This following is written on behalf of the hundreds of Friends of Silver Lake supporters who have spent thousands of dollars and donated hundreds of hours to make Silver Lake Park better.
The information below summarizes the Friends' reasons to stop the proposed city effort to remove the dam that has made Silver Lake Rochester’s "True Central Park" for 87 years.
- The Friends believe dam removal will ultimately cost Rochester taxpayers tens of millions of dollars, will not protect the city as well during flood times, and may lead to just a river running through the park. The city could then plant vegetation in the current lakebed, similar to Oronoco’s Lake Shady. This is an end result for Silver Lake favored, and stated, by my counterpoint writer, Brett Ostby, as well as other dam-removal supporters. Under that scenario, there would be no water under the three historic limestone arched bridges enjoyed by thousands of citizens and visitors to Rochester every year.
- The dam-removal proposal will significantly reduce the size of the 87-year-old lake originally proposed by Dr. W. W. Mayo in the late 1800s. It reduces the lake length by more than 700 feet, impacting many benefits that having a lake in the middle of the city has provided thousands of citizens and visitors.
- The dam-removal grant proposal sent to state leaders was never approved by the current city council representing Rochester citizens. The city has cited a 2020 consent agenda item as authorization for a dam-removal proposal for state bonding for a much different project. Only two of the current council members were in office at the time, so a majority of current council members have never discussed, nor voted to support the Silver Lake dam removal.
- The grant proposal, sent to state leaders in May 2023, was veiled in secrecy for nine months, until February 2024, when finally brought to the attention of the city council and citizens they represent. We are concerned about this lack of transparency and have discussed with knowledgable experts whether it might provide a legal basis to stop the city plans.
- The city has been unwilling to consider a Friends compromise proposal that would save the 1990s leaf dam so water levels and flood control could still be managed, and the full lake length maintained. The three openings of the older removed tainter gates could allow a fish passage run, canoeing/kayaking downstream, and a bike trail under Broadway.
- A more recent indication of citizen support for keeping the dam is one month of data from the Friends' "Save the Dam at Silver Lake" Facebook page. The site has more than 678 Rochester area followers, who have liked, shared, or commented more than 8,500 times in the last month. This indicates strong local support for keeping the current dam, with no comments supporting dam removal.
- Removal of the current dam runs contrary to the Landmark status of the park and lake designated by the Rochester Heritage Preservation Commission, and approved by the city council on June 5, 2023. The decision noted “Silver Lake is a prominent and character defining feature, contributing to the historic nature of the park,” followed by “Due to alterations in the 1990s, the dam does not retain historic integrity as a structural feature in the park. However, the presence of a dam in this location is a character-defining feature, contributing to the historic nature of the park.” Therefore, removal of the dam would negatively impact the historic designation of the park.
- The Minnesota DNR clearly prefers no lake, just a river flowing thru the park, similar to Lake Shady in Oronoco. And, Minnesota DNR comments to the Environmental Assessment Worksheet seem to indicate the city proposal will lead to higher river flood levels and create more future expenses and maintenance problems than the current dam.
Post Bulletin file photo
Reasons given in the city grant proposal to state officials contain numerous misrepresentations highlighted below, followed by facts from the Friends.
- They say: The dam is unsafe.
We say: In the 87-year history of the original dam, and the replacement Army Corps dam in the mid '90s, there have been no documented records of injuries or drownings sustained at the dam. - They say: The dam is old, built in 1937.
We say: The original dam was actually two side-by-side dams — the 150-foot non-controllable section, and the 75-foot tainter gates. The larger section was replaced by a new hydraulically controlled leaf dam in the mid '90s and the Tainter gates were upgraded in 2017. A 2019 inspection showed no significant structural concerns for either. - They say: Removing the current dam will provide canoeing, kayaking and tubing benefits.
We say: Engineering data shows there will be many times during summer when water flow will not support paddling activities, with tubing never likely given geese pollution. - They say: Removing the dam will allow better upstream movement of fish and mussels.
We say: The Minnesota DNR refuted this due to impediments from many upstream water control structures. Rivers upstream of the dam have healthy populations of many fish species, and mussel species could be re-established by the DNR as has been done elsewhere. - They say: Rochester citizens overwhelmingly supported dam removal.
We say: Approximately 200 people attended he largest public dam-removal meeting on April 6, 2022. The city mentioned this meeting in its grant application, but didn’t acknowledge an overwhelming majority of attendees did not support dam removal.
In closing, the most important argument the Friends can stress related to removal of the current Silver Lake dam is that city leaders, especially the city council elected to represent Rochester citizens, have not listened to the people they serve. Instead they have listened to the mayor and a small number of staff to force the dam-removal project forward against the will of the people.
If you agree with the Friends position to save the dam, please contact Mayor Kim Norton, City Administrator Alison Zelms, and your council representatives, and attend a Save the Dam rally at 5 p.m. Monday, April 22, at the city-county Government Center prior to the city council meeting.
ADVERTIsem*nT
Greg Munson is a lifelong Rochester resident who was director of Quarry Hill Nature Center for 22 years, wrote 436 weekly Post Bulletin Nature Nut columns over eight years and, when not with his partner or family, spends time playing pickleball, enjoying his backwater cabin, and working to make Silver Lake an even better place for Rochester residents and visitors.
