Rochester Council Postpones Quarry Permit Decision Amidst Airport Safety Concerns
Intense public and expert testimony, primarily focused on aviation safety, led the city council to delay a vote on a proposed limestone aggregate quarry, requesting further studies.
The Rochester City Council has deferred a decision on a contentious conditional use permit application for a proposed limestone aggregate quarry, following extensive testimony that underscored significant concerns regarding aviation safety and operational impacts on the nearby Rochester International Airport. After a lengthy discussion involving city staff, airport officials, the applicant, and community representatives, the council opted to postpone a vote, citing a need for more clarity and additional information.
City planning staff had initially recommended denial of the application, primarily due to potential risks to aviation. “Staff are recommending denial of this proposed application,” stated Taran Edens of the Community Development Department. “Our primary concerns are around the possibility of impairing visibility in the vicinity of the airport or otherwise endangering the landing, takeoff or maneuvering of aircraft.” These concerns were echoed and amplified by airport leadership, who focused on the specific threat posed by blasting operations.
My biggest concern is the blasting. It's 2800 ft from the end of the runway and essentially right on center line...blasting in that quarry area really effectively eliminates what's called an LV LPV approach to runway 21,” said John Reid, Executive Director of Rochester International Airport.
The applicant, MGK LLC, represented by Mark Welch of GCubed Engineering, expressed frustration with the assessment reports, particularly a recent study they characterized as biased. Welch argued that the report did not provide an independent evaluation, leading to skepticism about its findings.
This last report that came on Friday looked like a kill report... If they really truly were doing an independent study, they want to reference 1280 ft for the blasting potential. It's not an independent study. It's a kill report,” stated Mark Welch, GCubed Engineering.
Further concerns were raised by aviation community members regarding the practical implications for pilots. Brian Poss, Vice President of the Southeastern Minnesota Flying Club, highlighted how increased approach minimums due to quarry operations would severely impact the airport's usability for pilots relying on low minimums in adverse weather conditions.
When the FA increases those approach minimums, the chances of me making it into the Rochester airport decrease. And there's been many times myself I'm personally thankful for the low approach minimums that Rochester does have because a lot of surrounding airports don't have that and allows me to make that in. But if that goes away because of these Corey operations, it makes the usability of the Rochester airport much less,” explained Brian Poss, Vice President, Southeastern Minnesota Flying Club.
Calls for More Information
Council members acknowledged the complexity and the significant amount of conflicting information presented. Council President Schub voiced discomfort with the late submission and characterization of the recent report. Administrator Zelms also emphasized the city’s ongoing obligations as an airport sponsor, irrespective of the clarity on operational impacts.
I can't guarantee you that we will ever have clarity on what the full implications to the airport operation are, but you will be obligated to operate that airport for 20 years. Every time you take a dime of federal money, which you do every year, and as the airport sponsor for the airport, you have obligations to ensure its operability,” Administrator Zelms cautioned.
Ultimately, the council moved to continue the discussion to a later date, requesting more specific details to inform their decision. Taran Edens summarized the additional information sought by the council, which aims to address the remaining ambiguities.
What I heard was more information regarding the Madison example, what it would take to consider an operations agreement, if that's feasible and what that might include. More information around an air traffic controller. How does this work in practice with unscheduled flights? how much notice would be received if any and more clarification around the number of blasting events per year,” said Taran Edens, Community Development Department.
The deferral signifies the council’s commitment to thoroughly evaluate the project’s potential impacts before rendering a final decision, ensuring all safety and operational concerns for the Rochester International Airport are adequately addressed.
Our proprietary artificial intelligence agent analyzed publicly available documents including meeting agendas, minutes, and transcripts to write this story to help inform local residents. Feedback helps us improve, so please consider rating how we did with the thumbs up or down below.
Go deeper on this topic
Research related meeting documents and build a brief — without rewriting the story.
Full analysis
Votes (3)
Conditional Use Permit CD 2026008 by MGK LLC for Limestone Aggregate Quarry
Dissent: Council member Keane, Council member Miller, Council member Wall, Council member Doring, Council President Schubang all voted against the motion to approve.
Moved by Council member Palmer [1:02:44] · Seconded by Council member Frederick's [1:02:50]
The proposed limestone quarry near Rochester International Airport sparked intense debate. Staff and airport officials recommended denial due to significant aviation safety concerns, particularly from blasting activity that could impair visibility, throw rock into flight paths, and compromise instrument approaches, citing an independent airspace assessment. The applicant and their blasting expert argued that blasting is a highly controlled activity, can be safely coordinated with air traffic, and that similar operations exist near other airports without issue, criticizing the independent report as a 'kill report.' Local pilots corroborated safety concerns, emphasizing the critical need for clear airspace during various flight phases. The council debated the conflicting expert opinions, the long-term implications for airport operability, and the administrative complexity of enforcing conditions.
Motion for Continuance of Conditional Use Permit CD 2026008
Dissent: Council member Wall and Council member Doring voted against the motion to continue.
Moved by Council member Palmer [1:09:44] · Seconded by Council member Frederick's [1:10:04]
Following the failed motion to approve the quarry permit, a motion was made to continue the public hearing. The purpose was to allow staff and the applicant more time to gather additional information, particularly regarding the Madison, Wisconsin airport example, to draft a feasible operations agreement for blasting activities (potentially limited to Zone C and a specific number of blasts per year), and to clarify the practical implications of coordination with air traffic controllers for unscheduled flights. The applicant expressed willingness to continue, and the city attorney confirmed the need for explicit agreement on record for continuance.
2027 Annual Action Plan Community Development Block Grant Allocations
Dissent: None
Moved by Council member Keane [1:25:35] · Seconded by Council member Doring [1:25:47]
Brent Senvi presented the 2027 Annual Action Plan for the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program, requesting the council to open the public comment period. He explained that Rochester is an entitlement community receiving annual HUD funding for community development projects focusing on affordable housing, public services, and economic opportunities for low and moderate-income persons. The steering committee recommended funding five of nine public service applications, with significant funds also allocated to housing rehab and administrative costs. The public comment period will close on November 2nd, 2026.
Notable Quotes (10)
staff are recommending denial of this proposed application. ... Our primary concerns are around the possibility of impairing visibility in the vicinity of the airport or otherwise endangering the landing, takeoff or maneuvering of aircraft.
My biggest concern is the blasting. It's 2800 ft from the end of the runway and essentially right on center line...blasting in that quarly query area really effectively eliminates what's called an LV LPV approach to runway 21.
This last report that came on Friday looked like a kill report... If they really truly were doing an independent study, they want to reference 1280 ft for the blasting potential. It's not an independent study. It's a kill report.
I've personally never seen a blast of that poor design or execution in my entire career... Blasting is a strict liability activity in the state of Minnesota. And in this particular scenario, there's a an incredible ability for that blaster to not only see the sky, but hear the sky.
when the FA increases those approach minimums, the chances of me making it into the Rochester airport decrease. And there's been many times myself I'm personally thankful for the low approach minimums that Rochester does have because a lot of surrounding airports don't have that and allows me to make that in. But if that goes away because of these Corey operations, it makes the usability of the Rochester airport much less.
I can't guarantee you that we will ever have clarity on what the full implications to the airport operation are, but you will be obligated to operate that airport for 20 years. Every time you take a dime of federal money, which you do every year, and as the airport sponsor for the airport, you have obligations to ensure its operability.
I'm looking for and I understand that this has been going on for quite some time and I really commend Mr. Reed and the airport and and the applicants working together up to this point. I do have some I'm uncomfortable about the report that came out late this week and also some of the some of the characterization of that report by by the applicant. That concerns me.
What I heard was more information regarding the Madison example, what it would take to consider an operations agreement, if that's feasible and what that might include. More information around an air traffic controller. How does this work in practice with unscheduled flights? how much notice would be received if any and more clarification around the number of blasting events per year.
The city of Rochester is a UT entitlement community. So, every year we get funding from the US Department of Housing and Urban Development um for our community development block grant program. The funding is used for a wide variety of community development projects.
It's always a tough decision because you get so much of an ask and there's only so many dollars to give out. It's it's a really hard choice to make and I kind of reviewed my scoring my scoring sheet today and I had all nine applications within nine points of each other.
Ordinances & Resolutions (11)
Item up for vote, raised concerns during public comment.
Unified Development Code regulations, referenced for compliance of proposed quarry.
FAA grant assurance on compatible land uses, applicable to airport operations.
Forms for determining impacts to the airport, initially viewed as exempt for quarry.
Blasting assessment provided by the applicant's expert.
Independent report commissioned by Rochester International Airport, detailing core implications.
Plan designating how the city intends to allocate and spend its 2027 CBG dollars.
Strategic priorities for CBG funding, adopted by the city.
The city's five-year plan for housing and community development, guiding CBG allocations.
Resolution for the conditional use permit of the proposed quarry.
Minnesota statute regarding timelines for applicant processes, which the applicant waived.
Source document
Was this story helpful?
Other Topics from This Document
City Administrator's Report
Mayor's Report
Conditional Use Permit for Limestone Aggregate Quarry (CD 2026008)
2027 Annual Action Plan Community Development Block Grant Allocations (G2)
Want to know when new stories arrive?
Enter your email to receive updates.
We will not use your email for any other purpose. You can unsubscribe at any time.