The Oak Grove City Council on Monday approved a conditional-use permit for an 8-by-24-foot floating dock and gangplank at a property on the Rum River, following neighbor objections about size and visibility.

Neighbors told the council the proposed dock is larger than others on that stretch of river and could become an eyesore or hazard for tubers, kayakers and canoeists. Donald Bell, of 22160 Hoppy Street, said the dock’s proposed placement would put it farther into the channel and that an 8-foot width “seems far more than is necessary,” given recreational river traffic. “It just seems out of keeping with the rest of that part of the river,” Bell said.

The applicant, Alex Plaistead, said the 8-by-24 specification reflected recommendations from an experienced dock builder and was intended to allow water flow beneath the structure. “One of my friends, Flo, he’s been producing docks and lifts for about 30 years,” Plaistead said. “He recommended that size for how sturdy it is for on the river.”

City staff and the Planning Commission reviewed the proposal and recommended conditional approval. Staff said the state Department of Natural Resources had been notified; the DNR’s guidance on public waters was discussed during the Planning Commission review but the city’s Scenic Rivers District requires a conditional-use permit. “The DNR actively encourages communities to adopt standards higher than the statewide minimums,” a neighbor’s representative told the council, urging the city to adopt limits that preserve shoreland character.

The Planning Commission added two conditions that the council’s approval incorporated: the property owner must recover the dock at the owner’s expense if it floats away, and the dock must be removed annually in accordance with recommendations from the Anoka Conservation District. City staff told the council the applicant had worked with the Anoka Conservation District on bluff stabilization and best practices for installation and removal.

Councilmember Bridal Johnson moved to approve the resolution (identified in the meeting materials as resolution 20 25‑135). Councilmember Tradewell seconded. The motion passed, recorded as 4–0 in favor.

During deliberations, Councilmember Wylie said he intended to abstain before the vote, citing neighbor concerns; the final roll-call recorded the measure as approved. The council’s approval does not change required state notifications or any DNR processes. The council and staff also urged the applicant to work with neighbors on placement and removal timing going forward.

The council’s decision completes the city’s conditional-use permit review; staff said the property owner still must meet any remaining procedural requirements from the Anoka Conservation District and other state or county permits, if applicable.