All right.

Calling the meeting to order.

It's 5 p.m.

Welcome everyone to the June 10th, 2026 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting.

This is an open comment period, a time on the agenda that allows members of the public to address the commission on items that are not on tonight's agenda as a public hearing.

If there is anyone that would like to address the commission, please do so at this time.

Please come up.

Please state your name.

Okay, again, my name is Mike Deggerstrom, the commission members.

Um I'm reading a letter on behalf of the Zemro Val and Valley Audubon Society.

We presented a letter twice over the last few weeks.

These letters are intended to make the commission better aware of our rapidly declining wildlife.

This is certainly a dismal subject.

That is why we like to celebrate when we get good news.

I've mentioned our local trumpeter swans, a species rescued from the brink of extinction.

So our local swans have successfully hatched five signets, which is a term for young swans.

Trumpeter swans are some of the largest flying birds in the world.

Just uh that family alone will likely have significant impact on keeping the marsh from becoming choked out with vegetation.

Scientists say they are providing vital ecological services.

We must strive for similar successes with all of our many species at risk.

In the last letter we presented, we say we'd begin presenting recommendations for the city to adopt.

Many solutions are common sense and cost effective.

We do not know all the areas that your commission has oversight.

As such, please let us know.

Uh again, as always, my emails on top.

Um, so let us know if any of our recommendations might be better addressed to other commissions, boards in city departments.

Um we are talking to three other boards and commissions at the city.

So our our specific recommendation tonight is that new businesses incorporate native landscaping rather than by default covering with turf grass.

This adds some upfront costs, but likely saves the company a lot in yearly maintenance costs.

It adds habitat and retains and cleans the rainwater.

Once established, deep rooted native plants hold the soil from eroding and can soak up heavy downpours.

There are many examples of uh cities already implementing similar ordinances.

Uh a nearby example worth highlighting is the Red Wing Shoe Company, located just 60 miles from Rochester in 2023-24.

The company transformed the five-point acre lawn in front of the Burnside plant into native prairie habitat, the project was designed to create pollinator corridors, uh, support grassland songbirds, sequester carbon, and restore the historical landscape of the region.

The company simultaneously joined the B City USA initiative, becoming part of the regional network of pollinator sanctuaries.

This is a voluntary initiative driven by the employee and community engagement, and the company has publicly stated its hope to inspire other local businesses to rethink their green spaces.

The Red Wing Sue example shows that when businesses are giving a framework encouragement, they often embrace native landscape enthusiastically.

A city ordinance requiring native landscaping for new commercial development wouldn't be asking businesses to do something burdensome.

It would, in fact, be pointing them towards a proven model that saves money, builds community goodwill, and delivers real ecological benefits.

We respectfully ask this commission to consider our recommendation and if appropriate, forward it to the city council as a topic for ordinance development.

We will return in a few weeks for to better describe why native plants are so important in the recovery of our ecological systems.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Is there anyone else who would like to speak in the open coming period?

Anyone online?

No.

Okay.

In that case, I will now close the open comment period and call the meeting to order.

I will take roll call.

Commissioner Ross.

Here.

Commissioner Aishin.

Here.

Commissioner Kru uh Klein.

Commissioner Jans Boehm.

Present.

Commissioner Ahmed.

Here.

Commissioner Andrist.

Here.

We don't have Commissioner Krull and Commissioner.

Commissioner Yoast.

So I heard that Commissioner Kraut is going to uh come, but he's going to be a little late.

So Commissioner Yoast is absent and Commissioner Krull is expected.

Moving on to setting the order of the agenda.

Are there any changes required for tonight's agenda?

Commissioner staff.

Anything?

If not, I will uh take a motion to approve.

Motion.

Second.

Motion made by Commissioner Klein, seconded by Commissioner Aishan.

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

Any nays?

Motion passes.

We uh move on to the consent agenda.

The commission will now review the consent agenda items.

Item 4A is the minutes from the May 13th, 2026 Commission meeting.

Has everyone had a chance to review the meeting minutes?

Any changes, comments, concerns?

Nothing.

If not, then I will uh take a motion to approve the minutes.

Motion to approve the minutes from May 13th meeting.

Second.

Motion made by Commissioner Andrist and seconded by Commissioner Boyham.

All in favor, say aye.

Uh any nays abstains.

I think I was that the meeting I had to leave where I'd recuse myself is May 13th.

That one.

Yes.

So I have to request.

Yep.

Okay.

So we have uh all eyes except one abstain from Commissioner Ross.

That concludes our consent agenda items for tonight.

Moving on to reports and recommendations.

We have one report and recommendation on the agenda.

Item 5A is a conditional use permit on a limestone aggregate quarry at approximately a quarter mile north of County Highway 30 and 22nd Avenue Southwest.

Staff, can we have a report?

Yes, uh good evening.

Uh thank you.

Uh Chairwoman Gupta, members of the commission.

Good evening.

My name is Desmond McGill.

I'll be presenting this uh application for you.

Um this is a CUP for in an aggregate uh limestone aggregate quarry uh at the location you noted, uh just north of Highway 30th or Highway 30.

Um if you don't know where that is, generally it's in the south central portion uh of the city on the far end.

Uh this is the site here uh identified there in the yellow.

That's an 80-acre site.

Um, and it's located at the north end of 22nd Avenue Southwest and east of the summit Oak Summit Golf Course, uh just north of Highway 30, and it is also east of Oak Summit.

I already mentioned that.

This is a request for a conditional use permit uh for that limestone aggregate quarry in a light industrial zoning district.

Uh the approval body for the CUP would be the city council, and our recommendation is uh for denial.

Um an approval of this application.

This is the uh process that it would go through.

We first the applicant had a neighborhood meeting.

Um and then we are here tonight at the conditional use stage.

This is just a report and recommendation.

There will be a city council uh public hearing on this matter um in about a month.

And uh then I there may be a need for a development agreement.

Uh and then um they would make their plans, their civil plan reviews uh for uh public works approval, and then be issued a grading permit.

Um terms of surrounding land use again.

There's the site highlighted in the yellow.

Uh we've got a lot of agriculture around.

We got agriculture to the south and southeast, southwest.

Uh there's a little bit of light industrial, or it's it looks like some sort of warehouse structure there right on the corner, 22nd and county road 30.

Uh, we got the Rochester International Airport on the south side of um uh highway 30, Oak Summit golf course, uh, or what used to be Oak Summit uh is off to the east.

Uh we got it's an industrial area, tow yard.

This is out in the county right now, and then we have agricultural um areas to the north and also to the east of the site.

Uh this is the zoning map.

As noted, it's light industrial.

Uh we've got a lot of light industrial down to the south, which is covers pretty much the entire airport area.

Uh immediately to the west, uh, that golf course that is uh county recreational commercial.

Uh there's also an area of industrial in the county, and then we have uh county agricultural zoning districts on the north and to the northwest.

Uh those the area in green is uh within the city, and those are that is also uh an agricultural zoning district.

Um this is our comprehensive plan.

Uh the subject site is identified as parks in open space, and there's a lot of parks and open space designation around the property uh to the east and west, uh most of the south uh side as well, and to the northeast.

Uh airport facilities are generally located on the south side of highway 30, although the city does own parcels on the north side uh adjacent to uh the subject site.

Uh we have a small employment district area, and then future um this is urban reserve, that is where a specific land use has not yet been defined or designated for the for those properties that will be determined at a at a later time when we have the ability to serve uh that area infrastructure.

And then there's some industrial further off to the east.

Um I had a question uh from uh the chair earlier about whether or not uh the map I was uh looking at was indeed uh the most up-to-date map.

Um I talked with um Brent Carlson, our city attorney uh who provided me this map.

It does look like we do show the uh correct map on our GIS system.

Uh the site is highlighted there in the yellow dashed line.

Um runway 21 is a uh the runway that we have some concern about uh uh located on the south there.

Um this is what used to be zone A.

Um, and then about a year ago, it was expanded out to um uh further north and a little bit out to the sides.

So that is the map that we have represented in our GIS and also in this presentation.

Um again here is the airport area along the north side.

Um there's the site there in uh highlighted in the white dashed line.

Um we got a couple of runways.

We have runway 13 uh and runway 31.

That's those are not the uh runways that we have concerned about.

Uh it would be runway 21 that heads up to the northeast uh that we had questions about.

Um the subject runway is approximately one half mile uh from the edge of the runway edge of runway, is about a half mile away uh from the quarry site.

Uh this is a larger view of the airport uh zoning district, just so you can get the full picture of uh of the area.

Uh again, here's runway 21.

Um got the other runways labeled here 31, 13, and 3.

Um zone C, that is the the least restrictive zone uh associated with the airport zoning district.

Um the only provision really is that there shouldn't be any structure building uh that is more than uh 1,417 feet in elevation uh from sea level.

Um essentially that would result in um if it was a you know 1317 near the airport, uh about a hundred foot structure.

Um there are no identified prohibited uses in zone C.

Uh that would be handled by our UDC and uh other land use provisions, but not through the zoning ordinance.

Uh and that is it right there.

Um zone B.

Again, they have a maximum elevation requirement.

Uh you have a three-acre lot size minimum, and the population is not to exceed 15 persons uh per acre.

I'm sorry, per per yeah, 15 acres uh per acre for the site, and one building plot location where structures may be uh erected.

Prohibited uses include religious assembly, hospitals, plannings, schools, theaters, stadiums, hotel, motel, trailer courts, campgrounds, and other similar uses.

Uh zone A, more restrictive zone.

Uh again, it still has the maximum uh uh elevation that uh that a particular structure can be.

Permitted uses identified in the in the ordinance are agriculture, horticulture, livestock, like recreation, but non-spectator, uh, cemetery, trails, and automobile parking.

Those are the primary uses that would be permitted in that zone.

Uh prohibited are any buildings, uh, overhead transmission lines and other similar land use hazards, uh, use and uses that create, attract, or bring together a person's.

I think I think I uh did not copy this down right.

Uh assembly of persons is what it's supposed to say.

Um and uh there is a definition for person within the airport operate um airport ordinance as well, uh, which is an individual firm partnership corporation company association and uh body body politic, um, trustees, receivers, assignees, and administrator.

So, and then also some of the uh folks that would be managing properties.

So again, here's the site, uh, the runway in question right here.

This is runway uh 21.

Uh we do have FAA equipment.

We're not sure what that is at the present time.

That is probably either communications or navigation equipment.

Um that's about 315 feet from the from the property corner.

Uh the area in the purple is the rock, uh the Rochester International Airport, most of it being south of um uh county road 30.

Um city also owns properties right here, so but I don't think this is actually part of the uh airport, um, the international airport proper.

Uh again, the distance to this is uh 2,845 feet or a little over uh half mile.

Uh give you some perspective.

This is uh uh county road 30.

Uh the site is identified there on the far right hand side of the screen.

Uh the FAA equipment is also very close to that site.

Uh I just kind of highlighted it there in the yellow.

There's like four four large uh somewhat large towers there.

And then the end of runway 21 is located here where in this lighter area.

You can see where that's at.

So the total distance again, half a mile from the site to the end of runway.

Um, and just to give you an idea of what that half mile would look like.

This is uh, you know, if you were standing at uh on the Zumbro River Bridge, looking northward at uh Broadway Plaza, that would be 2,845 feet.

So just kind of give you some perspective.

Uh this is the grading plans uh provided uh by the application.

Uh it's turned to the side, north is off to the left.

Uh the bottom elevation of the of the proposed facility is uh 1,210 feet.

Uh I think at its highest point uh in the highest point on the on the cut, uh this elevation appears to be about 1,1270.

So it's about a 60 foot um uh grading of the site.

Um so these are some of our uh general concerns about uh the airport.

Um this is from the um airport ordinance.

The general restrictions uh are the use of any land in any of the safety zones is prohibited if the use is uh one creates or causes interference with the operation of radio electronic facilities on the airport or with radio electronic communications between the airport and aircraft.

Um makes it difficult for pilots to distinguish between airport lights and other lights.

Uh results in glare in the eyes of the pilots, uh, impairs visibility in the vicinity of the airport uh or otherwise and endangers landings and takeoffs and maneuverability.

Um staff at the present time can't confirm that the core use is a use that would not cause these things, um, whether it be causing interruption of uh equipment uh that is fairly close, impairing vision uh with the blasting um and or endangers uh landings takeoffs uh um either by reduced visibility and or projectiles.

So uh we believe we need additional information before we can provide a positive recommendation on on this application.

So at this point, that's why we are recommending denial.

Um the FAA review did look at this.

Uh they did look at the air hazards, but that is just a review of essentially any physical structures that may be constructed and whether they cause impediment uh to air navigation.

And they did uh submit that to the applicant to the FAA.

It took several months to get that back.

Um they did respond recently and uh indicated that there was no hazard to air navigation.

However, uh, we also believe that we need an opinion from the FAA as to whether blasting could be seen as an issue.

Um so close to their equipment uh and also to the takeoffs at the at the at the uh runway 21.

Um minor uh but noted is uh potential waterfall foul attractant uh applicant is proposing a gravity-based storm system uh with a drain pipe, which will outlet to a lower elevation.

Um this should uh protect the the area from becoming uh saturated uh for too long.

Uh they uh have agreed to uh having the storm uh water drain uh within 48 hours of the storm event, which will significantly reduce risk of water flop water foul attraction.

Uh but also there would be long-term maintenance uh to ensure the system is maintained according to the approved operations, the intensity of operations, uh assemble persons.

Uh one question we also had, we don't have any information on the number of people that would be give at the site.

Um if this was a site in uh safety zone B, uh it would be they could have up to 300 employees uh or and or visitors at any given time on the property.

Um, but um uh safety zone A doesn't really provide us a lot of information other than uh uh you know if you look at the plain language, uh it indicates zone A.

Uh it appears zone A is far more restrictive to zones B based on the different uses and based on the plain language of the ordinance um and other uses described as permissible uses in zone A.

So um basically what what it indicates is is that um no assembly of person.

So um we are not sure exactly what that means.

Um, but uh it could be um that if you take it at face value, um that would be you know, maybe a few similar to um for the farming activity and/or horticulture or livestock uh uses.

Um also uh we're concerned about potential damage to the FAA equipment.

Um we need FAA to weigh in on that issue.

And um we currently cannot have risk that uh assess that risk and then impaired invisibility, visibility.

Uh and we would like to have further documentation from an expert in blasting, uh providing information on the extent of dust plumes and in terms of the area obstructed and also duration of the obstruction.

Uh and also just a general concern as well.

We we don't know if uh if it is a problem or not, project but uh potential projectiles, uh planes will be landing and taking off and fairly close to this uh area that will be uh mined.

And so when a blasting is occurring, that that is uh would be of a concern.

So in terms of the conditional use permit, um, most of these are met.

Vehicle loading or parking is not an issue.

Uh there are no pedestrian walkways, uh, so they do not need any pedestrian facilities.

Um this is the one that we feel is not met at the present time.

The operation of the use will create significant negative impacts on the surrounding area or will impose undue burdens on sewers, sanitary, and storm-drain water or similar public facilities in the public facility being namely uh the um uh Rochester International Airport.

Uh it's not anticipated.

The use will create significant significant negative environmental impacts on the surrounding area.

And there are no prior developments associated with this property, so there's no issues there.

And uh the last one, the application complies with all applicable UDC regulations uh applicable to the zone district.

Um, however, considering the the um zoning ordinance for the airport, um uh we are unable to assess whether a quarry land use is something uh you know, half mile away would be something that would not negatively impact air native navigation.

So um we don't believe that complies with that criteria either.

So our recommendation is is denial.

Um and I provided the recommended motion down below, uh, which is to forward a recommendation of denial to the city council on the quarry land use upon the subject property and adopt the findings of fact presented in community development memo dated June 10th, 2026.

Um recommendation of approval be forward, we did provide provide six conditions that we would like you to forward with uh your recommendation to the city council, uh which are on page one and two of uh the staff report.

Um that concludes my presentation.

I would also want to note that uh John Reed, the executive director of the Rochester International Airport is also here today.

Um, if you have any questions about operations um uh or the physical characteristics of the facility, um, I I think I will defer to him on what on those questions.

So uh but that concludes my presentation at this time, and I'd be happy to answer any questions after the applicant has spoken.

Thank you, Mr.

McGill.

Thank you.

Um can the applicant come up, please.

Thank you.

I'm Mark Welsh with GCUBE Engineering representing Almstet Aggregate.

Uh, we have Krista Cook, Lee Badekook, and Mike Writer all with Alpstead Avocate that maybe it'll answer some additional questions or expertise within the mines.

They have other mines that are going to have the same process for uh blasting, excavation, crushing, and hauling.

So the reason we push this forward, uh SAF did give us an option of continuing to dialogue with them to try to answer some of the questions or come today with the recommendation for denial.

And the reason we came with the recommendation for denial is uh this airport uh review has been drawn out to the point that um it's just to the point that somebody's gotta make a decision, we've got to move forward.

So our hope is that we can still get your approval or some type of recommendation that uh can move forward, but we are continuing to work with community development.

Um, give a quick brief outline of the process I got to here.

Um this project started out back in 2004, had some discussions.

Uh the property that could be mined is both in the township and the city.

So there was some discussion on that.

Uh, an environmental assessment worksheet had to be completed.

Um took a lot of 2024 to get that completed.

Uh, that was submitted last year, uh, went through uh the city council ultimately decided in this uh May, which I think was signed in June of last year, a negative declaration, which a negative declaration means that the environmental aspects do not need to be further reviewed at an environmental impact study, uh, which having that negative declaration allowed us to move forward with a conditional use permit grading plan applications.

Those were submitted, uh I think it was August 13th of last year.

Um at that time, uh we submitted grading plans and the application, and at community development asked that we come in and meet with them because there's some concerns from the airport.

Uh so we did that.

Uh, that kind of took September and into October.

Uh, then they asked that we actually make application to the FAA for the quarry under a form, I think it was 7470.

Um, that application form um ultimately was submitted, and uh, the FAA switched from paper forms to electronic forms without notification.

I believe if you go to their website right now, you can still find directions to submit the paper form.

Um, frustrating, extremely frustrating.

When we finally found that out, and that was thanks to John Reed actually doing a little research.

We found out that we had to make an application online.

We made that application in January, found out then that their new forms were not set up correctly.

Uh, we had to make application not only for the quarry, but also for the access road.

And I believe the other one was for the temporary construction.

Uh, so we've ultimately made six applications because they also found out that they can't make one application for the quarry.

We had to do four separate ones, one for each corner.

Um, working with Ashley at the FAA was actually quite positive.

She was very on top of things once it got into her system.

It just took time to get into the system.

So we ultimately got six negative or six determinations of no hazard.

Um, there was another delay because they forgot to do the process of one of them.

So another month later, we finally had all the determinations.

So we reached out to community development saying, okay, here's the FAA is no determinations.

On those no determination applications, it's specifically called out blasting of rock.

So we just feel that the FAA and airport have had the opportunity to ask the questions necessary uh regarding blasting.

And we want to move this thing forward because we were trying to get an interim grading permit a year ago so that they could do the stripping and have this thing prepped last fall for uh excavation and blasting of rock this year.

And we're now already looking at another year.

Yeah.

So that is why we're here asking for a acceptance.

Um, and we are acknowledging the six conditions that are posted.

We can work with everybody on those.

Um, after we got the report that was submitted on uh Monday, I went through and there's the two main items they have in here is the uh project intensity or assembly.

Um in the quarry, the maximum number of people there brought there'd probably never be more than a dozen people, and they probably wouldn't all be within zone A.

Um, the location of the scale shack is actually in location zone C.

Zone C doesn't have any limitations on uh places of assembly.

The area that is zone A is not outlined for assembly, but there would be no need for assembly within there.

Uh people that are working within zone A know of the uh fact that they're in the airport fly zone.

And so they're considered workers, and anybody that's working on there is probably gonna be their excavator, um uh dump truck, a crusher.

That'd be an individual piece of equipment, not in an assembly.

And the reason that they want to make sure there's nobody assembled if a plane takes off and crashes or crashes early, that they aren't knocking out 20, 30 people that are at a party.

So I don't feel that the assembly is an issue.

Um, we definitely can work with community development on some clarifications in there.

We'll provide the additional recommended uh number of people that should be working.

Um earlier they're talking that there's about four people on a crushing crew.

And then when you have trucks gathering the rock, um, you have somebody in the loader plus the additional trucks.

But in general, there's not assembly within that zone A location.

The other item was on the use of explosives.

And um the wish that uh come up earlier that they're looking specifically for a explosives expert.

Um, we've been working with the blaster that uh Almstead aggregate uses, uh, Olsen Explosives, very, very experienced people.

Um, very, very safe and knowledgeable about what uh needs to be done.

They've worked with on other airport zones.

So the information that we've been relaying to community development in the airport has been coming from Olson Explosives.

Um they work near other airports in Wisconsin, other places uh that have quarries blasting and such within close proximity, similar to this.

Maybe not as big as an airport, but same kind of provisions.

Um they're experienced with notifying the airport of when they're going to be doing the blasting.

So there can be a schedule made.

Uh, they can go in, check to see what the actual flights are, make sure that they're not going to be doing a blasting at the time that somebody's taken off or landing.

Uh, but yesterday, actually, we found a guy that um his name is Travis David Saber with Bar Engineering, and he is a um professional engineer that is a blasting expert.

And in a short conversation I had with him, he's on vacation, but he took the call.

Um, he's also a pilot.

And when I was explaining what they're looking for information, he said, I get back next week.

I can get you guys exactly what they're looking for.

And so I'd like to be able to provide a recommendation from him of the items that need to be of concern.

You know, the blasting of rock that goes up in the air, it's not going to get up to the point that an airport plane is going to get hit.

However, we can get that into a form.

They can explain how they can adjust the amount of load that they put into a blast to make sure that it's not lifting.

If there was really concerned with it, there's blasting blankets that can do it.

This guy is actually working in Rochester.

He'll be here next Thursday, Friday, because he's the guy that's in charge of the blasting taking place for the mail clinic right now.

If you don't reware, there's actual blasting taking place downtown.

If you if you weren't aware, it's happening.

So these guys know what they're doing.

They can make sure that it's a safe operation.

They can help with the protocol that's necessary to make sure that uh the agreements that we have with the city of Rochester and the airport can be followed through on.

And so we're asking for the acceptance of this request with it to be continued on to the city council meeting in that period of time.

We can provide that additional information and continue working with community development, come with a uh a good plan of that they're asking for all those six conditions.

So I'm here to answer any questions, and the DeGooks and Lake Rider are also here.

Thank you.

Okay, thank you.

Okay, so now we're open for questions and discussion.

Any questions?

Commissioner Klein.

How long do you anticipate the quarry will be in operation to dig a 60-foot deep?

Uh quarries historically take a long time.

So at least 20 years, and there's more aggregate material that's on the golf course, which is in the township area.

Uh, but uh, we could have offered in the grading plan that was submitted uh and has been resubmitted to address many of the items that were first uh called out.

Um, we have put in there that uh how we would continue to uh give updates, like as built, uh, kind of to show as they're moving towards the good core rock um how everything is adjusted for like the stormwater management.

Uh, we can't have ponding water to attract waterfall because we do have an elevation of outlet that's lower than the elevation of the quarry floor.

Um, we know that we can make it drain, and then we'd be able to keep updates with that.

So if it's 20 years or even if it's 50 years, we know that we can make this work so that it works with the airport and is a product that uh the city of Rochester needs.

Yes, please go on.

20 years.

Um, I'd have to look back at what the actual calculation was, but yes, they're they're long period.

This is not a one-year deal.

So for 20 years, you'll be digging a hole.

Eventually, though, it the hole is done.

Yeah, I'll describe the process.

So they'll start in a location, get down to a point that they have a rock face, and that rock face, then they go in and blast, and that's actually reduces the amount of potential for a lot of rock to fly up.

It actually flies and falls down.

Then they go in, load it up, crush it, and then it gets hauled out as material to use.

As they're stripping the material that's on top for the next blast, they're taking that material and putting it back in for reclamation to essentially areas that are mined out, get the uh topsoil and everything respread back on them so that they can put it back into grass.

A lot of times those are actually allowed to go back to forest or some other use.

Um, it could be put at egg, but usually unless you have a lot of topsoil, it's not a very good ag use, but it's it's something that's a reclamation and uh there's some things that are outlined in a reclamation plan, but it's a slow process.

It's like uh if you look at the mining up in northern Minnesota where they actually have a lot of area changing over in a year, it's still multiple years of uh movement of material and reclamation.

You have another question?

I guess so.

We're gonna just pick a number 30 years.

Okay.

30 years from when you start, there's this hole in the ground.

Which will drain or will need to be drained.

It can drain.

So if they I don't know if Desmond, if you can go back to one of the pictures, uh the one that was closest in on the very northeast corner, there's a uh drainage channel that runs down through.

So unlike some of the quarries that need to be pumped out of water, um, then in this situation, uh, that one would have actually in this situation, the northeast corner of the quarry, the ground right adjacent to it is 20 feet lower.

And so we'll always have a location and it could be done with a pipe, or we could just open up that corridor to allow that water to run out.

So will that water be collecting over there?

Like and this is we'll we're talking about it like at the end of the life of the quarry, right?

At end of life of the quarry, the reclamation would ensure that there is no standing water during operations.

We have to take care of our stormwater treatment.

And so there'd be a shallow basin with the intention that that be drained down, preferably within a 24 hour period to let a settlement sediment settle out.

So there's temporary holding of the water for stormwater treatment requirements, but it would not be a pond.

Um, some of the quarries around here are water features now.

It would not be a water feature.

Okay.

Any other questions?

Another question for Mr.

Reed, Setch.

Yep.

Um I get the part about the runways, but where I live, it's all helicopters.

Excuse me.

Where I live, it's all helicopters going out to the airport to fuel.

Yeah, you know, I it give you some perspective.

You know, uh average years anywhere from 50 to 55,000 annual operations for uh RST airport.

So if you pick a mid number, say 53,000, you you're in that 140 uh 145 aircraft operations daily.

That could be aircraft that are regional jets from Chicago, Minneapolis.

It could be large aircraft coming from the Middle East or helicopters.

So it's a mix of variety of um operations.

Do the helicopters affect your thinking about the quarry any differently than the aircraft?

Other aircraft.

You know, I I I think I look at the aircraft as an aircraft, they're they're flying uh uh a pattern um that's dictated probably by necessity by the air traffic control.

Um I I mean, just my biggest concern here is I haven't had the ability for of the FAA to weigh in on the effects of the blast.

And what does that do to the airport as a whole?

Um it could be nothing, it could be um uh they say um RST, you have to um issue notems and not allow aircraft to operate.

Um it may not just be to runway two one, it may be to the entire one.

I don't know.

I I gotta I I continue to work hard to try to get that answer.

We've just not been successful at this point.

Commissioner Ross.

I have a couple questions.

Um milestone materials over by the college.

Is that one of the only I mean we've got that and almost at aggregate, right?

That has rock quarries.

There's other rock quarries.

There's one on highway 63.

There's four total, right?

There's highway 63, which is just to the north and east of this on the opposite on the east side of the room.

Right, the one by highway 14 is by the college, correct?

If I'm not mistaken, milestone used to be Goldberg.

Uh, Goldberg, uh, yes, on north uh North Rochester.

So and then my other question, you mentioned something about flight schedules and stuff, and I'm just throwing this out there because I'm thinking a little bit different, I guess.

Is my question is if this were to be approved and this were to be done, right?

What about the communication with the airport to talk about here's your flight pattern?

How many flights go out on a given day?

And which days are important where you could blast on specific days and times, would it be it would have to be very strict communication?

I mean, I'm just thinking, I know that sounds kind of foolish at first, but it's a reality if we've been waiting this long for something like this, and there's limitations on stuff and people are getting charged more for product um here in Rochester specifically for their business stuff, and you've got two experts that are willing to do all this stuff.

What happens when that happens?

Okay, we've got experts that need to um the scheduling of the airports.

We I know that there's a little more flexibility in the landing, but the taking off, they're relatively on schedule in Rochester.

Uh so the blasting company, they're at most probably gonna be blasting once a week.

Um there may be a little bit more in the initial opening up of the quarry, but they have no problem going over verifying the schedule and then coordinating with the city uh the Rochester Airport to ensure that when they want to do a blast, it's available to do it.

They also the blasting is extremely regulated.

Um they have suitcases that they have to go out and set in different locations.

So they're gonna be setting up like all the seismograph suitcases sitting over by the airport uh towers and stuff, any equipment that in fact if it's equipment that the airport feels is more technical or more um uh needs to be monitored closer, could be within the airport uh grounds versus uh uh north of uh 30th or highway 30.

If need be, we can put those seismographs in those locations to monitor it uh to make sure that there is no issues.

But it is very, very I don't want to say it's a perfect science, but it's a it's a science for blasting.

So they're gonna be setting up like all the seismograph suitcase sitting over by the airport uh towers and stuff any equipment that in fact if it's equipment that the airport feels is more technical or more um uh needs to be monitored closer could be within the airport uh grounds versus uh uh north of uh 30th or highway 30 if need be we can put those seismographs in those locations to monitor it uh to make sure that there is no issues but it is very very I don't want to say it's a perfect science but it's a it's a science for blasting right so I do have one more additional thing on top of that so if we want to make a comparison and how blasting works you've got experts that are willing to do that um talking about Mayo Clinic have we talked to them I've seen the building that was going the couple buildings going down over there that are just like I mean they're perfect when they're going down right has that affected their building can we get some sort of expert that says this is this that particular company that does that which you said was their engineering right for the for bar engineering bar sorry expert uh we'll say explosives is right and it's the other one right so if they come in and say this is this is the effects how close to Gonda was that how close to whatever this is the effects of it if we're concerned about the effects of the airport not just on flights but at other issues what does that look like well I think they're totally different types of blasting because of the fact that the proximity buildings structures and stuff and so the blasting that's in a quarry is going to be a little bit I don't want to say is constrained but they still have a very specific blasting plan on what they're trying to achieve and they can adjust that.

So if there was concerns that the rock ripple would go over to the airport they can do things to adjust to how much is how much uh load that they put in and and they may have to do multiple smaller blasts instead of a one larger blast.

Thank you.

I think uh Commissioner you had a question okay commissioner boys now I've got a couple thank you uh okay so I thank you guys very much for coming in I read through your application and one of the things that I I think I'm recalling from that is that the the documentation stated that there'd be blasting at every four to six weeks am I misremembering that number so um depends on how successful how often they need and how big of the blast and how big the face is and so initially opening up the quarry it's going to take a more blasting to get that face open but yes it can actually be quite reduced.

In fact there's gonna be months that there might not be blasting because there's not a lot of aggregate that's going out but it's same sometimes in the winter they're doing the blasting and crushing into stockpile for uh the uh the upcoming construction seasons sure so theoretically it could be as much as once a week or as little as every six weeks is what I'm gathering.

Uh I don't want to give an exact answer saying I'm on the on the stand saying that yes yeah okay at most it's totally get it yeah totally get it there's no cost to it uh the the process for blasting they have to go out they have to drill it takes time to drill all those holes and so generally they try to put together a uh a kind of a matrix to achieve what they're doing and that's why it's usually once a week is because they have to be continuously drilling the whole week.

Sure.

On a housing subdivision like if they're blasting for sanitary sewer water they a lot of times will do just enough to blast every day so that those holes aren't left to you know fill with rain or anything so that's why uh subdivision if there's blasting they're probably doing it every day.

Sure.

Okay south of Bayern we're blasting once every month and a half to two months to keep up with production with the shot now we're we're working on about a 50 foot face there.

We anticipate it being very similar at the new quarry so I anticipate once we get that face established that it'll be once a month at most and then that's all relative to what we decide as far as the size of the blast right and how much material is put on the ground all factors into it as well.

But I think I might be more towards the once a month the month sure um I have a couple questions like for the city then on this or I I don't know maybe it's actually for for director read.

So when it comes to zoning they've I mean they've broken up the airport zones here into categories A, B, and C.

So theoretically zoning district A and you can't put anything in there's no assemblies but if you own a parcel that sits on let's say all three of those different land types can I literally build a school that a butt section A like right on the line or how does the how does the zoning currently spell this out I can I can answer that.

So um essentially zone B has particular assembly uses that are not permitted in zone B.

Yeah before you can you can you go to the the the zoning map showing um just I think that will help explain it.

There we go.

And okay that's and can you back it off just oh back take the colors away take the colors away yep.

Uh that one no next slide I think I sorry go to the zoning map go back.

Oh the zone yeah the one that's that I sent I want you to go to the one I sent you today.

That one okay can you I think I saw a version where you I think I saw a version where you took those colors away can can you take those colors away oh yeah.

Can you take those colors away?

Oh, yeah.

Oh, the comprehensive plan?

This this is the color I want.

So I just want to be clear though.

Um you can see that the key off to the left.

Okay.

So just so that it's clear, the zoning that Desmond had in his PowerPoint is the zoning as it is today.

The timing of this is just a little interesting, as Chair Gupta understands is the joint airport zoning board was recently convened as of early 2026.

Okay.

And the uh yes, the joint airport zoning board is recommending a new zoning ordinance for RST.

They have recommended approval, and that is currently up at Mindot for their review.

Their review is due August 4th.

Okay.

So that is not technically in place yet.

But once the new zoning is in place, okay, zone A will be shifting to the southwest.

So this parcel will look like that, right?

So you can see zone A in the orange-ish color, and uh zone B, which is in the bluish color.

This is the contemplated zoning once it's been approved by Mindot, if that makes sense.

Okay.

So this is this is proposed zoning awaiting approval.

Correct.

This this as it's displayed on the screen is the proposed zoning.

Now you can see underneath there, there's the hashed, right?

You can see where the little letter A is.

So currently zone A goes all the way out to that white line just above the A.

Zone B extends further, which is sort of the blue hash further to the northeast.

So I just want to make sure that that is that is clear.

So right now the property is either in zone A or C.

Proposed is A, B, and C.

I didn't know that.

I thought what we was seeing in the presentation was the finalized zoning.

What we what you saw in the presentation is as it is today, but it is not what is being proposed, and literally is just probably two months or so from being enacted.

Okay.

Okay.

Thank you.

So how I'm so my question, I think still stands.

So like zone C is significant significantly less restrictive.

And there's not anything currently written that I saw that had anything to do with blasting, right?

It doesn't have restrictions on assemblies, it just has restrictions on building heights, correct?

Correct.

Okay.

And so the new stuff that's coming through, are there any impacts to that?

So I would just say that um there are certain restrictions for each zone A, B and C, zone A being the most restrictive, okay.

But there are also general use restrictions, okay.

Um so the general use restrictions are basically you can't have anything in any of the zones that's gonna interfere with um visibility, radio communications, um, or otherwise in dangers the landing, taking off, or maneuvering of the aircraft, right?

So even if you're in zone C, you can't put some big spotlight up in the air, likely.

Um like you might see at a movie theater at a grand opening for the mall or something like that.

You still can't do that, right?

Even though a mall might be allowed in that area, you can't put up something that's gonna interfere with correct, sure.

You know, okay.

So but as it stands, um, and he had a slide that spelled that out.

So Desmond, thanks for putting that information in.

Um, but as it stands, the the the facts we're hearing now are what we expect to be true on August 4th.

They're they're true today and they will be true on August 4th.

Okay.

Okay.

Less restrictive than it currently is today.

I do agree with that, yes.

Commissioner Hammond.

Thank you for clarifying that.

Uh one of the things that I want to know a little bit more about.

Well we do want to know make some progress here.

One of the things I do want to know is uh obviously RST has done a significant job in having increased number of flights going through that path, as well as really bringing up the uh commercial viability of local rochester.

So that part is great.

Um in a blast zone, um I've been uh I was at a spy house recently, actually about a week ago when one of them went off and it was fairly significant, but one of the things I didn't see was a dust come up.

So in a flight taken off, right?

And especially uh the impact of a blast is really what I'm wondering, not only about its radius, but also its material output, the dust makeup when it comes to visibility on planes, it is fairly crucial that we're not running into any sort of safety issue related to it, right?

The dust makeup when it comes to visibility on planes, it is fairly crucial that we're not running into any sort of safety issue related to it, right?

It's so what's the actual blast radius, the uh uh impact from the dust, the uh any environmental aspects that come up and that may reduce visibility of a pilot being able to navigate that area.

So the blast radius would be within the property within the quarry limits.

Okay, and the dust, there's very little dust created in the blasting.

Um I equate it to kind of like if uh you were saw a truck going on a gravel road.

Yeah, it's probably gonna be less than that.

Uh just because of the way the the blast is done, it's not opening up a bunch of lot of fines.

You're taking a solid rock, and so you can have a little bit of dust uh from the very top surface, but it's again very, very limited amount of actual material to become airborne.

Okay.

So one question from me.

Uh, can the FA how uh how much at risk will the FFA equipment be?

I know uh we went over it briefly, but what's your take on it?

Yeah, um, unless there's something extremely sensitive in that equipment that's at the end, which more than likely is radar, it could be radio, uh say um frequency or um not I don't want to speak on what the equipment is, but very low risk.

Um we're gonna have the same uh concerns for the building site that's right beside there, uh the well that's right beside there uh on the uh property that's owned by the golf course.

And uh essentially again, they're going to be doing the blasting to ensure that they're not causing damages off site.

Uh so we will need to find out if there's anything special about that equipment that uh I can't imagine there's any kind of gyrometers or anything like that in there that would would go off whack.

But those are things that uh again, we've had a year.

Uh they they there could have been comments on the EAW, understand that's an environmental worksheet, but we went through the process with the FAA and we got no comments back, knowing that there's blasting.

So I just I feel that we may be trying to find a problem that's not there.

And we want to push this thing forward.

But unfortunately, our expert we just got in contact with yesterday.

Uh so we were gonna have Olson explosives come and kind of explain some things, and they were like, you know, we're not the best because we are not an independent third party.

So we found this engineer that will be able to provide that documentation.

Okay, Commissioner Anders.

Yeah, I know it's a weird question, but I was just down at the Gonda and they blast every day, 1150.

Um, will that blast be very similar?

What you feel?

Uh I would say you shouldn't be out there at the airport to feel it.

And the airport shouldn't feel like I'm just saying in the Ghondah, I was in the basement of the Ghana when it off.

I mean it's again significant.

I don't want to I don't want to uh summarize the blasting that's taken place downtown other than uh acknowledge there is blasting downtown.

Um it's gonna be different.

But again, um I've been around a lot of blasts for uh subdivisions uh years ago.

Um I was around blasts in rock quarries, and they were not you know put your arms up and hold you on fall down.

They were kind of like, oh okay, it's done, we can go back to work.

Yeah, this it wasn't bad.

I was just curious, and that was relatively close to the blast.

I mean, probably 200 feet.

Yep.

So just I guess respective it's a half mile away.

I'll ask Mike on your guys' protocol when it is a blast, um, you do uh the air horn goes off, but do you have a specific distance that everybody makes sure that they're distant?

That's dictated by old sort of explosives.

Uh they come in and they tell us where our crew has to stand for the blast to ensure that they're out of you know, safe distance from that.

And of course, that changes every time we blast because that as we move the face, but they're very strict about that.

The gates shut, no trucks come in and out, everybody has to be accountable for a safe distance communication.

Um so Commissioner Ross has a question.

Do you have a question?

Okay, okay, Commissioner Ross, you go first.

Real quick, just to clarify, there's no residential people, there's nobody living in around this area, correct?

Just want to clarify.

I know the answer is yes, but I want to hear it.

Yeah, on the uh there's no residential people on the Oak Summit Golf course, there is residence.

But they're not that close.

They're the airports closer to actually what 400 feet west of the entrance to that's what I thought.

Okay.

Just wanted to clarify that part of it.

And so, I mean, obviously from Ghondda, how far do we think that blast was from you?

Do you think a little rattle?

Okay.

If I could weigh in if you don't mind before every blast, we have uh a resident that is ready across the drama road from our current quarry less than a quarter mile with a seismograph up in his front yard, and it does not read anything.

Thank you every time.

But to say that you may not get a little shimmy in a window, but it doesn't read on a seismograph.

I mean, if you blink, you're gonna miss it.

Thank you.

That's exactly what I mean.

Nope, that was my question.

It's a big hole.

When you're at a pit, like this is your face, the drill holes up here.

You drill holes up here.

They blast, this just tips down.

Yeah.

You know, wide open air.

So there's no constriction when you're in a hole, you're gonna vibrate much more.

Oh, here it's just boom, this whole process is less than 10 seconds.

The energy pushes out to the air versus over there that's actually pushing out and up.

So uh, Mr.

Clanson.

Yeah, I guess I would just add, um, I take off my lawyer hat a minute and put on my pilot hat.

Um one thing the airport is concerned about is what's called a TFR, which is a temporary flight restriction, um, which basically prohibits airplanes from flying in a particular area.

So, for example, tomorrow uh in Kewaton, Minnesota, which is just west of Hibbing, they're gonna be doing blasting in the mine.

Uh, and there is a TFR that's been issued um for that mine uh tomorrow.

And that blasting uh will be occurring.

The TFR is for two hours tomorrow.

It goes up to 4,500 feet and it's a two-mile radius, so four miles wide total, two miles out from the center of the blasting.

Okay.

Um so what we don't know at this point is whether or not a TFR would need to be issued um for this particular blasting.

Uh and the concern is is if a two-mile radius TFR or even a one-mile radius TFR had to be issued, whether that's for 30 minutes or that's for two hours, that shuts the entire airport down for that particular period of time.

So I think the the real sensitivity to this particular site is its proximity to the airport.

There are a lot of other quarries, um, especially southwest of Rochester, right?

That they're mining limestone, but they don't have this proximity to the airport.

Um, so that's really one of that is really probably one of our main concerns is I I don't think we're doubt that they're gonna do the they've hired professionals to do the blasting, they're gonna do it safely, all of those things, but we just don't know.

Like, is the airport gonna be shut down for a period of time while this blasting occurs?

So I just wanted to put that sort of perspective before you.

So, how come FAA has not chimed in on the TFR?

Um while they did the review.

I'll let Mr.

Reed answer that question.

Yeah, you know, I think you know, the the the gentleman, the engineer did refer to the form 7460, and it's really set up to for the FAA to and and throughout its entire line of businesses to look at obstructions.

That's what it's really meant to do.

Um it's also a tool for them to evaluate uh offhand things such as blasting.

They just didn't get it to the right place, and rather uh the federal government had a problem.

That's all I can say.

You know, they had a lot of time over the last year where they weren't working.

So I my big ask here is just give us a little more time to begin to work with the FAA.

I'd remind the board and the group here when it goes to council.

What I would say is the FAA is our regulatory body.

They're also our funding body.

Um we sign grant assurances every year, serious grant assurances and one of those grant insurance 21.

Um that's got to do with compatible land uses.

Now the FA is not gonna tell you blasting is good or bad.

They're gonna tell you the ramifications in their world, which could be uh a notice to airmen, it could be temporary flight restructions, or they could say, you know what, you need to shut your airport down.

So I caution you when you move this item forward.

Give me time.

I'll work, continue to work with the city attorney, see if we can work even harder to get their attention.

I'm not against, but I gotta know before I say yes or no.

That's my only real statement here.

Um we use quarries all the time.

I guarantee your quarry put a lot of limestone in our runways and taxiways.

I get it, I understand it.

But I do agree with um um the city attorney, it's 2800 feet from the end of a runway.

I don't know if that affects one runway that affects all of those runways, but I do know aircraft are gonna be passing over that.

And if they're blasting at that time, they're gonna be somewhere in that 250 feet range above that.

It's gonna affect the airport as a whole.

Um, airport is about a billion dollar asset.

We're pouring about a hundred million into that runway that they're gonna be right off of right now.

I caution just for the time being, give us a little more time.

Let us see what the ramifications are.

That's exactly what if I can chime in on what I wanted to know is actually let's just take a hypothetical example and have it uh a TFR issued for a single event.

What's the ramifications of that consequentially downstream?

I can actually tell you right now that we would not be looking at any blasting that would require that.

Keywattin, Minnesota is uh iron Range.

Um when they do blasting up there, um, it's amazing.

Uh they're drilling holes that are probably 18 to 24 inches in diameter, and they don't care because there's nobody living within two and a half miles, probably.

Um, so it's a different not apples to apples comparison.

Um, the one thing is I'd really like to be able to get this letter from Mr.

David Saber because he's also pilot.

And so when I talked to him, he was like, this is not a problem.

We can get this taken care of.

Um, so you know, I have concerned about waiting on the FAA.

We've had about 10 months of waiting on the FAA.

Um, somebody should have been able to get an answer to us by now, especially through the permitting process.

We want to move this thing forward.

Um, at least get us to the point that we can continue working on these conditions because what I'm concerned is that we're gonna wait another six months for the FAA to come back that no issue, and then we're gonna be working on these conditions, and we're gonna be another year out.

And that's my concern, and that's why we're asking essentially to move this thing forward, even though staff recommends denial.

We can work with staff on this, but we gotta have FAA step it up or come up with a reason.

Go to Chicago.

No, I believe O'Hara, I believe there's a quarry right outside of airport.

Okay, Commissioner Crowd.

Mr.

Reed, what's the timeline you're thinking for FAA feedback here?

Yeah, a good question.

You know, I've reached out to our contact at the Minneapolis ADO.

She has moved this all the way up to the regional administrator.

Um if anything, uh Brent and I will begin to write a letter to that regional administrator asking for some action.

Again, I can't give you a timeline.

I I don't drive the federal government.

I don't drive what their biggest needs are, but I would say that the municipality is the owner of this airport.

Um you should heed caution at the moment.

And you know, I understand the necessity and the desire to go.

I get it.

I I do take your time.

It's gonna be there for a very long time if you say yes.

Um, and if we do say yes, and it comes with all these parameters, we got to live with that for a long time for their sake and ours.

So let's let's do the right thing.

And I get it.

The FA is taking too long.

I don't disagree.

You're not the only one in the room that would agree to that, but we've got to give them time.

Conditional.

And then this might be a two-part question.

Desmond, can you read the six conditions for the alternative motion as well, please?

Uh yeah, sure.

I think they were on a slide.

Did I have them on a slide?

They were, but they weren't calling us.

Oh, I apologize.

Well, let me go to the Snap report.

Condition number one is okay.

Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall receive approval for uh civil plans, grading plan, storm water management plan.

This is actually one of our standard conditions.

This is um something they will have to get approval of their um civil improvement plans from our public works department.

So um, yep.

The condition two is uh applicant shall provide an update to the submitted application documentation that includes specific information regarding the activity occurring on the site, how many employees and construction contractors could be assembled on the site at any given time.

Uh additional documentation included shall provide um an assessment by an explosives and engineer having credentials in the area of drilling and blasting.

Uh condition three is an operations agreement executed by the applicant in the city to include plan controlled explosions, only occur outside of scheduled flights.

Uh requirement to notify the airport within 48 hours of a planned control explosion, and then hours of operation.

Condition four prior to the commencement of operations, the applicant shall obtain approval from community development director for quarry closure and reclamation plan.

The quarry closure and reclamation plan shall be prepared by a qualified professional and submitted to the city for a review and approval.

The approved closure reclamation plan shall be implemented in accordance with the approved milestones, and the site shall not be permitted to remain in a condition that allows for the creation of permanent lake or other water impoundment.

The plan shall include closure milestones, defined phases, timelines of cessation, extraction, site stabilization, grading, and final reclamation.

Um final condition of site, specific measures to include ensure that the quarry floor and surrounding areas are restored to a stable, non-hazardous condition, uh, including but not limited to filling, grading and or drainage improvements necessary to prevent the formation of permanent surface water bodies.

Umsection C monitoring and reporting.

Milestone shall include monitoring intervals, reporting requirements to verify progress towards reclamation, and then D would be financial assurance to reach that financial uh reclamation.

Umigate dust contration, uh excuse me, dust creation from the 22nd Avenue Southwest uh right away by ensuring the page section maintain is maintained uh into the future uh to hold dust down as well as placement of chlorophied on remaining gravel to the north.

And then condition six was include an interim and long-term plan to maintain dry operations, ensuring drainage of standing water within the 48 hour period.

Uh that concludes the the conditions of approval that we asked to be forwarded if this item is recommended for approval.

Thank you.

Um and so with the exception of this FAA piece, Mr.

Reed, does this satisfy is this satisfactory to you with the exception of that FAA item to be determined?

Yeah, I think once we get at least uh some indication from the FAA, I think it would be bears further discussion.

If the this decision is to go forward about an operational plan, it's more than just us in this room deciding that it's um the FA as a whole, it's air traffic control, it's um aviation safety groups.

It's it's a pretty it's a pretty big uh group of people we'd need to bring into that mix given its proximity to the airport.

So I would reserve that.

Yeah.

So what I'm hearing there, and also the desire for stability in this path moving forward.

Attorney Carlson, is there the freedom of our body to add a seventh condition of approval, adding that in there relating to the FAA?

Actually, can I ask one question?

What is the process?

Like uh the Kiwaten mine.

I I don't know.

I know what the process is.

Well, that's good, but you're not the FAA.

I understand.

But they so you can't weigh in at that level.

They have to get approval from the airport.

So if our conditions don't allow that, the non-factor.

I can't say yes or no.

I'm not the FAA, I'm not the aviation safety body.

Does that make sense?

So I don't know what they're gonna say here.

Please go through me.

Let's let's take the conversation.

That's what we my point was that uh the operations procedures that we'll have in place would not allow for a mine blast of what took place at Kiwatan, because we essentially would have to make applications that the airport would not approve.

Which mine are you referring to?

The Kiwatan mine, which is a uh iron ore mine uh where they have like 18-inch holes and blasts with the the what the one the restriction that uh uh Mr.

Calsen is referring to.

Yeah, well, it's a restriction that shuts down the airport for a set period of time.

Yep.

I'm saying is so you will not be allowed to have that kind of a blast here.

The application for that has to be routed through an airport for approval.

If the airport doesn't approve that shutdown, it can't happen.

So even if we requested that through the processes that the blasting company has, if they don't get approval from the airport, it's a moot point.

And so all of their blasting has to be within a threshold that would not require that higher level of scrutiny or shutdown of the airport.

Okay.

Mr.

Reed, yeah.

I was just gonna say, is this a are you able to answer any or add anything to it, Mr.

Reed?

Again, no, I mean I need input from the the regulatory agency.

That's my only ask, really.

And then I'm open to discussion post that I'm understanding of like the sun attorney.

Um essentially, this is a dispositive question, right?

We're talking about airport safety zone or not.

As much as we want this to move forward as quickly as possible and uh is beneficial, it is dispositive in the sense that if there is a safety airport concern, I think that becomes higher up there, right?

And in terms of the assessment of head counts, blast radius, all the aspects that go into it, and the unpredictability of the FFA currently, I think that also brings in a conditional aspect to it.

Like as much as I want this to move forward, uh I do have a pause here in that a shutdown, even a temporary shutdown of this airport has ramifications that are significant beyond even the revenue that would and benefit that would apply from the quarry.

Am I understanding that correctly?

And it can go to Mr.

Reed.

We would never get to that point of being allowed to do something that shuts down the airport.

Yeah.

We're not asking for anything that would allow for that.

We're willing to put that into a condition of the approval that we would never ask that the airport have their operations impacted due to the operations of the court.

They need to weigh in, but they need to do it in a timely manner.

Ten months is not a timely manner.

Well, it's not in our control.

But yeah, my my one point that I want to bring up is that the airport also functions in an uh unscheduled way.

There are uh you know, there are delay, flight delays.

Flight is delayed by two hours.

You can't delay it by another four hours because the quarry is in operation, right?

And then there are emergency uh situations where flights from some place X are devoted to this place, but that you know the quarry is in operation.

So one question is how quickly can the quarry shut down if you get an emergency notification from the airport.

It has nothing to do with that, it's actually just the scheduling for blasting.

There's gonna be more weather events that affect airports, this airport than blasting events.

We control the blasting events.

Yeah.

So I mean, if you're in full operation as at a at a time, and you know, you you get notified that the airport really needs to land a plane here, or we really need to take off.

So I mean, how what what is your uh response time to that?

Well, that's part of the portions that can be in the conditions, but I would assume that it's gonna be very, very easy to control when that is, and they can they probably could do the blast from the airport uh because it's a remote.

They it blast from the airport?

If they could schedule the blast probably from within the airport control room, if that's what it is.

So we just won't blast.

You got plans, we won't blast.

Um excuse me.

I'm curious to the city staff.

Is there a way we can postpone this until we get?

I mean, I think what we need to know here, right?

Is we have to have the findings from the blast experts, and I think the FAA needs to weigh in.

Yeah, so I don't want to deny something that and I mean, obviously this is important work, but I think there's also knowledge that needs to be brought to the table before we impact something this big, such a huge community asset.

Yeah, I mean, it would be great if we could put have a 60-day pause and hope that the FAA gets us something in reasonable time.

Uh, when this application first started, though, uh, we did um uh pause the application for a period of 60 days.

Um, so I believe if the applicant wants to move it forward with a recommendation, that that would be I think Mr.

Conson has something to say.

I'll just say um Minnesota Statute 15.99 requires the city to make a decision on this within 60 days.

Okay.

That can be extended up for an additional 60 days, or the applicant can waive the timelines altogether.

And the applicant in this particular situation did waive those timelines.

However, um, community development did give them the option of continuing this hearing, uh, or not not bringing it to the commission tonight, um, and waiting to get the input from the FAA that we feel that we need, or bringing it tonight.

And the applicant chose to bring it tonight.

So the only way I would feel comfortable with this commission continuing this matter without voting yes or no tonight is by getting consent on the record from the applicant.

If the applicant, that's the only way um that this can be continued tonight.

Um with consent with the cons with the clear consent of the applicant saying yes, we would want this continued.

Otherwise, if they don't consent, I would not feel comfortable with this body um continuing the matter.

Okay.

Uh, Commissioner Ross.

Going back to Commissioner Kroll, you made a comment about adding a condition.

Thank you.

But FAA.

I think that needs to be in there.

Um, if that's something we can do, because I think that's very important with Sareed speaking on it.

All of us are still kind of on the fence about different things because of that.

I'm not concerned about bar and Olson and all of that.

I understand all of those things.

But I'm thinking that the concern is safety of pilots and planes, and for us to all sleep at night, I think that's the what we need to do, but they also need to act in urgency, yet we have no control over what they do.

However, whoever this lady is, FAA that keeps pushing things forward, she might need to get pushed a little bit further then because urgency is these guys have been wanting to blast for a long time, is what it sounds like.

And we're not looking for technicality, we're looking for some action.

Thank you.

So if we as a company decide to extend that, you said 60 days, and you said an additional 60, so 120.

What happens if the FAA still doesn't get back to us then?

So the so ma'am, sure if I may.

Uh-huh.

So the the 60 days is is long over, right?

So if the applicant were to, you know, the 60 days.

I mean, I think you applied what in maybe September.

I believe it was uh October was the extension or the right yes, the continuation of request from our side.

So the timelines have run in 2025 long ago.

Okay.

Um so it's not like if the applicant continues we we don't know how long the FA is gonna take.

We could get an email from them to next week.

It could take three, four or five more months.

We just we just don't know.

Um John feels that it's it's going, you know, it's getting to the right people that it needs to get to, but we just have no idea how long that's gonna take.

So uh uh if if we uh if we pass on uh a denial right now, what happens to them to their project?

It gets shelved.

No, the next step is it goes to council.

So it would go to city council July 6th, Desmond.

Yes, um, and it would be a public hearing the public hearing, um, just like we're having here tonight, and the ultimate authority would be the the the council.

Yep.

And Desmond may ask if there was still a couple of questions to be answered.

Our our hope is this gets answered in the next three weeks, but at that point we can still ask for continuation.

Uh uh yeah, you can you can ask for the continuation as the applicant.

So our our hope is that the answers can be made in the next three weeks here, um, especially with the expert witness uh information from the blasting who is also a pilot.

Um and that's why we're asking this continue this, whether it's a recommendation for denial, we're going to city council, a no recommendation or a recommendation of approval with the conditions or additional conditions.

But I think the additional conditions you're um talking about is actually item that would be part of the conditions of approval anyway.

Yeah.

And agreement with the city and airports.

Um I'd like to make a motion.

Continuation would mean like another 60 days.

Actually, we we do not want to do it.

We've already done the continuation.

Yeah, you you're done with the 60 days, but what what was it that uh Mr.

Carlton's cousin said about consent from them?

Yeah, I I don't think the applicant and Mr.

Welch can be very clear with you this, but they want you to make a decision tonight.

What I'm hearing is that you then appear to votes.

Can I make a motion?

Okay.

So I think you know, I make a motion, then it gives the opportunity for discussion.

I think in what I'm gathering, I just want to make sure here that uh you guys, I want to be really clear, right?

Like we want to work with you on this.

Okay.

But Madam Chair, I move um to forward a recommendation of denial to the city for quarry land use upon subject property, and I adopt the findings of fact as presented in the community development memo dated June 10th, 2020.

Is there a second?

Second, second.

Motion made by Commissioner Boyam and seconded by Commissioner Klein.

Discussion.

On the discussion points, I just want to be clear, you guys.

Like I think what I'm hearing from you is that this denial allows you to get to the next step.

And what I just heard from the city is that the city council is the final decision body, so they can overturn this if in three weeks if you have those findings, right?

I think that that does make a material difference.

But as of right now, I think from where I stand, the lack of those findings is a it's a very big uncalculated risk on part of the city.

I don't doubt that you guys have really great expertise and that your opinions are true on this.

I think we just need to hear it from the FAA and from the experts themselves.

Second your opinion.

Yeah.

So again, and I'm just gonna give you a rob averages because some days there's nothing.

Yeah, someday there's a five.

So about 145 a day.

Um is uh is an average on 53,000 annual operations.

Um it just depends on the wins.

Um and it also depends on the the the ones of the pilot as to what runway they use.

The pilot had the ultimate control of that.

Yeah, it could not right now.

How much is runway two one getting well none right now because it's it's under full construction, has been uh for an extent period.

How long has that been closed?

Um that runway's been fully closed for a little over a year prior to schedule because uh all right.

We have a motion.

We have a motion here.

So uh any other discussion needed on it.

So um, so I'm gonna take a roll call and uh take votes.

Commissioner Ross.

The motion is for denial.

Uh no, nay.

Nay?

So uh it's a double negative double negative, so double negative.

So what exactly because you're saying you're denying it because of the findings that but they're gonna come back with the findings and it has to go to city council, so I have to prove a denial so that they can come back to city council is what you're saying.

Yes.

So the motion is the with the recommended motion on 5A motion to forward a recommendation of denial for this to the city council for a quarry land use upon the subject property.

Okay.

And adopt the findings of fact as present on the community development memo dated June 10th, 2026.

This allows it to continue moving forward to council for the whole time.

That's what I want to do.

Okay, good.

But if there's gonna be that seven, are we gonna add something to this though too?

No, because we're okay.

I'll prove it.

So council can still take that up when they have it.

So what's your vote?

Yes.

I okay.

Uh Commissioner Ration.

Aye.

Hi.

Commissioner Klein.

So it's I for denial.

I for denial.

Yes.

Commissioner Krell.

Hi.

Commissioner Bohem.

Aye.

Commissioner, I've forgotten the name.

Commissioner Amick.

Hi.

And uh Commissioner Andrist.

Aye.

And I am also an aye.

So the motion passes unanimously for a denial.

I do want it.

Okay.

So that's okay.

It was hard.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Thank you.

Yeah, thank you guys very much.

Thank you.

Okay.

So what's next?

Okay.

Just let no.

Can we thank uh commit Mr.

Reed for the case?

Mr.

Reed, thank you for coming tonight.

Thank you.

All right.

So uh going on to public hearings.

We have one public hearing on tonight's agenda.

After staff have given their report on an item, uh we can call each member of the public.

Item 6A is a request for major modification CD 2026 005 MOD by tiny giant LLC seeking relief to the buffer yard requirements related to the UDC neighborhood protection standards and usable recreation area.

Can we have uh uh okay staff?

I understand that the applicant has requested a continuance on this item to the June 24th Planning and Zoning Commission.

So um what do we do here?

Um just from a staff's perspective, we support their request.

Okay.

There were some issues that came up during the site plan review that caused some uh concern about how we would proceed forward with this modification request.

Okay.

Uh I believe those comments uh that came from the fire department have been since addressed.

Um and it won't result in uh massive changes to to their proposal.

Um so um we think that we'll be ready to bring it forward back on the 24th.

Um the applicant has requested this uh this continuance.

Um so we can get everything all our our ducks lined up.

So do I need to open the public hearing for this?

Um you can, and but if you do, I would highly suggest uh maybe opening it up the following meeting.

Uh Brent.

So I'll open up the public hearing for this, but this has the request is to have a continuance.

I I would be reluctant to open up.

I think they're only entitled to one public hearing at this stage.

So I I would be reluctant to open up the public hearing if the request is for a continuance.

Okay, a movement.

Say that again.

Make a motion.

Well, I think we should make the motion.

Yeah, I'll make a motion to continue application CD 2026-005 MOD to the following planning and zoning commission meeting on June 24th, 2026.

Second.

Uh motion made by Commissioner Krull and seconded by Commissioner Boyham.

Uh, any discussion on this?

All in favor, say aye.

Aye, aye.

Aye.

Any nays?

Motion passes.

So we move on to the other business, city council recap.

Yeah, um, we had a meeting on uh June 1st.

We just had one item that the planning commission had considered um uh that had been forwarded to the city council.

That was for the uh West Meadows uh subdivision, the fourth phase.

Um, and uh that was approved by the city council.

It was the seven, I think seventeen third, about 15 lots, a couple of uh out parcels, and uh for um wetlands and also storm drainage and what have you.

Um so that was approved uh by the city council unanimously.

Okay, okay.

Any other business?

I do have some, so I'm gonna talk about something that I've that I've been thinking about.

So um just like the council initiates action, CIA.

I would like the ability to initiate an action to update the UDC.

So uh do we need to first take make a motion and vote on it so that we can move forward with it or can I Desmond, do we have our five-year review of the UDC and updates coming up soon, or when does that process begin?

Because I know we've discussed it here, but we we don't really know when it's starting.

Yeah, we do it essentially every year, but they're usually minor modifications if we're bringing it forward as staff.

Um so but I think in five years, let's see, we adopted it in 23.

I think there was supposed to be sort of a more robust uh review after a five-year period uh of the provisions in there.

So most of the things we're working on right now are just sort of you know making it more legible or easier to read or what whatever it might be.

So we're providing clarifications.

Um so we're probably about two years out, I think, from from bringing forward.

No, it doesn't answer that well.

Uh additionally, as mentioned, we do annual updates, and I think I mentioned that last time.

Um we're likely looking at bringing considerations to council at a study session in the fall this year.

Uh Brent left the room, but I do think there are limitations, frankly, per what you're asking, asking chair, to change your authority to be able to do that, because I don't believe that's necessarily the case to make recommendations.

Um, but I want to confirm that.

So I would just caution that we would want to confirm.

Nonetheless, we're we're certainly still gathering all this feedback period informally, but you're asking for a formal authority to do so.

So hopefully that answers your question.

Yeah.

Um I mean, I is a do you think Karen, do you think it's possible that they could make um um a motion to send something up to the plan uh city council for them to start an RCA or I'm sorry, council action form if they concur with uh with the the findings of the uh the planning commission that something should be brought forward or or generally uh commissions have the ability to make recommendations, they can be written, right?

This is our position as this board, we are sending it to council.

I I'm not sure if the the process to a CIA necessarily is is clear if they can go through that process because individual council members have to get a certain amount of folks to sign in for it.

So I don't think there's a clear pathway to do that, and we should probably consider that.

Uh I I can say with certainty that you can document recommendations and pass that along to council.

Okay.

So whenever a UDC um changes come to us as a presentation, we do vote on it, and that goes to council for a final vote.

Yes.

Yeah.

Okay.

So yeah, I mean, whatever it is, I would I would like to initiate some changes to the UDC.

And even if it has to be approved by council, that's fine.

Um so I think the formal method for that is to refer to committee, right?

So can we we can refer those things to the decision making body?

Okay.

Okay.

So would we want to come back with anything in particular related to the UDC or I I do have some changes that I want to recommend for the UDC.

And uh it I think originated from the uh Zoom Robity Auto One Society coming to present to us.

And last time I asked the question, what happens to, you know, the the uh there's wildlife using an area for breeding and all, and once they move off, it's it's prime grounds for development.

So where do they go?

They go somewhere else.

So uh that got me thinking, and what I and along with all the transit problems and all, what I want to recommend is that whenever a new development goes on in the city, we uh along with sewer and along with roads, we also make sure that we can provide public transit so that the developer can get away with fewer parking spaces and instead save like 5% of the land for wildlife wildlife habitat.

So, you know, it costs the developer less.

It's greener for greener because of wildlife habitat, and it is also greener because there's public transit, which is less intense on the environment.

And interestingly, uh Mike today, when he presented on on the uh on the uh uh on the ecology of the area, he also touched upon this.

Um businesses incorporate native landscaping rather than by default covering the turf grass, or you know, in my case, what I'm saying, saying parking spaces.

So these are some changes that I would like to recommend to UDC.

I know it's very very it really hinges on where on budgeting for transit.

So uh, but you know, we need we need to start including transit as all like required when we build new almost like a utility that it needs to be present in order to approve or or within a certain distance.

Yes.

I I think what I'm thinking uh is this is uh unique from our usual process, right?

Uh staff uh consider a lot of different um options when they're making recommendations, certainly even to council for feedback before it goes to vote, right?

Um so I think with what you are providing, what we would want.

We'd want I think what would be ideal, frankly, is there's there's a lot of impacts to what you're suggesting, right?

That we would want to find a way to communicate for consideration before we would bring a recommendation and staff might not support the recommendations.

We'd want to communicate that, right?

So I think would be ideal is if you considered what you're looking to achieve and um if staff could consider that and bring it back to commission, right?

So you described uh that you're trying to find ways to reduce environmental impacts essentially.

Um and and we would want to hear from the entire commission, right?

Do you generally support and we would want this documented?

So I think that's what we want to know.

Um we often hear uh uh suggestions from individual council members on what they would like, and we have to sort of weigh what's going to be supported fully.

So that's my concern with this idea.

I think uh I'd like to know that would be my recommendation is can staff have time to consider kind of what you're looking to achieve and your suggestion uh so we can weigh in on that and get overall feedback from the commission.

And then we would schedule that as an item on whether or not we would forward it as an RCA to city council or council initiated.

Okay.

Okay.

Yes, Mr.

Boone.

Thank you.

Uh one of the discussion points we had a couple weeks ago when the when the representatives from the TDM group came here um was whether or not we could get findings that represented the TDM interests when we saw our requests for um for approvals and for variances and all the other things that come to this committee.

Um I kind of feel like that might be a solution to this.

If we could see something that helped us align with kind of the long-term vision for the future states of um and modes of transport, then we could think more carefully about those things when we do make zoning decisions and when we approve changes to land use, etc.

Um it's just a a thought I'm having about this.

So maybe just an additional section in the findings from from city staff when we get those applications.

I'm pausing to make sure I'm understanding your suggestion here, which it is it's I believe would be a code change to say we want the findings to also reflect information that support the long range plan alignment essentially as it relates your example is TDM.

Yeah, so the the TDM document is the one that we saw.

So I guess the what I was thinking about was having the TDM plan sort of incorporated into the into the assessment that comes from the city to say either it is or is not in alignment with the TDM.

Does that make sense?

It makes sense.

I it's something that's contemplated when we provide those applications, but you're asking for it to be documented as a finding.

So I'm I'm tracking, and that's feedback you're providing to add to the list.

Got it.

Yeah, I it what I'm thinking is that it it also is a potential solution to what uh uh chairwoman Gupta just mentioned.

So it would be something we could use in every application we get to think carefully about managing modes of transportation.

I have something completely unrelated.

Since the city updated the website, we no longer have access to the full agenda packet, it's just the agenda, and then we have to click through the link.

Can we please bring that because like when I had you read out the the thing, I can't easily find it.

Right.

Um, and it was just a lot easier to access, go through, get that comprehensive viewpoint before the meetings versus going through clicking the links, jumping back to another link.

Can we bring that back?

It still has the category, it's just not linked.

We can't commit solutions, but we can pretty fast it all of our pay trade.

Thank you.

I just have one thing.

Um I get what everybody's saying, but one of the toughest things for the city of Rochester is to speed up the process.

And I'm just being I I have a building that we had, and it no offense, Desmond, it took forever to get through the process.

So I'm not trying to, and I'm not saying all those things are not important, but I'm just trying to tell you that is one big restriction for developers in this area is the process to get from A to B.

And I I'm not blaming anyone on city staff, trust me, I'm not.

But it's just the whole process of getting your plumbing permit.

You're getting all these permits and getting through all these processes.

So that'd be one caution I would as a commissioner state is that we already have a long process to get developers to come here and to actually get going because the process takes.

So I think any time we add, and I'm not saying they're not important, trust me.

I I get what everyone's saying here, but that's one thing we should be cautious is like we got a lot that takes the city staff to already get through to add more lanes I call them hurdles.

So this would add to the hurdles.

It would absolutely because mine I had to have restrict my parking or if I had more parking I had to put in you know retainage pond and not retainage pond now I have to have so many trees on my boulevard.

I have to have so many of all this and then it snows.

Yes.

And then I have to replace those trees.

I'm just saying just be cautious of what we put through it really hinders development in the city and that's one thing you want development you want growth.

So I just had to state what I feel good to know I concur.

It's very hard for developers that's the only thing I hear when people come here and I deal with it daily all right lanes if that's everything.

I'll make a motion we adjourn the meeting second push made by commissioner crowds seconded by commissioner all in favor say aye.

Aye aye any nays we're journaling