[{"_1":2,"_99":-5,"_100":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6496478,"mediaKeyId","5665442-f67ff121c19ac29661054bb83c6c325f","parentId",5665442,"title","Planning commission tables temporary‑dock request on Rum River after public concerns about size and shoreline work","audioSeconds",470,"startMs",1009000,"endMs",1479000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5665442-f67ff121c19ac29661054bb83c6c325f&start=1009&end=1479","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5665442-f67ff121c19ac29661054bb83c6c325f/thumbnail_1009000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6496478/Oak-Grove/Clackamas-County/Oregon/Planning-commission-tables-temporarydock-request-on-Rum-River-after-public-concerns-about-size-and-shoreline-work","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6496478-89636028d586a2e28a46915869f9b807/orig.mp4?Expires=1775692578&Signature=CBRrvFg1vTX3KhbUSrb5iAf7D-NXI9JhefoavdGG4iHDiuF647AfZvDu1y3vS4AaoDS1inliZ19dkIhaTdVk5jbkWGbypFfEr0FvuCz2I1utNot7fiMY8AW1vW6aiZN~~uy8oGYLexfhAbqrFbJHuaHzp9D6REZcjAzWVD1eSZ1wxM-KpVZyTSJfhxypIPxC3SUzKR-c9MWzhgSPtExEsubPj0yyNzq7XBetwtGdZHRxFLcxkugGK94i6yil3i2tGBk6KZ7gP83scGa4Jxdu0SeGI7K1rI8Bca8FxFJZCeEBhK837O5sJ-~-5-o9YoBhEwk4pYkPBXi30NHzBUMraQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Oak Grove","date","2025-08-21T00:00:00Z","article","The Planning Commission tabled consideration of a conditional use permit for a temporary floating dock and lift proposed at 35772 First Avenue NW after a lengthy public hearing that produced questions about dock size, shoreline restoration and the property’s Scenic River overlay.

Planner Chris Janssen (MSA) said the applicant, identified in staff materials as Bad Medicine Rum River LLC / Alec (Alex) Plasted, applied for a floating dock approximately 24 feet by 8 feet with a gangway and an inclined track lift about 5 by 25 feet. Because the property lies within the Scenic River District overlay, temporary docks require a conditional use permit under city code; staff reported the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) had commented that the proposed dimensions “fit within the DNR's no permit needed criteria” for docks under some conditions, and that the watershed district had been consulted.

Multiple neighbors came to the podium to oppose the size and placement of the dock. Nicole Bufkin, who lives across the river, said replanting that had accompanied prior shoreline riprap “do not meet the spirit of the requirements because all of those trees are dead,” and asked whether a large dock would bring motorized boats and noise into a shallow, mostly non‑navigable stretch of river. Neighbor Gary Martz, who lives adjacent to the property, told the commission he was primarily concerned about the proposed dock’s proximity to his property line and maintenance access. Brad Bufkin said the dock “is out of proportion with the rest of the docks” along that stretch of the Rum River and urged the commission to consider long‑term scenic and habitat impacts.

Planner notes in the record describe that the DNR provides a “no permit required” checklist for docks where structures meet certain dimensional and siting criteria, including not impeding navigation and not requiring permanent piles; staff said a floating dock meeting no‑permit criteria would typically be preferred by the DNR over permanent bank‑attached structures. The DNR had also suggested a no‑rise certification would be required if the dock intruded into a mapped floodway.

Because the applicant was not present to answer detailed siting and design questions and because residents raised issues that staff said the applicant could best address, commissioners voted to table the CUP and to request additional information from the applicant and from the DNR/Anoka County Conservation District. Commissioners said the record would benefit from a clearer explanation of (a) why a 24‑foot dock is needed at this location, (b) how the proposal would avoid interference with navigation and adjacent property, and (c) whether the riprap and replanting work on the site meets the scenic river restoration expectations cited by the DNR and conservation district.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Oak Grove - Planning Commission","oneSentenceSummary","A conditional use permit request for a 24x8 floating dock and boat lift at 35772 First Avenue NW was tabled for lack of applicant presence and after residents raised concerns about dock size, shoreline riprap and Scenic River protections; planners asked staff to seek more applicant and agency information.","taxTitle","Oak Grove, Clackamas County, Oregon","taxId",72763,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6496482,"Planning commission recommends two‑year home‑occupation permit for T10 Construction with conditions",3287,821000,4108000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5665442-f67ff121c19ac29661054bb83c6c325f&start=821&end=4108","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5665442-f67ff121c19ac29661054bb83c6c325f/thumbnail_821000.jpg","/articles/6496482/Oak-Grove/Clackamas-County/Oregon/Planning-commission-recommends-twoyear-homeoccupation-permit-for-T10-Construction-with-conditions","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6496482-32c9820374508b37969a66cf9e1116e4/orig.mp4?Expires=1775692578&Signature=IxDtAUWBLFFsxQSK0ZqWc7AyPqN4-GIZ6T2XBUILW7ZUFFar1T-C~Z1GSd-KgjndLurI7LtYK5tfCKnN4qu4Xg-I0WDdXFa-TbkKRoWYY1aNj4bhAty0i~9zrHAwwF8Z6pdUt0UEp2wkbiWjl3RNBoBqiBXAQENfMvJHYJ~pA8LAYRD6SPYqBvhkCloLR-ysNGhg9ER75Fbo5hw12TN1ulmAOgocL7D~LmOpHSC8oqt6amSwX24UVNdRtIEBmDXUnoQRQUW6O2JBNnAfqQATUcOOXd2BoPbF9v3mCYguZC4wB6MBdlzbr94T9uuePS3zJybgvBeVK0sMfQTLZRxbuA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Oak Grove Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of an interim use permit (IUP) that would allow T10 Construction to operate administrative functions from an accessory building at 17822 Hundredth Lane NW.

Planner (consultant) Jansen summarized staff’s review: the 1.81‑acre property is in the single‑family residential district and the applicant proposes to use the accessory building for office and administrative work only; all construction work and materials would remain off site. The accessory structure contains two finished rooms and a bathroom that are proposed to serve as an office. The application requests weekday hours of 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. and proposes up to three compensated employees who do not live at the residence.

Jansen said the proposed use exceeds standards in Oak Grove city code sections cited in the staff report, and therefore an IUP is required. Staff recommended approval to city council with conditions including: the permit is granted only to the property owner and expires if the owner moves or if the business ceases for six months; the permit term is two years; city staff (including fire department) may inspect the dwelling and accessory building; the number of nonresident employees is limited to three; and operation must follow the submitted narrative unless modified by conditions.

Applicant Jay Solum told the commission he uses the accessory building for invoicing and paperwork and that “we're doing all the invoicing paperwork stuff out of there. No construction materials or anything dropped off there. It's all done off‑site.” He acknowledged past in‑person sales meetings and training that drew multiple company vehicles; the applicant said those in‑person meetings have stopped and sales meetings now occur by videoconference.

Several neighbors testified with mixed views. Some neighbors said parking and vehicle traffic from earlier on‑site meetings had been a safety concern for children and an annoyance for homeowners, while others said the applicant is a “stand‑up neighbor” who remedied parking issues when they occurred. City staff explained that on‑street parking of commercial vehicles is restricted by city code except when parked for contracted work during daylight hours, and that enforcement and revocation of an IUP would follow the city’s code and administrative procedures.

After discussion commissioners added two conditions: a prohibition on on‑site employee meetings (trainings) and allowance for one annual employee social event at the residence. The commission voted to recommend approval to city council; the planning commission recorded three votes in favor, one abstention and the motion carried. The recommendation will be forwarded to city council for final action.","The commission recommended a two‑year interim use permit allowing T10 Construction to operate administrative functions at 17822 Hundredth Lane NW, with limits on nonresident employees, inspections, a ban on on‑site employee meetings and a single annual employee social event.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6496487,"Planning commission recommends approval of Aspen Glen Second Edition final plat",527,243000,770000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5665442-f67ff121c19ac29661054bb83c6c325f&start=243&end=770","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5665442-f67ff121c19ac29661054bb83c6c325f/thumbnail_243000.jpg","/articles/6496487/Oak-Grove/Clackamas-County/Oregon/Planning-commission-recommends-approval-of-Aspen-Glen-Second-Edition-final-plat","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6496487-a870a66e03118b3ccf9595daed7f2016/orig.mp4?Expires=1775692578&Signature=DJTIbtQmpb7Mg~2d8Hd1-BkgSUdFQlIsn8odq5B7YKhKzgq1IOj9~9cUc3e2LTEIEPxwZ-2FkkTvKHtOZBTUnxy80aNmX5fnGPjFYjArmTzfMefQFKCvu2wK1pPscYbehXcZprGckmQX5g1IcNlXyC6oncuSGqLX48gul~K5GiXlmoeZfwL4jV-QMRUjseAGsQn9ma2J~xHMr5l8dOs~YE-61BhHPSyOgKrTzX7lFSsaZnhiaQcuKdyB5tab1KQ21nsFzF1-qJZajG3gbOaB75VOOgs4xyP8~v-ox4VRq4Eygyt4t6DvyI2i8VdouNgW2Lq4fk75siLklK6I6Otzdw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Oak Grove Planning Commission recommended approval Thursday of the final plat for Aspen Glen Second Edition, a subdivision that would create 13 new single‑family home parcels and one outlot for future development.

City consulting engineer Chris Janssen of MSA told the commission the property lies south of County Highway 24 and west of the Aspen Glen First Addition, and that the plat “would be 13 new single family home lots with 1 outlot that is reserved for future development, in accordance with the preliminary plan that was approved previously.”

The recommendation is based on staff findings that the proposal “generally meets the city's lot size and configuration standards for the single family residential district,” that it conforms with the previously approved preliminary plat and with the city’s subdivision and comprehensive plan standards, and that stormwater, grading and wetland buffer requirements can be met. The staff memo included a list of required conditions, including that the applicant enter a development agreement addressing public improvements and financial security, supply current title work and satisfy the city attorney's plat opinion.

Janssen described infrastructure provisions in the staff report: two new roads — 226th Lane NW and Thrush Street NW — and a trail required along 226th Lane NW \"in lieu of parkland dedication or park fees.\" He said the trail would connect Aspen Glen to Ponds Park and, ultimately, Lake George Regional Park and the St. Francis waterway system. Engineering estimated the trail construction at about $90,100.

Developer representative Ben Schmidt of Twin Cities Land Development said there were “no changes, deltas from the preliminary in this phase.” Commissioners praised the developer’s efforts to conserve wetlands and preserve trees. Commissioner Johnson noted the importance of protecting oak trees and asked developers to avoid oak cutting during vulnerable seasons.

Commissioner Farah moved to recommend approval; the motion was seconded and carried. The commission’s recommendation will be forwarded to city council, which makes the final decision (staff advised the applicant the council consideration may be scheduled for September 8).","Oak Grove Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of the Aspen Glen Second Edition final plat, a 13‑lot single‑family subdivision with trail and road requirements; recommendation moves to city council for final action.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Planning commission tables temporary‑dock request on Rum River after public concerns about size and shoreline work

Planning commission recommends two‑year home‑occupation permit for T10 Construction with conditions

Planning commission recommends approval of Aspen Glen Second Edition final plat