Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Signage topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Rhinebeck ZBA accepts sign variance application for public hearing; lighting may require use variance
Summary
The Rhinebeck Zoning Board of Appeals accepted an application for a freestanding business sign on Route 9/9G (case 1075) and scheduled a public hearing, while flagging that lighting on the sign may require a use variance because the parcel is in a residential zone.
The Rhinebeck Zoning Board of Appeals on April 16 accepted an application for a freestanding sign on Route 9/9G and set a public hearing for the board's next meeting, while noting that exterior lighting could trigger a separate use-variance review.
The applicant — represented at the meeting by Paul Meijer — described the proposed sign as a double-sided freestanding panel about 2 feet by 6 feet to be placed near the intersection on Route 9/9G. Meijer said the site faces a highway where posted speeds are commonly 55 mph and that similar, larger signs exist along the corridor. The application package includes a site drawing and a rendering showing landscaping under the panel.
Zoning staff flagged lighting as an issue. The board’s staff member (identified in the record as Brian) told Meijer that the parcel falls in a residential district and that the town code allows only non-illuminated signs in that zone; adding exterior lighting would therefore require a use variance. Meijer and the applicant said they would consult and report back before the public hearing; they also discussed reflective paint or text as an alternative to active illumination.
Board members voted to accept the application for public hearing, subject to clarification about the lighting. The board also determined the proposal is a Type II action under SEQRA (6 NYCRR 617.5(c)(22)) concerning signs and referred the matter to the Planning Board for lead-agency coordination and site-review assistance. A site visit will be scheduled before the public hearing. The applicant was told neighbors within the notification zone would be informed.
The board and applicant discussed operational details, including approximate business hours (applicant estimated roughly 7 a.m. to 5 p.m.) and landscaping expectations for the sign base. Meijer said the applicant could have an answer about lighting by the next day; the board told him the lighting decision would determine whether a use-variance application was required ahead of or at the public hearing.
The public hearing was scheduled for the ZBA meeting on May 21, 2025, and the application will appear before the Planning Board in the interim for review and lead-agency coordination.
Votes at the April 16 meeting were procedural: the board voted to accept the application and to deem the SEQRA determination Type II; both measures passed with the board’s affirmative votes and were seconded by other members.
Next steps: the applicant will confirm whether the proposed sign will include lighting; if lighting is pursued, the applicant was told they will need to file for a use variance. The board will post notices to neighboring properties and hold a site visit prior to the May 21 public hearing.
