FW: NCTimes-Sifuentes: Decision may be uncorked for 'boutique" wineries

------ Forwarded Message
From: <char.ayers@att.net>
Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2008 17:16:58 +0000
To: Charlene Ayers <char.ayers@att.net>
Subject: NCTimes-Sifuentes: Decision may be uncorked for 'boutique" wineries

Monday, April 21, 2008
Last modified Sunday, April 20, 2008 7:41 PM PDT


REGION: Decision may be uncorked for 'boutique' wineries

By EDWARD SIFUENTES - Staff Writer

 

County supervisors are scheduled to decide Wednesday whether small wineries that want to offer tasting rooms will be required to pay for expensive building permits and environmental studies.

Winemakers in the Ramona area say that a requirement to pay for the permits and studies to open tasting rooms would dash their hopes of reviving the once-booming industry.

 

County officials have been struggling to find a compromise between vintners and their neighbors to create an ordinance that will allow "boutique" wineries to open tasting rooms without having to pay more than the $40,000 that some of the permits and studies cost.

In their recommendation to supervisors, county planners said the ordinance should require winery operators who want tasting rooms to conduct environmental impact reports addressing traffic, noise and related issues.

Despite those recommendations, the county Planning Commission, in a split vote April 4, sided with winemakers and ruled the studies weren't necessary.

It will be up to the supervisors to make the final decision.

Carolyn Harris, a member of the Ramona Valley Vineyards Association, said few winemakers could afford to produce such a study.

The association, which has led the fight to create the ordinance, represents about a dozen Ramona-area wineries.

"I don't think you're going to see too many applications for major-use permits" to build tasting rooms, Harris said Friday. "I can guarantee you that."

Ordinance proponents have said that making it easier for boutique wineries to open tasting rooms could help resurrect the industry, attract tourists and increase the county's tax base.

Opponents, including some backcountry residents, say they are worried that the wineries, some of which are on private roads, would create public safety hazards, such as drunken drivers, on poorly maintained roads.

In December, the supervisors asked county planners to address the question of allowing boutique wineries on private roads.

Owners proposed a plan that would allow small wineries with tasting rooms on private roads with fewer than 10 residences to create road maintenance agreements with neighbors.

Applicants on private roads with more than 10 residences would need a permit from the county.

Harris said the county's Department of Planning and Land Use and the county counsel threw wineries a curve ball late in the game, saying last month that if the ordinance is approved without requiring winery owners to conduct environmental studies, it could expose the county to a lawsuit.

Harris said the county should have made that determination two years ago, when the discussion about the ordinance began.

"We just wasted two years of our lives, thank you very much," Harris said.

Ordinance opponents say that requiring wineries to apply for a major-use permit, which includes the environmental study, is only fair to their neighbors.

"I know that some people think that the whole concept of having small wineries is neat, but you don't give up your zoning" requirements, said Jack Phillips, chairman of the Valle del Oro Community Planning Group.

The supervisors are scheduled to meet at 9 a.m. Wednesday at the county administration building in San Diego.
Contact staff writer Edward Sifuentes at (760) 740-3511 or esifuentes@nctimes.com.

 

***********************************

 

Charlene Sez:  I think the Gibson letter to the participants was talking about an EIR for the ordinance itself which would cost the County $250,000.  


------ End of Forwarded Message