Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Cannon Beach Rezoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Cannon Beach surf‑park rezoning advances after technical presentation; residents express noise, security and services concerns
Summary
The commission voted 7–0 to forward a PD rezoning for 'Cannon Beach,' a mixed‑use entertainment and water‑recreation project with a wave lagoon, hotel and restaurants. Developer presentations addressed sound mitigation (citing a 60 dB reading in Mesa, Ariz.), screening and hours; nearby residents raised concerns about noise, lights, security, property taxes and utilities.
The Planning and Zoning Commission voted unanimously to forward a proposed Planned Development (PD) for a mixed‑use entertainment center called Cannon Beach to City Council for final action. The project would allow an outdoor water recreation lagoon/wave system, a hotel of roughly 150 keys, restaurants, flex entertainment spaces and shared parking, with proposed public open space integrated across the site.
City planner Jake Bennett summarized the proposed rezoning from C‑3 and PD to a new PD accommodating outdoor water recreation and altered parking and development standards. Applicant Rachel Henderson (owner’s representative) described Cannon Beach as "the intersection of lifestyle and adrenaline," emphasizing a family‑oriented attraction with a spa, hotel and surf lagoon. Architect Sam Lawrence explained technical design choices intended to limit noise and visibility toward adjacent residential areas: the applicant proposed insulated operation buildings, layered landscaping, masonry or wrought‑iron screening and a pedestrian corridor to direct visitor flow.
"Cannon Beach offers a holistic oasis where kids can enjoy the waves... while mom and dad enjoy the beach," Rachel Henderson said, describing the concept and the team's efforts to be good neighbors. Sam Lawrence referenced a Mesa, Arizona operation and presented a chart showing the wave‑machine area measured at about 60 decibels at 10 feet — a level he described as comparable to normal conversation — and said the residential area is about 105 feet from the machine, with additional landscaping and building placement providing attenuation.
Nearby resident Venkatesh Garpudi and others voiced concerns at the public podium about security, noise and light pollution; multiple attendees asked how the city would address increased traffic and whether property taxes and utility burdens would change if adjacent streets are rezoned or annexed. Staff said the noise and lighting ordinances would apply, code enforcement can be contacted for violations, and that annexation/zoning do not by themselves immediately provide water or sewer — infrastructure extensions would be part of any future development approvals.
Commissioners discussed screening height options (6‑ to 8‑foot walls) and emphasized the ability to add zoning conditions to require additional landscaping or screening when forwarding recommendations to Council. The commission closed the public hearing and approved the PD rezoning 7–0; the case will appear before City Council on April 7, 2026.
