Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Environment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Neighbor raises pollution and burning complaints at Clackamas County subdivision hearing; staff points to permits and code‑enforcement path
Summary
A neighbor at the July 9 Clackamas County hearing alleged decades of debris and an extended demolition burn on a 20‑acre site that she said harmed Lisonbee Creek and aggravated her asthma; planning staff said the demo was performed under a 2025 burn‑to‑learn permit and directed the neighbor to county code enforcement for dumping concerns.
During public comment at the July 9, 2026 hearings officer proceeding on minor subdivision Z0014‑26, neighbor Kat Malstead testified she is concerned the site’s clearing earlier this year piled long‑accumulated refuse that now risks washing into Lisonbee Creek and, ultimately, the Clackamas River.
"When the first bulldozer begins scraping up piles of noxious garbage and leaving the rain to pollute Lisonbee Creek and thereafter enter into the downstream direct access of the Clackamas River," Malstead said, describing diapers, construction materials and other debris she said were exposed and left in piles. She also said one of the house sites was demolished and burned for "almost two weeks," which she said triggered several asthma attacks; she told the hearings officer she has photographs and that she contacted DEQ and the county planning office.
Planning staff responding at the hearing said the demolition appeared to have been carried out under a demo permit issued in 2025 and described as a burn‑to‑learn permit managed by the fire department. Staff said allegations of illegal dumping or ongoing refuse accumulation are handled through the county’s code‑enforcement process and gave a contact: phone (503) 742‑4452 and codeenforcement@clackamas.us. Staff also noted that protections for mapped wetlands and slopes are evaluated under the subdivision review and that additional encroachment would trigger further land‑use review.
Applicant Matthew Seal told the hearing he had removed an occupant from the property after purchase, is undertaking cleanup work and has paid for asbestos testing and removal planning: "We're cleaning the property. We're not intentionally having anything wash into creeks and streams." Seal offered to walk the parcel with the neighbor to demonstrate cleanup efforts.
The hearings officer and staff emphasized that enforcement of alleged dumping or air‑quality complaints falls to code enforcement and the fire department, and that those enforcement issues are separate from the land‑use criteria he must apply when deciding the subdivision appeal.
