On February 22, about 100-150 people crowded into the Media Borough Parlor Room to meet with officials from the PA Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) to discuss the planned partial breach of Broomall’s dam in late April.

After some time to look over the technical plans and respond to residents’ questions, the DEP presented the why’s and how’s of the removal of Broomall’s Dam for safety reasons. Roger Adams, Division Chief of Dam Safety, gave a compelling presentation of the dangers to human life and property when a dam fails. Examples include the Bayless Dam, in which 10” of rain caused a catastrophic failure.

High hazard dam in poor condition

Of the 3,371 dams in Pennsylvania, only 754 are high hazard dams. While Broomall’s Dam is smaller than large dams like the Youngstown Dam, it is still categorized as a High Hazard C-2 dam, based on the amount of water and sediment held back and the height. It is also a High Hazard dam in poor condition. Even if the dam is rebuilt, it will again be a High Hazard C-2 dam.

Broomall’s an orphan dam that is deteriorating

Duke Adams (no relation to Roger), took up the presentation and discussed the issues around ownership. The dam was built in 1883 by John Broomall for ice harvesting. In 1980 the Army Corps of Engineers found the dam to be structurally in poor condition. In 1996 the roadway was closed for safety reasons. No party, not Broomall’s Lake Country Club (BLCC), Media Borough or Delaware County have been willing to take up the maintenance responsibilities over this time. The DEP has considered Broomall’s Dam an “orphan dam” because of the lack of responsible or willing owner.

In June 2014, Delaware County, BLCC and Media Borough signed a stipulation and order. Duke Adams explained that this order means that Media Borough would manage the reconstruction of the dam, and Delaware County would take ownership of the downstream face, and BLCC would be the owner and responsible party for the upstream face.

In 2012, BLCC sued Media Borough over its plan for a one-lane compromise for the bridge  — a solution that was supported by borough residents, Friends of Glen Providence Park, and the majority of Borough Council. Shortly thereafter the dam began to deteriorate significantly, with entire pieces of wall crumbling on the upstream and downstream side. The DEP elected to lower the water level to its absolute minimum in June 2013, and when the lake level was not maintained, the DEP returned and lowered it again in March 2016.

Eliminate the hazard

However, due to continual delays and a lack of clarity of an owner (none of the three parties has stepped forward and take responsibility to date), the DEP has decided to eliminate the hazard of the dam. By removing nearly all of the standing water and a significant amount of liquid sediment, the pressure on the dam walls will be reduced. The hazard category will be lowered to C-4.  Their presentation highlighted the dangers of allowing high hazard dams to remain in place.

Work begins in early May

The work on the dam will begin around May 9th and should conclude within two months. During construction, the entire corner of 3rd and West Street will be closed to all traffic and the entrance to BLCC swim club will be closed, to reopen once the partial breach is complete.

The main spillway of the dam will be removed, as will the waterfall. Broomall’s Lake will drain almost completely and construction access into the lake will remain until the dam is reconstructed. The original stream of Broomall’s Run will find its own course and several springs that feed into Broomall’s Lake may make their appearance.

The DEP reported that before dam removal begins, up to two weeks will be spent to remove the PA Threatened Northern Redbelly Turtle (Pseudemys rubriventris) and native snapping turtles, which will be relocated to the pond in Glen Providence Park. The invasive Red-eared slider (a similar looking turtle) will be removed and donated to science programs. Other fish, frogs and invertebrates will have to find their way during the draining of the lake or they will perish. Traps to capture turtles were set on April 24th. 

Loss of pedestrian and bicycle access for Upper Providence for 2 years or more

The likely reason why so many people came to the meeting was due to the disruption of pedestrian and bicycle access across the dam starting at the end of April, and lasting until the proposed dam reconstruction. Roger Adams could not say how long the period between dam removal and dam reconstruction would be, but did not hesitate to say at least two years. (The dam reconstruction permit has not been approved or scheduled to date.)

There were a number of questions from the audience on the issue, particularly focused on Upper Providence residents who use Third Street frequently to walk into Media. Safety issues were also raised by residents, particularly the concern that if there were no access at all, some daring individuals would somehow find a way that would most likely be very unsafe. The DEP indicated that there might be a possibility of installing a temporary pedestrian bridge.

Stream Restoration

A benefit of dam removal is the re-establishment of open waterways and natural streams. Artificial dammed bodies of water not only present a hazard of failure on the downstream side, but they also hold back aquatic life and sediment that contribute to the overall health of our waterways. 

Pedestrian Bridge

A coalition of Upper Providence and Media neighbors and Friends of Glen Providence Park is working to establish a temporary pedestrian footbridge to maintain the connection between Media and Upper Providence in the time period between dam removal and dam reconstruction. The proposed footbridge is modular and can be relocated into Glen Providence Park at one of the former bridge sites once dam reconstruction begins. If you are interested in supporting this effort, please contact us.

It was the fruit of the Advocacy Committee of Friends of Glen Providence Park’s work with a 5th year Landscape Architecture Student, Melissa Boffa. See below how the principles of public safety, control of environmental damage and prioritizing pedestrians was turned into a visual rendering.

The rendering as presented to Media Borough Council.

Most importantly, Friends of Glen Providence Park is urging Borough Council to construct a one-way, one-lane automobile road with a separate  path to maximize pedestrian safety and access while minimizing damage to Glen Providence Park. The dam reconstruction is expected to destroy 1.1 acres of park, including mature trees, native plants, wetlands, historic springs and trails. This area will be filled in with “earthfill” to create a large earthen dam. Each foot that is conserved on the roadway atop the dam conserves one foot of Glen Providence Park, so for a 500 foot wide dam, that adds up quickly!

Borough Council is expected to make a decision on the width of the roadway at its September legislative meeting this Thursday, September 20th at 8pm.

Portland’s Bike Boulevards Become Neighborhood Greenways from Streetfilms on Vimeo.

Portland has set a goal to have 20% of all transportation be by bicycle by 2020, and 80% of residents within a 1/2 mile of a greenway. Philadelphia has started designating some significant bicycle routes as part of their general transportation plan.

What will be possible for Delaware County? Bring your ideas and goals to the Delaware County Open Space, Recreation and Greenway Public Forum on Thursday, February 23, from 7-9 p.m. at the County Council Meeting Room, Front and Orange Streets, Media, PA.

Many Friends of Glen Providence Park hope that the 3rd Street Bridge can become part of a larger Delaware County Greenway, which prioritizes safe, family-friendly, pedestrian and bicycle transportation and recreation.

In the past couple of months, information has come forward that has shifted the possibilities for the 3rd Street Bridge and Dam. It is very clear that something must be done, and soon; the dam was declared unsafe in 1980 by the Army Corps of Engineers, and has been closed to traffic since 1996. For the public and especially those living downstream, it must be dealt with as soon as possible.

Up until recently, it was believed that PennDOT (Pennsylvania Department of Transportation) required that the dam be rebuilt and the road be restored and opened to automotive traffic. Recent interactions with PennDOT have revealed that this is not the case, and in fact, Media Borough, the “project sponsor,” may declare whatever goals they see fit, as long as the safety issues with the bridge are resolved.

To the best of our knowledge, there are four possible options that the PennDOT (and local) funding would permit, noting that there are variations and creative options within these four broad categories:

1. Replace the dam, reconstruct an automotive road. This is the current plan on the table, incorporating a two-lane road. It is possibly the most expensive and environmentally damaging plan, but maintains Broomall’s Lake and allows the greatest amount of transportation access between Media and Upper Providence.
2. Replace the dam, create a greenway for pedestrians and bicycles, possibly that is open to emergency vehicles. This would maintain Broomall’s Lake and the parklike atmosphere between the lake and Glen Providence Park, while allowing passage between Media and Upper Providence.
3. Remove the dam, build an automotive bridge. Dam removal and stream restoration tends to be a less expensive option, often 2-3 times less expensive. Environmentally, dam removal can be disruptive in the short term, but will overall cause much less damage to the park and will restore the stream to its natural course. It will improve water quality. All dam maintenance and ownership issues are resolved when there is no dam. There are many factors specific to Broomall’s Dam that can only be addressed by an expert. Building an automotive bridge, however, would be costly and have significant maintenance costs.
4. Remove the dam, create a pedestrian and bicycle bridge, or greenbridge. This would potentially incorporate the cost savings and environmental benefits of removal, while maintaining a transportation connection between Media and Upper Providence.

As far as we understand, PennDOT would fund 80% of any of these four options. The rest of the money would come from local grants like that provided by Senator Pileggi.

Friends of Glen Providence Park wants to minimize damage to the park and create a pedestrian and bicycle greenway, to preserve and enhance the park for those who use it recreationally, and for those who live there — the wildlife. (The park was founded as an arboretum and bird sanctuary, after all.) We are currently working to understand the pros and cons of dam removal vs. replacement of the dam, particular to the 3rd Street Dam and Glen Providence Park.

Media Borough, Delaware County and Broomall’s Lake Country Club have also signed a stipulation agreement that seems to include replacing the dam and rebuilding a “roadway.” We acknowledge that the stipulation is a different challenge than PennDOT funding, and one that can probably only be handled by the signatories and their legal counsels.

That said, the stipulation was signed under false assumptions that PennDOT would only fund dam and bridge reconstruction, and that PennDOT was in charge of the project. It is now clear that Media Borough is in charge of the project, and PennDOT will fund any option that restores the public safety of the Third Street Bridge. Is it time to consider all the options? We think so. 

Check back regularly for updates and information as we do our research.

What are your priorities and concerns for Glen Providence Park and the Bridge/Dam?