Dear editor:

Since I moved to NOTL four years ago and have acquired a taste for our local news and politics, I have been trying to follow the zoning issues with our various wineries.

It seems there is always some problem with some wineries breaching the bylaws and not being able to host outside events, or have restaurants, or have summer patios and yet other wineries have large outside venues: movie nights, concerts, weddings, Michelin-star restaurants, helicopters landing on site, skating rinks — the list goes on.

All these wineries are all on agricultural land, are they not? Greenbelt lands? They all have neighbours — what is the difference? Why can some function, having large outdoor gatherings and others cannot? Why can some have full-service restaurants and others cannot?

Is it the zoning? Who approves the zoning? What is the criteria for the very different offerings the wineries can offer customers?

Stone Eagle Winery grew up out of the dust of agricultural land, with a large, concrete footprint, a full-service restaurant and opulent winery — who approved that and why is it different from a Konzelmann Winery or a Colaneri Winery or any other small, family-owned winery?

It seems to me, zoning should be respectful of our Greenbelt and preserve finite, agricultural/Greenbelt/growing soil. However, there should also be room for dining, music, weddings etc. — within certain guidelines — and all wineries should be held to the same standards and bylaw regulations.

Please tell us: what is the fundamental difference between the family-owned wineries and the corporate-owned wineries? Why does one group seem to get special treatment over the other?

It’s a mystery to me — one I would appreciate a better understanding of.

Thank you.

Megan Wood
NOTL