Get AI Briefings, Transcripts & Alerts on Local & National Government Meetings — Forever.
Pipestone County board tables proposed Jasper quartzite quarry, seeks technical groundwater study
Summary
After hours of public testimony raising health, dust and water concerns, Pipestone County commissioners voted to table a conditional use permit for a proposed 39.5-acre quartzite quarry near Jasper and to extend the decision deadline while pursuing a DNR technical review and legal guidance.
Pipestone County commissioners on April 28 tabled a decision on a conditional use permit for a proposed 39.5-acre quartzite quarry northeast of Jasper and directed staff to seek additional technical review of groundwater and other environmental risks. The board voted to extend the 60-day approval window to allow for the requested review and legal consultation.
The planning commission had recommended approval with conditions — including routing haul traffic south through Jasper, dust-control measures on the crushing equipment and haul road, a 10-year permit with five-year compliance checks, and a $50,000 surety to address potential impacts. Planning staff described the operation as stripping and crushing rock that would likely be processed intermittently rather than continuously.
Residents and nearby landowners urged the board to pause. Vance Walgrieve, who identified himself as an owner of nearby property, read a letter from a former quarry worker describing a diagnosis of silicosis and warning that quartzite dust does not settle and “lingles in the air” and can cause irreversible lung disease. Another resident, Katie Walgreens, cited Pipestone County’s conditional-use ordinance and argued Jasper’s governing body had not issued a formal recommendation, and she pointed commissioners to DNR hydrologist testimony that a free state groundwater study could assess aquifer flow and potential impacts to wells and the Split Rock Creek habitat for the endangered Topeka shiner.
The applicant’s representative, Jake Sopaniak, described industry-standard controls and compliance tools: “We have plans to control the dust … water suppression on our conveyors and on our equipment,” and said industry inspectors randomly audit operations. Planning-commission members said they considered dust-control and water issues and that the recommended permit conditions were intended to mitigate identified risks.
DNR staff explained what a technical request for services would produce: a geologist-authored report on groundwater flow, transmissivity and storativity metrics, potential risk to domestic and livestock wells, and recommendations that could include observation or test wells. DNR staff estimated a DNR technical report could take six to eight months to prepare and would provide a professional, technical risk assessment though not an absolute guarantee.
Given the volume of public concern and the remaining technical unknowns, commissioners moved to table the permit and to request an extension of the statutory review period while they consult the county attorney and consider whether to request a discretionary Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) or rely on DNR technical services. The motion to table and extend carried on a voice vote; no final approval or denial was made.
Next steps: staff will prepare written notice of the extension to the applicant and consult the county attorney on how additional data or studies should be handled procedurally, including whether new information should return to the planning commission for further consideration.
