Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Signage Ordinance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Cannon Beach work session favors simplifying sign rules, debates 24 vs. 36 sq. ft. limits
Summary
At a special work session, Cannon Beach officials and staff reviewed a new draft signage ordinance, debating whether to remove a linear-footage metric, how to count window and incidental signs, and how to handle nonconforming signs; staff will revise language and return it to planning review.
Cannon Beach held a special work session to review a draft signage ordinance, during which members and staff agreed the city should simplify its rules and application but disagreed on details such as whether to allow 36 square feet for single businesses or cap signs at 24 square feet per business.
The session opened with a procedural motion to approve the agenda, which passed by voice vote. Staff presented the new draft and said the goal is a clearer application and straightforward measurements so applicants ‘‘could fill out the application’’ without complex calculations, according to a speaker identified in the transcript as a staff member.
Why it matters: Members said the current system, which ties allowable sign area to linear frontage, creates confusion and uneven outcomes; simplifying to a per-business allowance could reduce staff workload and make compliance easier for small downtown businesses. Chair raised concerns about increased visual clutter if entrance-based rules multiply signs on facades, saying, "This would, exponentially increase the number of signs and visual clutter that we have." That remark framed the trade-off members weighed between clarity for applicants and preserving the city’s aesthetic.
On size and frontage: Staff described the existing approach—single-lot businesses often allowed up to 36 square feet while multi-tenant complexes were limited to a smaller total (about 24 square feet under the draft). Multiple members proposed striking the linear-footage calculation entirely and instead setting a uniform per-business maximum; discussion repeatedly returned to whether 24 square feet should be the baseline cap. Several participants supported removing the lineal-footage metric to simplify administration.
Window graphics, incidental signs and definitions: Commissioners and staff debated how to treat window graphics and decorative window film (including imagery of Haystack Rock) and whether such material should count toward a business’s overall sign area. Participants proposed tightening the ordinance’s "window sign" definition to include graphic wraps and certain films so those elements count in the total allotted area. On incidental signs (hours-of-operation decals, credit-card stickers and small ‘‘open’’ signs) members discussed numeric caps—suggestions included 1.5 to 2.0 square feet or a 12-by-18-inch limit—and whether incidental items should be included in the business’s total 24-square-foot allowance; the working consensus leaned toward limiting incidental signs and including them within the total allowed area.
Review, variances and enforcement: The group discussed routing permanent-sign approvals through the Design Review Board (DRB) while allowing staff to approve many applications administratively via a clearer checklist. Staff proposed carrying permanent-sign matters to design review and allowing administrative staff approval for routine cases. Members also flagged the draft’s language about nonconforming signs and a 90-day compliance window after an ordinance takes effect; several members cautioned against retroactive enforcement of long-standing, previously approved signs and asked staff to revise the language to avoid unintended consequences.
Other points: The council discussed how to count double-sided or freestanding signs (members favored counting a single flush, identical double-sided sign as one piece), clarified that seasonal inflatables and special-event signage should be handled through special-event permits, and debated whether large attached wall art or sculptures should be treated as signs or permitted as art with a variance. Members urged better outreach to businesses, including a brochure explaining the ordinance and a simplified application.
Next steps: Staff said they will revise the draft ordinance and the application materials, circulate an updated packet for comment and bring the proposal to the planning board for further review. No formal ordinance vote occurred at the work session; the meeting functioned as a consensus-building review and direction to staff.
Speakers quoted or paraphrased in this account are identified by the label used in the meeting transcript (Chair; Staff member; Committee member; Resident).
