By TOM REHILAN
Staff Writer
Greenfield Recorder
DEERFIELD — It appears a sign advertising James Pasiecnik’s Whately farmstand on Route 116 won’t be taken down any time soon, despite hundreds of walk-in and written complaints — mostly from the same person.
During a hearing last month, the Zoning Board of Appeals voted to ask the Planning Board to undertake a revision of the town’s sign bylaws to more clearly define what “off-premise signs” are and decide whether they should be allowed in town, then bring it before Town Meeting for a vote.
On Monday night, the Planning Board agreed that the sign is protected by state laws regarding agricultural signage, which members said supercede local zoning bylaws.
The issue rose out of a dispute between residents Michael Killeen and Steven Pistrich over a sign Killeen has on his property along Route 116 advertising the 5J Creamee and Pasiecnik’s Farmstand in Whately.
Building Inspector Richard Calisewski said the town has received 70 written complaints and over 150 in-person complaints about the sign, mostly from Pistrich, regarding non-agricultural products like hot dogs and ice cream being advertised through additional signs hanging off the main farmstand sign. Calisewski was asked to issue Killeen a temporary permit until the matter can be resolved.
The sign is taken down at the end of the growing season. Killeen denied being paid to host the sign, saying he allows it on his property because it was there when he purchased the land. Calisewski, at the time, acknowledged that the sign was violating its permit due to a number of auxiliary signs hanging off it — one of Pistrich’s complaints.
Planning Board member Henry Komosa, however, said during a meeting Monday night he doesn’t think the town’s sign bylaw is poorly designed and it doesn’t need to be changed.
“The problem I see is that we have a bylaw that says you cannot have off-premise signs, so one could argue that sign should not be there. But, because it’s a farmstand sign it’s allowed by-right and cannot be eliminated by zoning,” Komosa said, citing state law.
Komosa said the sign was erected legally, with the proper permits, and displays the legal name of the business. He said those who have complained about it should seek legal remedies and not harass town officials. He said the term “off-premise sign” is “pretty self-explanatory” and doesn’t need to be further defined.
“If it’s a sign for a business that is not there, it’s an off-premise sign, period — the end,” Komosa said. “If our bylaw says you can’t have it, you can’t have it. But state law says zoning cannot preclude a farm stand. I don’t see there’s much we need to do.”
Komosa said the name displayed on the sign or its shape doesn’t change the type of business that it advertises.
“If that’s the name of the business, that’s the name of the business,” Komosa said.
Resident Reenie Clancey said other farms also have off-premise signs in town, such as The Bars Farm and Clarkdale Fruit Farms in Deerfield and Nourse Farms in Whately, and taking down Killeen’s sign would mean those would need to come down as well.
“It’s not feasible or fair to the promotion of agriculture, which is one of the second largest industries in this area,” Clancey said. “It’s a state-recognized promotion of agricultural which is important to the economy of this area, and that sign is falling within that purview. There doesn’t seem to be any grounds besides personal grounds for what’s being called harassment. This individual just has to be advised that it’s a state law or provision and that (the board) cannot do anything special about it.”
Board member Paul Allis noted that a number of state-installed signs also advertise off-premise businesses along Route 116. He also noted that the board has been asked to impose a moratorium on off-premise signs in the past, but were told by the town’s lawyer that such a decision is illegal.
Chairman John Waite said he would consult Calisewski about what changes he’d like see made to make enforcement of the sign zoning bylaws easier and then the board would revisit the issue.
Pat Smith, the Franklin Regional Council of Governments senior land use planner, who was present at the meeting, said the supreme court recently ruled on sign regulations during its past session on free speech grounds and it’s not clear what restrictions, if any, towns can put on signs anymore.
You can reach Tom Relihan at [email protected].
