LANESBOROUGH, Mass. — The fate of the Lanesborough Local Country Store's signature vintage pickup truck remains uncertain following the Zoning Board of Appeals' recent decision.

 

Tensions flared at last week's meeting as the board debated whether a truck with a sign mounted on its bed complies with the town's sign bylaws. 

 

The board voted to uphold the building inspector's violation, though board member Ronald Tinkham expressed reluctance about the decision.

 

For the last five years, the truck has been a familiar sight on the grass near the store, at local events and parades, and serving ice cream at summer gatherings.

 

That was until the family business, known for its handmade gifts, nostalgic toys, farm fresh ice cream, groceries, beer, wine, baked goods and deli, received a violation. 

 

Building Inspector Brian Duval explained to the board that the bylaws only permit one freestanding sign to be located on the property and the store already has a freestanding sign — making the truck sign a violation. 

 

"I realize that the vehicle is a registered vehicle. The sign obviously is not original equipment to the vehicle. It obviously is being used as advertisement to the property. It's not something they use in their day-to-day businesses, not talking about a box truck with lettering on it," he said. 

 

He expressed concerns that allowing the truck would create an unregulated loophole where anyone could mount freestanding signs to vehicles and bypass sign-size and number limits. 

 

The town's bylaws define a sign as "any word, number, emblem, picture, design, trademark or other device designed to inform or attract the attention of persons not on the premises on which the device is located, whether affixed to the ground, or a building, structure, or vehicle, or other conveyance." 

 

The definition also outlines a number of items not to be included in the definition, including "signs painted on or attached to duly registered motor vehicles." 

 

Tyler Purdy, owner of Lanesborough Local Country Store, explained to the board that the sign is not just sitting in the back of the 1955 truck; it is lagged through the frame of the truck and cannot move. 

 

Paul B. Sherr, a New York attorney, offered his "informed opinion" to iBerkshires, but not in representing Purdy as his Massachusetts license is retired. 

 

He highlighted the language in the definitions of the town bylaws, which was also presented by board member Tinkham.

 

"The bylaw on its face is plainly worded and it clearly gives an exemption applicable under the circumstances. Mr. Purdy has a display 'attached to (a) duly registered motor vehicle…', without more, the plain wording speaks for itself to create an exemption," Sherr told iBerkshires. 

 

"The language was written into the bylaw for a reason. The language is not there by happenstance."

 

Sherr, who didn't attend the meeting but heard of the determination from Purdy, said the board did not "legally qualify the exemption, such as moderating case law or countermanding sections of the bylaws.

 

"The Zoning Board offered its various opinions as to why the exemption should not apply, but no more."

 

The attorney said "opinions do not control," and if the ZBA cannot prove that the drafters of the bylaw did not intend this exemption, "then in my opinion, the Zoning Board bears the burden of proving the modification, qualification, or contrary intent has been made or codified in some controlling fashion."

 

He advised Purdy to retain a Massachusetts lawyer. Purdy confirmed that he will be appealing the board's decision through Land Court. 

 

When Tinkham raised the wording of the bylaw, Chair Mark Siegars, an attorney, argued that the bylaws state there only be one sign and "it doesn't make any difference what the definition is. It's one sign …

 

"I think the practical reading of signs painted on or attached to is you painted on or you have a magnet sign on it. You don't have something strapped back that's going to potentially fly off."

 

Purdy emphasized during the meeting that the sign is mounted to the frame so there is no safety risk. 

 

Another argument against him was that the truck is on the grass and not in a parking space, so the purpose of the sign does not coincide with the purpose of the exemption. 

 

Tinkham asked if the board could allow the sign with the stipulation that it be parked in a parking spot and be regularly moved. 

 

However, Siegars said it is not the job of the board to advise the applicant. Rather it is the board's jurisdiction to decide whether to uphold the building inspector's violation or not — strictly a yes or no decision. 

 

"That's why all these arguments happen in this town, because there's no consistency," Siegars said. 

 

Tinkham wondered if the sign predated the bylaw, and is therefore non-conforming and pre-existing.

 

Siegars asked if there is any evidence the sign pre-existed the adoption of the bylaws. 

 

"I'm just telling you, nobody brought any evidence in as to when this section was adopted or not adopted. We can't sit here and conjecture about it," he said. 

 

The business received the violation following what town officials described as a "complaint" to the building inspector by Second Drop Farm, which has been fighting its own battles with the town over short-term rentals and signage.

 

The farm owners took to its social media to clarify it had never filed a complaint with the town; rather, it questioned what is permitted based on what other businesses do, such as taking inspiration from the country store by hanging its banner on their farm truck.

 

"We weren't trying to 'report' our neighbors. We were trying to establish a baseline of what is allowed and hold the building inspector accountable by showing him what other businesses had that we were also trying to have and being told no," they said in the post.

 

"What the town is doing is called selective enforcement and it is illegal. We agree that the Lanesborough Local truck should be allowed, just as we should be allowed to also have advertising."