Grande River group presents revised design options for Crissy Dam site after wide public input

Sophia, the watershed coordinator for the Grande River Association, briefed the Stevens County Board on the outreach and next steps for a project to alter the Crissy Dam reservoir and restore river channel features.

At an informational meeting March 6, about 50 people attended and project staff collected 39 website comments plus a handful of letters and emails, Sophia told the board. The comments showed a mix of views: general support for the project, support for “option 2” that would keep the reservoir water level the same, support for “option 1” to restore the natural channel, and a few comments opposing the project entirely. Concerns raised included aesthetics for Riverview Drive homeowners, recreational access (ice skating and views), the potential spread of cattails in new green space, and whether funding would cover some options.

Sophia said the project team printed detailed maps and a single large diagram at the public meeting and presented three alternatives during the presentation. She described a new draft that combines features of earlier options: it widens and dredges a new channel (about 80–100 feet wide in parts), deepens portions of the pool so sediment will move through the system more readily, retains most accessible fishing platforms from option 2 while adding a new accessible pool below the bridge, and plans to use some dredged spoil to raise green-space elevations so they are mowable and not immediately colonized by cattails.

Board members and attendees pressed for details on permitting, long-term maintenance and ownership, and how the ordinary high‑water mark might change. Sophia said the city of Morris will own the park and would be responsible for maintenance, while local Soil and Water Conservation District and watershed funding could support some maintenance activities. On permitting, presenters said Department of Natural Resources (DNR) permitting and ordinary high‑water‑level determinations will control what maintenance and vegetation removal are allowed.

County staff asked whether dredging and channel changes would affect a planned County Road 10 bridge replacement and the highway department’s five‑year plan. The project team said the options on the table would likely rule out a box‑culvert solution and would require a multi‑span bridge, a more expensive alternative that could delay the county’s schedule. Project engineers told the board they intended to present a more refined draft to the city council and the county board before a wider public hearing; staff expected a follow‑up presentation to the county board in mid‑April and a public open house later in April or the first week of May, depending on comment and revision needs.

Sophia and the engineers told the board funding constraints will determine which alternatives are possible — one alternative that would raise the pool substantially would require a grant amendment or new funding. Sophia and other presenters emphasized that sedimentation is a key driver for the design changes and that dredging the channel is intended to reduce future sediment accumulation and improve water quality. The project team said they plan planting and mowing in the new green space to prevent it from becoming unmanaged cattail marsh. No formal county action or vote on the project was taken during the meeting; presenters said they will return with a revised draft and more information on permitting and construction sequencing.