-brewery that sells 25 percent or more of beer on site; beer is brewed primarily for sale in the restaurant and bar, and often dispensed directly form the brewery’s storage tanks. 3. Contract Brewing Company. Business that hires another brewery to produce all or a portion of beer. Contract brewing company handles marketing, sales, and distribution of its beer, while generally leaving the brewing and packaging to its producer-brewery. 4. Regional Craft Brewery. Independent regional brewery with a majority of volume in “traditional” or “innovative” beer(s). Typically defined as a brewer producing 15,000 to 6,000,000 barrels per year. Page | 2 LICENSING AND PERMITTING Federal and state law allows an individual to brew a maximum 200 gallons of beer per household per year for personal consumption only, without securing a license. Should the beer be produced and sold commercially, then appropriate licensing and permitting is required. Breweries also need to register with the federal Food & Drug Administration, maintain compliance with California state health code, and so on.  Federal Level. The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TBB) licenses the manufacturing of beer at the federal level. There is only one type of license at this level, so all microbreweries, brewpubs, breweries, and alternating proprietors are required to prepare and submit the Original Brewery Permit.  State Level. The California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) regulates and licenses the manufacturing of beer at the state level via three primary types of ABC licenses: • Type 01 - Beer Manufacture (Large Brewery): “Authorizes sale of beer to any person holding a license authorizing the sale of beer, and to consumers for consumption on or off the manufacturer’s licensed premises. May conduct beer tastings under specified conditions. Minors allowed on premises.” This type of license may brew more than 60,000 barrels of beer/ year. • Type 23 - Small Beer Manufacturer (Brewpub or Microbrewery): “Authorizes the same privileges and restrictions as Type 01. A brewpub is typically a very small brewery with a restaurant. A microbrewery is a small-scale brewery operation that typically is dedicated solely to the production of specialty beers.” This type of license is limited to brewing no more than 60,000 barrels of beer/ year. • Type 75 - On Sale General - Brewpub (Restaurant): “Authorizes the sale of beer, wine and distilled spirits for consumption in a bona fide eating place plus a limited amount of brewing of beer. This license does not authorize the sale of alcoholic beverages for consumption off the premises where sold.” This type of license must brew at least 100 barrels, but no more than 5,000 barrels of beer/ year. The ABC also includes a variety of other alcohol manufacturing and distillery permits that may be relevant to this discussion; including: • Type 03 - Brandy Manufacturer • Type 04 - Distilled Spirits Manufacturer • Type 22 - Wine Blender • Type 74 - Craft Distiller  Local Level. To obtain the State license, the ABC requires that businesses operating within the City’s jurisdiction first obtain a local Business License and local land use approval. Brewing is generally considered a type of manufacturing, and therefore, most jurisdictions restrict brewing activities to industrial zones. As demonstrated by Table 1, jurisdictions take a varied approach to permitting breweries and distilleries; and many follow a similar pattern to the City of Bakersfield. Figure 1 shows that Downtown Bakersfield is predominantly zoned CC (Commercial Center), CB (Central Business District), with areas of industrial zoning along the eastern areas. Page | 3 Table 1. Comparable Cities - Breweries Jurisdiction By-Right CUP Required Bakersfield M-2 (General Manufacturing) M-3 (Heavy Industrial) M-1 (Light Manufacturing) Fresno LI (Light Industrial) No on-site consumption If not connected to sewer Fremont N/A GI (General Industrial) CC-UO & CC-UN w/ ZAP Fresno County M-3 (Heavy Industrial) N/A Kern County M-2 (Medium Industrial) M-3 (Heavy Industrial) A (Exclusive Agriculture) Lancaster All Industrial zone districts Commercial districts Glendale N/A ID (Industrial District) – tavern AUP – alcohol sales in ID Modesto “Downtown core” only | 15,000 barrel/year On-site sales only C-1, C-2, C-3 Oxnard M-2 (Heavy Manufacturing) allows alcohol manufacture BRP (Business & Research Park) for on-site sales Ontario N/A Industrial districts except BP Pasadena N/A CO, CL, CG, IG – Bars & Taverns +25,000 SF Stockton Craft Brewery w/ restaurant exempt from location restrictions Commercial districts San Bernardino N/A Light Industrial (IL) district Tulare County M-1 & M-2 (Light and Heavy Manufacturing) C-3 and C-4 (Retail and Service Commercial) districts Visalia “Downtown core” only | 15,000 barrel/year On-site or off-site sales C-N, C-MU, I-L, I (Commercial and Industrial) districts Long Beach Commercial districts (<=6,000 sf) | 15,000 barrel/year Siting & Operational Standards Commercial districts (>6,000 sf) Page | 4 FIGURE 1 Zone Map – Downtown Bakersfield Compatibility Considerations. Full-scale brewery and distillery businesses are typically limited to industrial zones because these activities are associated with various impacts including, but not limited to: 1. Odors 2. Traffic 3. Noise 4. Water Usage 5. Wastewater Discharge Regarding Wastewater Discharge, brewery wastewater is generally high in sugar, alcohol and temperature, often contains solids, and has generally low pH. Therefore, primary considerations are related to low pH with additional concerns to the “load” or the amount of Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) and Total Suspended Solids (TSS). The higher the load, the more it costs to treat. To address discharge, a brewery will typically install a fully automated neutralization tank. Additionally, City Public Works would require a flow meter at each site to monitor discharge into the sewer system. Page | 5 Developer Considerations. Development is required to pay sewer connection fees, which are calculated based on the unit capacity fees. Table 2 lists the fees and shows that the “average” brewery connection fee would be $12,140. The connection fee would increase if any of the characteristics increase. Table 2. Sewer Connection Fees Fee Type Fee Amount Fee Examples Excellent Pretreatment Average Pretreatment Poor Pretreatment Average Pretreatment Average Pretreatment Flow $1.18 gpd1 500 gpd 500 gpd 500 gpd 1,275 gpd 3,822 gpd BOD $800 ppd2 1,080 mg/L 3,240 mg/L 12,000 mg/L 3,240 mg/L 3,240 mg/L TSS $254 ppd 400 mg/L 700 mg/L 8,000 mg/L 700 mg/L 700 mg/L Total $4,617 $12,140 $49,095 $30,957 $92,799 Table 3 provides the maximum wastewater discharge for two local breweries. It is assumed for each gallon of beer production, that three gallons of wastewater are produced. However, the ratio could be as much as five gallons of wastewater for each gallon of beer. For reference, a single family home averages 200 gallons of wastewater per day. Table 3. Local Brewery Characteristics Brewer Daily Beer Production Wastewater Discharge (gallons per day - maximum) Business A 28 barrels or 867 gallons 2,600 gpd Business B 22 barrels or 667 gallons 2,000 gpd Table 4 provides for a production vs. discharge comparison based on annual barrel production. Table 4. Production vs. Discharge Annual Beer Production Daily Beer Production Wastewater Discharge (gallons per day) 1,000 barrels or 31,000 gallons 3 barrels or 85 gallons 255 gpd 2,500 barrels or 77,500 gallons 7 barrels or 212 gallons 636 gpd 5,000 barrels or 155,000 gallons 14 barrels or 425 gallons 1,275 gpd 10,000 barrels or 310,000 gallons 27 barrels or 849 gallons 2,547 gpd 15,000 barrels or 465,000 gallons 41 barrels or 1,274 gallons 3,822 gpd Operational Considerations in Downtown Bakersfield. Microbreweries/distilleries typically operate on a smaller scale than traditional breweries; and specific operational requirements can help ensure compatibility with adjacent uses and avoid potential impacts. These may include, but are not limited to: 1. Require on-site restaurant and/or tasting room (limits full-scale brewing industrial zones) 2. Require setback distance from schools and/or parks (e.g. 500 feet) 3. Maximum square footage of floor area to prevent expansion (e.g. 6,000 square feet) 4. Maximum usable square footage for production and storage of beer (e.g. 50%). 5. Maximum annual production quantity (e.g. 15,000 barrels) 6. Define operational hours for accessory tasting room, service trucks to load/unload, manufacturing and production, etc. 7. Limit retail sales of alcoholic beverages to only those products manufactured on site 8. If located adjacent to or across from residential areas, require installation of mechanical air filtration systems vs. natural ventilation 9. Require sewage plan and infrastructure approval by appropriate City departments Page | 6 PERMITTING IN DOWNTOWN BAKERSFIELD Currently, “Breweries and Distilleries” require a conditional use permit (CUP) in the M-1 zone and are permitted in the M-2 zone. The Ordinance does not list “micro” breweries and distilleries in any zone; however, a business can request a CUP for “any use in any zone in which that use is not permitted by this title.” (17.64.020) Figure 1 shows that a majority of Downtown Bakersfield is zoned C-C and C-B. Therefore, a CUP would be appropriate to permit “micro” breweries and distilleries in Downtown Bakersfield. CUP Considerations. The following items are relevant to the CUP process: 1. A CUP is a discretionary action to consider certain land uses that may need special conditions to ensure compatibility with surrounding land uses. CUPs are considered on a case-by-case basis, through a public hearing process. The Municipal Codes states that a CUP shall only be granted when it is found that: • The proposed use is deemed essential or desirable to the public convenience or welfare; and, • The proposed use is in harmony with the various elements and objectives of the general plan and applicable specific plans. 2. Development of general operational standards for “micro” facilities will ensure that all CUPs are consistent. 3. A CUP could be limited to certain types of ABC licenses. For example, the Type 75 – Brewpub/Restaurant allows up to 5,000 barrels of beer per year, and requires beer to be consumed on-site. NEXT STEPS As noted above, the Ordinance does not currently contain any definition or reference to “micro” breweries or distilleries. Therefore, to allow these uses in Downtown Bakersfield, the following revisions would be necessary: 1. Add a definition of “Microbrewery/distillery” to the Zoning Ordinance. a. Include Gallons/Year Maximum (ex: up to 15,000 gallons per year) b. Include applicable ABC License Types (More research needed) c. Include basic Operational Standards (additional can be added via CUP) 2. Add a definition of “Brewery” and “Distillery” to the Zoning Ordinance (to differentiate from “Micro”) a. Include Gallons Minimum (ex: More than 15,000 gallons per year) b. Include applicable ABC License Types (More research needed) 3. Add “Microbrewery/distillery” to the listed land uses as follows: By-Right: M-2 CUP: M-1, C-2, C-C, C-B, PCD These steps would allow Microbreweries/distilleries, with or without an on-site restaurant (depending on their ABC Permit), via CUP in the listed Districts. RECOMMENDATION Direct Staff to draft Ordinance changes noted above and bring back to Committee for review. Page | 7 Attachment A California ABC - License Types NON-PROFIT TEMPORARY LICENSES 31 Special Daily License (Temporary Beer or Wine) 32 Daily Beer 33 Daily Wine 34 Daily Beer and Wine 37 Daily On-Sale General OFF-SALE LICENSES 20 Off-Sale Beer and Wine 21 Off-Sale General 85 Limited Off-Sale Retail Wine License ON-SALE LICENSES 40 On-Sale Beer 41 On-Sale Beer and Wine; Bona Fide Public Eating Place 42 On-Sale Beer and Wine; Public Premises 43 On-Sale Beer and Wine; Train 44 On-Sale Beer; Fishing Party Boat 45 On-Sale Beer and Wine; Boat 46 On-Sale Beer and Wine; Airplane 47 On-Sale General; Bona Fide Public Eating Place 48 On-Sale General; Public Premises 49 On-Sale General; Seasonal Business 50 On-Sale General; Club 51 Club 52 Veterans' Club 53 On-Sale General; Train 54 On-Sale General; Boat 55 On-Sale General; Airplane 56 On-Sale General; Vessel of 1,000+ tons burden 57 Special On-Sale General 58 Caterer's Permit 59 On-Sale Beer and Wine; Seasonal Business 60 On-Sale Beer for Seasonal Business 61 On-Sale Beer for Public Premises 62 On-Sale General Bona Fide Public Eating Place Intermittent Dockside Vessel 63 On-Sale Beer and Wine for Hospital 64 Special On-Sale General Theatre 65 Special On-Sale Beer and Wine, Symphony 66 Controlled Access Cabinet Permit 67 Bed and Breakfast Inn 68 Portable Bar 69 Special On-Sale Beer & Wine Theater 70 On-Sale General Restrictive Service 71 Special On-Sale General License 75 On-Sale General Brew-Pub 76 On-Sale General Maritime Museum Association 77 Event Permit 78 On Sale General Wine, Food and Art Cultural Museum 80 Special On-Sale General Bed and Breakfast Inn 83 On-Sale General Caterer's License 86 Instructional Tasting License NON-RETAIL LICENSES 01 Beer Manufacturer 02 Winegrower 03 Brandy Manufacturer 04 Distilled Spirits Manufacturer 05 Distilled Spirits Manufacturer's Agent 06 Still 07 Rectifier 08 Wine Rectifier 09 Beer and Wine Importer 10 Beer and Wine Importer's General 11 Brandy Importer 12 Distilled Spirits Importer 13 Distilled Spirits Importer's General 14 Public Warehouse 15 Customs Broker 16 Wine Broker 17 Beer and Wine Wholesaler 18 Distilled Spirits Wholesaler 19 Industrial Alcohol Dealer 22 Wine Blender 23 Small Beer Manufacturer 24 Distilled Spirits Rectifier's General 25 California Brandy Wholesaler 26 Out-of-State Beer Manufacturer's Certificate 27 California Winegrowers Agent 28 Out-of-State Distilled Spirits Shipper's Certificate 29 Winegrape Grower's Certificate 74 Craft Distiller 79 Certified Farmers' Market Sales Permit 81 Wine Sales Event Permit 82 Direct Shippers Permit 84 Certified Farmers' Market Beer Sales Permit TEMPORARY LICENSES 30 Temporary Retail Permit (Only in conjunction with a Person to Person transfer) Page 1 B A K E R S F I E L D Community Development Department Jacquelyn R. Kitchen, Community Development Director MEMORANDUM DATE: November 7, 2017 TO: PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE Bruce Freeman, Chair Bob Smith Chris Parlier FROM: JACQUELYN KITCHEN, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR SUBJECT: Referral No. 770 (Ward 2) Definition of Microbrewery in Downtown Bakersfield At the June 7, 2017 City Council meeting, Councilmember Gonzales made a referral to the Planning and Development Committee to review creation of a definition of a “microbrewery” in Downtown Bakersfield. At the October 3, 2017 Committee meeting, Staff presented information on the following topics: • Background of “micro” brewing and distilling • Applicable definitions • Licensing and Permitting Overview • Comparable Cities List and Compatibility Considerations • Options for Operational Standards and Permitting During the meeting, the Committee discussed the list of “Operational Standards” presented in the Staff report and provided direction related to Size limits, Setbacks, and Off-Site Sales. The Committee also directed Staff to bring back a draft Ordinance that incorporates the uses into the Zoning Ordinance as a “by right” use in the Downtown area; subject to basic operational standards. Staff has researched further and offers the following information: SIZE, SETBACKS, OFF-SITE SALES. The October 3rd Staff Report noted some Cities limit the size of “micro- breweries,” require setbacks from schools and parks, and prohibit “off-site” sales of product. Councilmembers Smith and Freeman commented that these regulations may be too restrictive on business owners and suggested reduced or minimal requirements. Upon further research, Staff found mixed results in other Cities and did not find consistent information related to limitations on business size, setbacks, and off-site sales. Additionally, all operations will be required to obtain and maintain the applicable State ABC permit, which defines specific sales and setback requirements based on permit type. Therefore, Staff concludes that these topics will be addressed through ABC regulations. ODORS. The Staff Report also noted that large breweries generate odors. Councilmembers noted that other jurisdictions permit “micro” breweries and that odors would be less of a nuisance on a smaller scale. Staff has researched further and found that other jurisdictions require mechanical filtration systems instead of natural filtration systems. Staff also reached out to the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District and requested information on applicable regulations and the District confirmed that applicable commercial projects would obtain permits and that, in the District’s experience, property designed “micro” facilities have not created an odor nuisance. Therefore, Staff is recommending adherence to best practices and the use of mechanical filtration systems for small operations. Page 2 DEFINITION. The purpose of regulating brewery and distillery establishments is to ensure compatibility with surrounding properties. The California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control permits a “Micro-brewery” under the Type 23 license, for manufacture of up to 15,000 barrels per year; and a “Craft Distiller’s License” for manufacture of up to 100,000 gallons per year (See Attachment 1). Therefore, Staff developed two definitions in accordance with these thresholds. “Brewery or Distillery, Large” will address commercial breweries that are currently allowed in industrial zones. “Brewery or Distillery, Small” will add a new use for “micro” operations in Downtown and commercial areas. Staff recommends modifications to Municipal Code (Chapter 17.04 Definitions) to add the following definitions: 17.04.077 BREWERY OR DISTILLERY, LARGE “Brewery or distillery, large” means the manufacturing of more than 15,000 barrels per year of beer, ale, malt beverages, or more than 100,000 gallons of distilled spirits; not including wine. Operations shall continuously comply with the following Operational Standards: 1. Maintain an approved Wastewater Discharge Plan from the Bakersfield Public Works Department. 2. Maintain a valid California Department of Alcohol and Beverage Control (ABC) license. 3. Obtain appropriate permit from the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District, if applicable; and adhere to industry best practices for odor reduction. 17.04.078 BREWERY OR DISTILLERY, SMALL “Brewery or distillery, small” means the manufacturing of 15,000 barrels, or less, per year of beer, ale, malt beverages, or 100,000 gallons, or less, of distilled spirits; not including wine. Operations shall continuously comply with the following Operational Standards: 1. Maintain an approved Wastewater Discharge Plan from the Bakersfield Public Works Department. 2. Maintain a valid California Department of Alcohol and Beverage Control (ABC) license. 3. Obtain appropriate permit from the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District, if applicable; and adhere to industry best practices for odor reduction, to include a mechanical filtration system. 4. Include and continuously operate a bona-fide food service/restaurant component, on-site. ZONE DISTRICTS. Staff recommends amending the Zoning Ordinance to add the new definitions as listed uses in the zone districts noted below. Per your Committee’s direction, this would allow “small” operations to open in the Downtown area, subject to operational standards listed above, without a conditional use permit. Brewery or Distillery, Small 1 Brewery or Distillery, Large 2 Section Zone Permitted Use CUP Permitted Use CUP 17.24.040.B C-2 (Regional Commercial) X 17.25.020.B C-B (Central Business) X 17.26.020.B C-C (Commercial Center) X 17.28.020.B M-1 (Light Manufacturing) X X 17.30.020.B M-2 (General Manufacturing) X X 1. New use will allow “micro” brewery/distillery in the Downtown area and in C-2 zone with a CUP. 2. Currently, Breweries/Distilleries are only permitted in M-1 and M-2 zones. 3. This definition is not inclusive of Wineries, which are only permitted via CUP only in M-2 zone RECOMMENDATION Direct Staff to draft Ordinance changes noted above and bring to City Council. MEMORANDUM March 11, 2021 TO: PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE Bruce Freeman, Chair Bob Smith Patty Gray FROM: Christopher Boyle, Development Services Director SUBJECT: Metal Storage Container Architecture in the Downtown District This report is in response to a referral from Councilmember Gonzales at the September 9, 2020 City Council directing Staff to prepare an amendment to current ordinance that guides the use of storage containers for human habitation in the downtown area. BACKGROUND In 1998, City Council adopted Ordinance 3869 which created standards for the use of Metal Storage Containers (“Containers”) within the City limits. In adopting this Ordinance, the City Council found that the unregulated use of Containers may negatively impact the aesthetics of neighborhoods where they are placed and discourage investment in the surrounding areas. Subsequently, Containers are only permitted in certain zone districts, subject to specific design criteria, as specified in Chapter 17.57 of the Bakersfield Municipal Code. This criteria prohibits use of Containers for human occupancy (See Table 1, below). In 2016, in response to a resident request related to a property on H Street in Downtown Bakersfield, former Councilmember Maxwell made a referral on December 9, 2015, directing Staff to research changing the existing Ordinance to allow Containers to be used as construction materials for buildings, including buildings utilized for human occupancy. On March 3, 2016, the Planning Commission discussed the matter and recommended that the City Council delay amendment of the Municipal Code to expand the use of Containers as building materials for human occupancy until such time as further guidance was provided by the State or the California Building Standards Code was updated regarding this topic. As noted in the attached 2016 Staff Report to the Planning Commission, interest in repurposing storage containers has been topical in the last decade. Used Containers have become readily available as the containerized shipping industry has aged and evolved, evoking many ideas for reutilization of these older and more affordable Containers. Just as in 2016, research continues to suggest that the popularity of utilizing repurposed Containers is a byproduct of potential affordability, a desire for aesthetic variation and the availability of materials. 2 | P a g e Since 2016, the Development Services Department has had three (3) inquiries for using Containers for human habitation. Two of these inquiries were associated with a retail/office proposal and one was proposed as a residential accessory dwelling unit. In all cases, these proposals were advised of the City’s ordinance which prohibits the conversion of Containers to human habitation uses. It is difficult to gauge the actual demand for consideration of projects involving a proposal to convert Containers to human habitation in Bakersfield. The current referral requests that staff revisit the topic of storage containers for human habitation in the downtown district. It appears that the referral was initiated from a citizen inquiry to use a Container as a retail commercial suite to be located in the downtown region on 18th Street. Staff met with the interested parties and reviewed the proposal of repurposing a Container into a retail suite. The challenges of the proposal are borne out within this discussion. CURRENT ORDINANCE The current ordinance does not provide a pathway for the utilization of Containers as habitable space. Instead, Containers are allowed within specific zone districts in specific circumstances at varying intensities. A Conditional Use Permit (CUP) is required in some instances. The current ordinance is summarized in the table above. Utilization of Containers in all cases is restricted to traditional activities, namely storage, consistent with the original intent for the construction of shipping containers. 3 | P a g e ANALYSIS Research demonstrates that there are a number of topics that should be considered when reviewing the potential use of Containers as a building material for structures intended for human occupancy; including: 1. Health and Safety. Many proposals for conversion of Containers to alternative uses show stacked containers. Containers readily stack when utilized in the shipping industry; however, once a Container is altered to provide for a door and/or window, the designed structural integrity of the Container is lost, and stacking requires specific engineering in order to maintain structural integrity. Often, stacking requires revised engineering calculations, steel reinforcement and stronger foundations. The weight of a steel container typically requires cranes and/or flatbed trucks to move them. A 20-foot Container weighs approximately 5,000 pounds. In the Central Valley, there are other unique circumstances to consider with the repurposing of Containers. The climate of the region is one where extreme seasonal temperature variations are prevalent. This leads to condensation concerns within converted Containers and the potential development of mold on interior walls. Temperate climates provide better outcomes than climates which experience temperature extremes. 2. Building Code. Containers were initially designed and constructed for use in the packing, shipping or transportation of goods or commodities, and designed to be mounted on rail cars, trucks and ships. The Building Code does not have code specific to Containers. Utilization for habitation therefore requires numerous alterations to meet building code standards for human occupancy; including insulation, plumbing, electrical lines, and the like. Those standards are specific to the intended reuse of the Container. The intended reuse then determines how the Building Code applies required improvements to the Container. Conversion to a residential use will require improvements that are different that conversion to office uses. Conversion to retail activities will be different than conversion to an assembly use. Since the Building Code does not currently address storage container conversions to other uses, some cities have developed technical bulletins with standards for the conversion of containers consistent with building codes. The following is a short list of requirements for San Diego and Los Angeles: • A discretionary planning permit to allow for human occupancy. • A ministerial permit to address compliance with building codes, for example; o Americans with Disabilities Act compliance, Title 24, Part 2 o A permanent level foundation, with ventilation under the structure. o Compliance with Title 24, Parts 3,4, 5 and 6 addressing electrical, mechanical, plumbing and energy. o Structural engineering calculations for any/all altered Containers o Stacking no higher than two Containers o Roof drainage details o Other occupancy specific requirements such as egress window(s), fire sprinklers, etc. • Historical review ensuring that the container has either never been used or (in some cases) has been used to transport only dry goods. Floor replacement may be required if the floor has been treated with chemicals to deter invasive insects or other vermin or has been damaged in any way. Two examples of information bulletins specific to the reuse of Containers are attached as exhibits to this report; San Diego’s Information Bulletin 149 – Cargo Containers, and Los Angeles’ information Bulletin entitled “Cargo Container Conversion to Building Modules.” Note that these examples originate in temperate regions of the state. 4 | P a g e 3. Design Inconsistency. Although some municipalities have developed technical bulletins, the current Building Code does not include standardized provisions for the conversion of Containers to structures for human occupancy. Most projects are Do-it-yourself or done through third party vendors. Each project requires that the Container be developed to Building Code building occupancy classification requirements, which then must be determined based on the intended use of the converted Container. In California, the only state-approved application of Containers for alternative use comes from the Department of Housing and Community Development’s Factory-Built Housing Program and Commercial Modular Program or the Division of the State Architect, who regulates the utilization of Containers to be used as modular school buildings. All other proposals require compliance with local development standards, zoning ordinances, and issuance of local building permits. 4. Affordability. Analysis has shown that once alterations are made to make Containers suitable for human occupancy, costs often exceed those of standard building materials. The significant costs make the repurposing of storage containers less attractive than might otherwise be the case. Because of the financial constraints of conversion, some have chosen to build traditional construction with exterior sheathing that mimics Container architecture. This allows the client to build a structure without the limitations in dimensions that Containers present and without the cost constraints prevalent in conversion. Below are two diverse examples. 5. Quality of Life. Once appropriate alterations are made to containers to make them consistent with the Building Code standards referenced above, there is often little interior room left inside for use by the occupants. The intended reuse is often less viable because of the design constraints. Containers come in standardized shapes, almost always 8 feet wide by 8 feet high, with 20, 40 and incrementally longer lengths. By the time all required improvements are made, the interior space is reduced to 7 feet high by 7 feet wide; very constrained dimensions. Alternatives like those above become more viable options simply from an enhanced feasibility perspective. 6. Recycling. The use of Containers for human occupancy is a potentially-green alternative to the use of new, traditional building materials, but to do so is difficult because of the aforementioned negative factors. The cost associated with transport and delivery only adds to the issue of viability. Cumulatively, this research strongly suggests that if affordability, a desire for aesthetic variation, and the availability of materials are driving forces in deciding to convert a Container to human habitation, traditional construction techniques may provide better strategies to realizing those goals. 5 | P a g e COMPARABLE CITIES Research of ten (10) comparable cities shows that two cities, Stockton of Oxnard, make provisions within their code for Containers as habitable space. Their standards rely upon the Building Code for direction when converting a Container to a habitable space, which then significantly reduces the financial viability of any conversion of a Containers to a habitable space, rendering the ordinance untenable. As noted earlier within the report, two additional cities, Los Angeles and San Diego, were found to provide technical bulletins which assist citizens in the conversion of Containers to habitable spaces. OPTIONS Staff requests that your Committee digest the information within this report and any testimony associated with the Committee meeting itself and provide direction regarding further consideration of this topic. Three options available are: Option 1: No Further Action. The 2016 Planning Commission report recommended no further action be taken until additional information and/or direction is provided via a Building Code update. No new guidance for storage containers occurred as part of the 2019 Building Code update. The International Code Council did publish its “ICC G5-2019 Guidelines of the Safe Use of ISO Intermodal Shipping Containers Repurposed as Buildings and Building Components” in 2019. Within those guidelines, new provisions for Containers are proposed for consideration of incorporation into the 2022 Building Code update. The current information bulletins utilized by Los Angeles, San Diego and other municipalities provide a guidebook to Container conversion that includes all of the aforementioned code requirements. Option 2: Amend the Municipal Code. Staff has conducted the research and prepared a draft Ordinance for review by the Committee. The draft Ordinance would implement the following: 1. Containers for human occupancy would require discretionary approval. 2. Containers for human occupancy would be allowed in the “central district.” 3. Specific development standards would be applied to the installation of Containers for human habitation. 4. Standards for location, number, structural setbacks, parking, signage and landscaping are provided. 5. The ordinance would provide guidance in the conversion of Containers consistent with the Building Code. Option 3: Alternative Direction from the Committee. Name Population Containers Allowed for Habitation Purposes?Required Standards Fresno 494,665 No Riverside 326,414 No Stockton 309,228 Yes San Bernardino 216,089 No Modesto 201,165 No Oxnard 208,154 Yes Ontario 176,760 No Fremont 235,740 No Glendale 200,232 No Pasadena 141,258 No Oxnard - Container needs to be on permanent foundation and have the appropriate plumbing and sewer hookup. Stockton - Container unit needs to adhere to all building code standards. 6 | P a g e NEXT STEPS Staff will take the direction of the Committee. ATTACHMENTS • Draft Ordinance • March 3, 2016 Staff Report to Planning Commission, Council Referral – Amend Zoning Ordinance to Allow Human Occupancy of Metal Storage Containers • City of San Diego Information Bulletin No. 149, Cargo Containers • City of Los Angeles Department of Building and Safety Information Bulletin Reference No. LABC – 104.2.6, Cargo Container Conversion to Building Modules CITY OF BAKERSFIELD PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT TO: Vice-Chair Lomas and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Jacquelyn R. Kitchen, Planning Director AGENDA ITEM __________ DATE: March 3, 2016 APPROVED _______ SUBJECT: COUNCIL REFERRAL – AMEND ZONING ORDINANCE TO ALLOW HUMAN OCCUPANCY OF METAL STORAGE CONTAINERS APPLICANT: PROPERTY OWNER: N/A N/A LOCATION: City of Bakersfield (City-wide) Figure 1, Location Map RECOMMENDATION: Motion to Adopt Resolution: Recommending that the City Council direct Staff to delay amendment of the Zoning Ordinance to allow use of Metal Storage Containers as building materials for human occupancy until such time as further guidance is provided by the State or the California Building Standards Code is updated regarding this topic. Page 2 of 6 BACKGROUND In 1998, City Council adopted Ordinance 3869 which created standards for the use of Metal Storage Containers (Containers) within the City limits. In adopting this Ordinance, the City Council found that the unregulated use of Containers may negatively impact the aesthetics of neighborhoods where they are placed and discourage investment in the surrounding areas. Therefore, Containers are only permitted in certain zone districts and are subject to specific design criteria, as specified in Chapter 17.57 of the Zoning Ordinance. This criteria prohibits use of Containers for human occupancy (See Table 1, below). On December 9, 2015, and in response to a resident request related to a property on H Street in Downtown Bakersfield, Councilmember Maxwell made a referral to Staff to research changing the existing Ordinance to allow Containers to be used as construction materials for buildings, including buildings utilized for human occupancy. The response is below. EXISTING REGULATIONS Definition. A Container is any structure of one hundred twenty square feet or more designed to carry cargo to be shipped by truck or rail and designed to I.S.O. Standard 668-1979(E) or equivalent, or any roll-off storage bin with a fixed cover. (Ord. 3869 § 1, 1998) (17.04.464) Permits Required. All Containers require a Building Permit and Plot Plan Approval (17.57.020). Containers are exempt from Site Plan Review (17.08.070.I ). Additionally, a Conditional Use Permit is required in some cases, as described below. Permanent Uses (by Zone District) Zone1 Parcel or Site Area Maximum Number2 Setbacks C-1, C-2, P.C.D. less than 1/2 acre 1 Container Prohibited in front or street side yard 1/2 acre or more 2 Containers M-1, M-2, M-3 less than 1/2 acre 1 Container May be in front yard or street side yard with minimum 30-foot setback from any street 1/2 acre or more but < 1 acre 2 Containers 1 acre or more but < 2 acres 3 Containers 2 acres or more 4 Containers All Other Districts (17.57.030) Requires a Conditional Use Permit, and must: (1) be an accessory use; and, (2) ratio of square footage of Container(s) to area of parcel shall not exceed 1:50 Per Zone District 1. Additional containers may be approved via CUP, no to exceed the 1:50 ratio (17.57.030.B) 2. Prohibited in Large Retail Developments, except during construction (17.08.140) Temporary Uses 1. Emergency. Permitted on any surface in any zone for emergency use for up to 90 days, subject to Building Director approval. (17.57.040) 2. Construction. Permitted on any surface in any zone for construction use until issuance of certificate of occupancy, subject to Building Director approval. (17.57.050) Design Criteria (17.57.060) 1. Must be painted a neutral color and placed on a permanent slab 2. May not be used as an office, a residence or for any human occupancy 3. No signs on container 4. Maximum Height: 8 feet 5. Maximum Size: 320 square feet 6. Containers shall not be stacked 7. No use of truck trailers, shipping boxes, railroad cars, etc. 8. Containers cannot be placed in parking lots & must not be visible from public streets Page 3 of 6 CONSIDERATIONS The request proposes allowing the use of Containers as a construction material throughout the City, specifically for structures that would be used for human occupancy (e.g., office space, retail space, industrial buildings, and residential dwelling units). In recent years, there has been a heightened interest in using Containers as a primary building material for permanent structures that involve human use; particularly for office buildings, luxury homes, affordable housing projects, etc. The use has become an increasingly popular trend and there are numerous websites and handbooks devoted to the conversion and use of such Containers, as well as a variety of examples where Containers have been used for human occupancy purposes. Research suggests that the use of Containers has become popular due to potential affordability, aesthetic variation and availability of materials. Photo examples of different construction projects that use Containers outside of Bakersfield are provided below. PHOTO SET 1 Page 4 of 6 PHOTO SET 2 Page 5 of 6 TOPICS FOR CONSIDERATION Research demonstrates that there are a number of issues associated with the use of Containers as a building material for structures intended for human occupancy; including: 1. Health and Safety. Many proposals show stacked containers. However, stacking requires specific engineering in order to maintain structural integrity and often requires steel reinforcement, stronger foundations, etc. A 20-foot Container weighs approximately 5,000 pounds; therefore, cranes or flatbed trucks are typically needed to move them. 2. Building Code. Numerous alterations are required to meet building code standards for human occupancy; including insulation, plumbing, electrical lines, etc. Improper insulation may result in heavy condensation on the inside of the metal exterior walls. Additionally, space is needed to run utilities through the walls (HVAC, plumbing, etc.) 3. Design Inconsistency. The current Building Code does not include provisions for the conversion of Containers to structures for human occupancy; most projects are DIY or done through third party vendors and there is no certification. 4. Affordability. Studies have shown that once alterations are made to make Containers suitable for human occupancy, costs often exceed those of standard building materials. 5. Quality of Life. Once appropriate alterations are made to containers to make them consistent with the Building Code standards referenced above, there is often little interior room left inside for use by the occupants (7-foot ceiling height, etc.) 6. Recycling. The use of Containers for human occupancy is a potentially-green alternative to the use of new, traditional building materials. Useful Websites 1. “The Pros and Cons of Cargo Container Architecture.” http://www.archdaily.com/160892/ the-pros-and-cons-of-cargo-container-architecture 2. “15 Well-Designed Shipping Container Homes for Life Inside the Box” http://freshome.com /shipping-container-homes/ 3. “What’s Wrong with Shipping Container Housing? Everything.” http://markasaurus.com/ 2015/09/01/whats-wrong-with-shipping-container-housing-everything/ 4. “23 Shipping Container Home Owners Speak Out: “What I Wish I’d Known Before Building My Shipping Container Home” http://www.containerhomeplans.org/2015/04/what-i-wish- id-known-before-building-my-shipping-container-home/ 5. “10 Things to Consider Before Using Shipping Containers For Your Project” http://www.jetson green.com/2010/02/ten-things-consider-shipping-container-projects.html ENVIROMENTAL REVIEW AND ANALYSIS Should your Commission desire an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance to authorize use of this material, it is advised that the project undergo a full analysis pursuant to the requirements of California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); including review of the potential impacts of the use of this new building material and increase in the shipment of such material to the area. Page 6 of 6 OPTIONS Staff requests that your Commission provide direction regarding further consideration of this topic. The potential options identified by Staff are as follows: Option 1: No Further Action. Current Building Code requirements address the use of Alternative Materials and specify that these materials could be used if the building official finds that the proposed design is satisfactory and complies with the intent of Building Code provisions, and that the material, method or work offered is, for the purpose intended, at least the equivalent of that prescribed in quality, strength, effectiveness, fire resistance, durability and safety. However, as outlined above, the City Council has adopted language within the Zoning Ordinance that specifically prohibits use of Containers as an office, a residence or for any human occupancy. Due to the increasing popularity of the use of these materials, other jurisdictions may identify potential methods to address this issue in the future. Additionally, the State or future updates to the Uniform Building Code may provide further direction on this issue. Therefore, under this option, your Commission could advise Staff to recognize the past position of City Council to prohibit use of Containers for human occupancy and direct Staff to delay additional research on amending the Ordinance until a future date. Staff will report this determination to City Council. Option 2: Research Amendment to Zoning Ordinance. Should your Commission wish to explore the option of allowing use of Containers for human occupancy, your Commission could direct Staff to conduct the research and prepare a draft revised Ordinance. Should this option be selected, it is recommended that the draft revised Ordinance account for the following: 1. Any use of Containers for human occupancy should require approval of a Conditional Use Permit. 2. Ordinance should define specific parameters for scenarios where use could be requested; perhaps limited to certain zone districts. 3. Need to specifically define what is permitted – can Containers be used as offices only or as residences as well? 4. Ordinance should specify limits to the number of occupants within Container space. 5. Define the maximum density/number of Containers allowed per parcel/square footage. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS As noted above, the proposal is to change the current Zoning Ordinance to allow the use of Containers as a construction material throughout the City. Preliminary research demonstrates that there are numerous complications associated with this use; and that City Council has previously taken a position against such use. Additionally, other jurisdictions or future updates to the Uniform Building Code may provide further direction on this issue. Therefore, Staff recommends Option 1 and that this topic be revisited by your Commission at a later date. EXHIBITS AND ATTACHMENTS 1. Resolution All meetings will be held at City Hall North, First Floor, Conference Room A Planning and Devlopement Committee Meetings 12:00 p.m.3:30 Closed Session 5:15 p.m. Public Session Budget Hearing: 06/02, Budget Adoption: 6/16 Holidays - City Hall Closed S M T W TH F S S M T W TH F S S M T W TH F S 1 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 28 28 29 30 31 31 S M T W TH F S S M T W TH F S S M T W TH F S 1 2 3 4 1 1 2 3 4 5 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 26 27 28 29 30 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 27 28 29 30 30 31 S M T W TH F S S M T W TH F S S M T W TH F S 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 29 30 31 26 27 28 29 30 S M T W TH F S S M T W TH F S S M T W TH F S 1 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 28 29 30 26 27 28 29 30 31 31 League of California Cities Mayors and Council Members Executive Forum - 2021 Date yet To Be Determined League of California Cities Annual Conference - September 22-24, 2021 OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER City Council Meetings Budget Departmental Workshop JANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE Planning and Development Committee Calendar January 2021 Through December 2021 DRAFT JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER Documents Presented At The Planning and Development Committee March 11, 2021 Meeting 3/12/2021 1 March 11, 2021 – Item 4a. City Council Referral November 18, 2020 City Council (Ward 2) City Council Committee Meeting Planning & Development Boutique Wineries Background Councilman Gonzales - Explore boutique wineries in downtown area Boutique Winery - highly specialized, limited production,and personalized from start to finish to create a masterpiece in each bottle 3/12/2021 2 Factors to Consider Specific operational requirements to help ensure compatibility with adjacent uses and avoid potential impacts: •Maintain a valid California Department of Alcohol and Beverage Control license o Type 02 - Winegrower (Winery): A winegrower must have facilities and equipment for the conversion of fruit into wine and engage in the production of wine •Maintain an approved Wastewater Discharge Plan o Winery wastewater discharge is generally high in sugar, alcohol, often contains solids, and has generally low pH Factors to Consider Specific operational requirements to help ensure compatibility with adjacent uses and avoid potential impacts: •Establish maximum annual production quantity o Could be consistent with wine industry’s estimated annual production levels: 10,000 cases / 23,780 gallons / 396 barrels o Reference: Large Distillery = more than 100,000 gallons Small Distillery = 100,000 gallons or less •Obtain San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District permit. o Applicable if determined wineries’ odor require special filtration 3/12/2021 3 Next Steps NEXT STEPS Provide staff direction: Option #1 – Research Amendment to Municipal Code •Add Boutique Winery to list of definitions •Add Boutique Winery as permitted use in C-2 (Regional Commercial) zone •Add Boutique Winery as conditionally permitted use in M-1 (Light Manufacturing) zone •Add Boutique Winery as permitted use in M-2 (General Manufacturing) zone Option #2 – No Further Action Option #3 – Alternate Direction March 11, 2021 – Item 4b. City Council Referral September 9, 2020 City Council (Ward 2) City Council Committee Meeting Planning & Development Storage Containers 3/12/2021 4 Background Councilman Gonzales - prepare an amendment to current ordinance that guides the use of storage containers for human habitation in the downtown area. Current Ordinance makes no provision for containers for human habitation. 2016 discussion led to no change in the ordinance. Building Codes have not been updated – difficulty in converting containers to alternative uses. Factors to Consider Report discusses: •Health and Safety •Building Code •Design Aesthetics •Affordability 3/12/2021 5 Factors to Consider Draft ordinance has been prepared which would facilitate the use of storage containers for human habitation. Chapter 17.57 is amended to: 1. Containers for human occupancy would require discretionary approval. 2. Containers for human occupancy would be allowed in the “central district.” 3. Specific development standards would be applied to the installation of Containers for human habitation. 4. Standards for location, number, structural setbacks, parking, signage and landscaping are provided. 5. The ordinance would provide guidance in the conversion of Containers consistent with the Building Code. Next Steps NEXT STEPS Provide staff direction: Option #1 – No Further Action Option #2 – Forward Ordinance Amendment to Planning Commission Option #3 – Alternate Direction 3/12/2021 6 Item 4c. Adopt Calendar for 2021