Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Land Use topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Board affirms denial of Meyer oceanfront setback variance in Arch Cape

Clatsop County Board of Commissioners · June 24, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

After a de novo quasi‑judicial hearing, the Clatsop County Board of Commissioners affirmed the hearings officer ecision denying a variance request for a 3‑ft encroachment into the oceanfront setback, citing rules that prohibit increasing the nonconformity of an existing structure.

The Clatsop County Board of Commissioners on Tuesday affirmed a hearings officer's denial of a variance request from property owners seeking to enclose roughly 22 square feet beneath an existing cantilever that extends into the oceanfront setback in Arch Cape.

Staff and the hearings officer concluded the proposed ground‑floor infill would increase the nonconformity of a legally nonconforming structure and that the application did not meet the county's variance criteria. "A nonconforming structure may continue in its existing dimensions," staff explained, quoting ordinance language that additions cannot increase nonconformity.

Applicant Rich Meyer, the house designer Vito Cirelli and engineer Kyle Supple argued the small infill is necessary to address chronic leaks and a structural deflection in the 1976 cantilever and to create a continuous load path for seismic safety. Engineer Kyle Supple said the original construction predated modern seismic design and that adding a ground‑level wall would improve life‑safety by transferring loads to the foundation.

Commissioners split on the legal interpretation. Commissioner Thompson said the infill appeared "de minimis" and expressed concern that denying the variance would impose what she called an unreasonable standard; other commissioners cited the code's blanket prohibition on increasing nonconformity and the hearings officer's careful application of ordinance sections.

After deliberation the board voted to affirm the hearings officer's denial; the county advised that any party with standing may appeal the decision to the Oregon Land Use Board of Appeals within 21 days.