DEERFIELD — Debate volleyed back and forth at Dec. 9’s Zoning Board of Appeals meeting, and members ultimately voted to adjourn until next month to see if new information materializes in Dollar General’s quest to build a store at the corner of Mill Village Road and Routes 5 and 10.
The board met via the online conferencing platform Zoom for 2½ hours and discussed everything from the positive and negative aspects of having a Dollar General to the board’s civic duty. Members adjourned shortly before 8:30 p.m. and agreed to meet at 6 p.m. on Jan. 14.
As far as he is concerned, member Adam Sokoloski said, the applicant, Lisciotti Development’s South Deerfield DG LLC, has met all requirements.
“I know it’s an unpopular opinion, and that’s fine, but I can’t see any reason not to (go) forward with the rest of the deliberation,” he said.
But member John Stobierski said the board’s role is to weigh an application’s “pros and cons” for the community.
Sokoloski responded that he has done that. “I’ve been here. I’ve listened. I’m ready to move on,” he said, adding that the town’s legal counsel has advised members to judge the applicant as a retailer and not a “nasty corporation.”
“Would I like something else in there? Absolutely. But just because we don’t like something doesn’t mean we can discriminate against it,” Sokoloski said before adding that he believes the benefits outweigh any potential detriments.
Stobierski made a motion to reopen the public hearing to accept any new evidence, saying it appears some engineering analysis put forward by the applicant “has not withstood the scrutiny of the (state Department of Environmental Protection),” but no one seconded it. David Potter, an alternate, had been told earlier that he could make comments and ask questions, but was not allowed to second a motion or vote. So Stobierski made a separate motion in hopes of moving on to discussion of natural environment impacts. Again, there was no second.
Stobierski moved on to neighborhood characteristics, stating he thinks it “is the most important criteria that we have to look at.”
“This should be weighed very heavily, beyond all the other criteria, maybe as much as 50 percent,” he said. “I firmly believe that the detriments do not outweigh the benefits.”
Stobierski also said the design of the proposed Dollar General store does not match the area’s New England architecture and mom-and-pop businesses. He mentioned The Rock, Fossil and Dinosaur Shop, located nearby, is “going to get swallowed up.”
Gina Bordoni-Cowley, owner of The Rock, Fossil and Dinosaur Shop, previously said the clear-cutting of trees in April 2018 later resulted in Bloody Brook flooding her business and its parking lot, most severely in July of that year.
“Those trees were absorbing a great deal of the water before they were cut down,” she said, adding that the storm drainage system in the parking lot could not handle the massive volumes of water, which got “ankle deep” inside the shop at 213 Greenfield Road.
Stobierski said the Dollar General development “is the exact thing that our zoning bylaws were designed to not have in our town.”
Sokoloski responded that the applicant has worked diligently to ensure the store’s design complements the neighborhood’s character, saying the site plan is “much better than the crappy-looking store they’ve had in Bernardston.”
Sokoloski also said Magic Wings Butterfly Conservatory is much bigger than this proposed building, and the Cumberland Farms convenience store and gas station and the Yankee Candle buildings are also sizable.
Zoning Board of Appeals alternate Alex Herchenreder agreed with Sokoloski, saying the applicant “has done a pretty decent job with conforming to some of the requests.”
“It could have been something worse,” he added.
Board member Robert Decker III said a Dollar General would provide a public service to Deerfield.
Zoning Board of Appeals Chairman Bernie Sadoski said the five small grocery stores once in town are gone, and a Dollar General at the proposed spot could keep people in town and prevent them from traveling to more congested areas. He cited the COVID-19 pandemic and the elderly’s susceptibility to contracting the virus.
Before making a motion to adjourn, Sokoloski said he believes it is “pretty far-reaching” to say land cannot be developed because of a possibility of an environmental impact such as flooding.
Decker said he is not concerned about flooding.
“I happen to own property on both sides of Bloody Brook,” he said, “and I’m OK with (the development).”