Rosewood History

The Town Drain

© Jane Schy 2025

After decades of enduring the consequences of the overflow from the natural watercourse which had its origin in the hills above Rosewood township, a proposal to drain the town was finally acted on.

Mason’s dam had been constructed in 1884 in the centre of the natural watercourse in a bid to mitigate the flow running its normal course through the town. A portion of Richard Mason’s land, 2 acres 8 perches, was resumed by the Crown for the purpose (corner of John Street and Walloon Road). However, the large volume of water which flowed from the gullies in a heavy deluge, or in a prolonged period of constant rain, caused the water to break the banks of the dam and gush down through the town, flooding John Street…time and time again.

See a map showing the original watercourse.

Chairman of the Rosewood Shire Council, John Pender, in March 1909, arranged for the following to be published in the Queensland Times. It was a report by Mr. A. Macdonald, Civil Engineer, with respect to the proposal for a drainage scheme for the township of Rosewood.

Norwood-street, Toowong, 17th December, 1908.
The Chairman Rosewood Shire Council Rosewood.
Sir, I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 17th ultimo, confirming your instruction to prepare a report on the drainage of the Rosewood township for submission to your council, and beg to report as follows: I have made careful inspection of the township and surroundings, and find that the primary difficulty to be coped with is the storm water, which comes through the township by means of a gully leading from the mountains in the north. The gradient of this gully is very steep from the range to within about 150 yards below the dam, and to this point is well scoured out, and I think would carry all the storm water of an ordinary rainfall without overflowing its banks, but from this point to the outlet the gradient is greatly diminished on account of the fall of the land through which the gully passes and consequently the watercourse is very much silted up, which does not allow of the volume of water being carried away quickly. Therefore the storm-water would spill over the banks of the gully as soon as the lower levels were reached and inundate the township. In this connection I would recommend that an open drain divert be made from a point on this gully about 150 yards below the dam, and leading from it at an angle of about 125 degrees for about 14 chains towards the swamp at the west side of the township, such drain to be of sufficient size to carry off all storm-water from the watershed above this point. 

On account of the veritable nature of the ground through which the  proposed cut would be made, it would be necessary to pitch the bottom and at least two-thirds of the sides of same, so as to prevent scouring. There is a very suitable concrete pressed plate now being manufactured in Brisbane which could be used in this work, and cost of putting it in place per square yard would be as cheap as ordinary 6in. stone pitching, in addition to making a first class job. If you decide on making this divert I would recommend that the plates be used and they could be manufactured on the job. The Railway Department use them to a large extent. I submit that it would be necessary to build a culvert about 12ft long and about 25ft wide and the balance of the roadway might be fenced off so as to prevent accident in conjunction with the open drain. The spoil from the divert could be used in filling up and forming streets and thus minimize their cost in this respect.

The balance of the drainage in the township area could be catered for by sectional drainage and little difficulty would be found in this matter when the large volume of storm water which comes from off the range watershed is diverted from passing through the township. I would recommend that concrete water-tables be laid down, and the three main streets completing the section and the streets metalled, blinded, and rolled. The water tables will be sufficient to drain the township. In connection with improvement generally, I submit that it is infinitely preferable to lay down permanent work in the first place, because temporary work is generally unsatisfactory, and the maintenance of same often exceeds the original amount used to put in place the permanent work, without taking into consideration the inconvenience caused to the ratepayers in the meantime. This procedure is now being generally recognised by local authorities in the State, and, I submit, is very applicable to your case. In the absence of any data as regards levels, &c., hereunder please find a rough estimate of the cost of the drainage scheme proposed, which of course, will probably be slightly altered where the data supplied by the taking of levels, &c., is available, for, with fuller information, a closer estimate could be made:

Rough estimate of divert.
Length 14 chains 2100 c. yards at 1s 3d ……..£131 5 0 
Pitching bottom and 2/3rds; sides 1530 s. yards at 3s 6p ..…… £267 15  0
Total –  £399 0 0

Bridge over divert on road  12 x 25,  £2 per ft ……. £50 0 0
Concrete water-tables, per chain, complete …….. £10 0 0
Forming streets, including metalling, blinding, and rolling …….. £25 0 0 

The estimate in connection with the divert include, putting the spoil in place, either on the streets or in filling up the watercourse that at present runs through the township; but, in connection with private property, the owner is responsible for stagnant water that lies on his ground, and the council can take steps in this connection at his expense. [1]

In July 1909 the Council Works Committee submitted a report which had been prepared by Cr. John Frederich Hall, and adopted by them. The report read as follows:

The question of the township drainage is a most necessary and urgent one for reasons of the public health, protection against floods, general improvement, &c. It is allied to and connected with the alignment of the town and the installation of a sanitary system. As the work if carried out at once, would cost a considerable sum, the better plan would be to arrange it in sections, and spread the work over a period of say two years. 

The most urgent part of the work is coping with the storm-water from the hills, and both engineers recommend the construction of a divert at the upper end of the town. The estimates for this portion of the work are from £450 to £600. The first estimate for a bridge and cutting was made without levels or other data, and as put, is a very rough one. The second is after levels are taken, and comprises (besides the bridge) very elaborate stoning and pitching of the divert, together with re-cutting the existing channel in the main street, from the dam to the proposed new bridge, and also a continuation of the cutting to Moran’s bridge. As far as I can gather the cost of labour in both estimates is based on railway work. We could I think modify both proposals to suit our needs, and considerably reduce the cost as well by using (where possible) the prepared concrete plates suggested by Engineer M’Donald, instead of more expensive stone-work, and doing the whole of the work engaging a professional supervisor ….(unreadable)… the old water-course through the town, and considerably improve these properties. The above estimates cover this expense, which could be charged to the owners of these properties, and thus reduce the initial cost. 

The second section, I would suggest, would be the alignment of the township, which, considering its growth in recent years, and the necessity which devolves upon the Council to keep abreast of the times, is really necessary and the longer it is postponed, the worse the evil will become. Until the town is aligned, I do not see how the council can accurately place their drains, &c.

The third section I would suggest would be the drainage of the lower part of the town by means of concrete pipes along the railway fence, from the eastern side of the railway-gates to the goods-shed, and an open drain to Moran’s Bridge; open concrete table-drains down the three streets leading into the main drain in Railway-street with earthenware pipes at cross-sections. Engineer M’Donald’s estimate for these table-drains is £10 per chain, but does not include the main concrete pipe-drain in Railway-street. The eastern side of the railway-line could be catered for by earth-drains and ditching. 

The work generally is one of permanent improvement to the township, and in benefiting the common business centre, the whole of the shire will directly or indirectly derive considerable benefit. The area immediately benefited is computed by the clerk to be about 250 acres, which I would suggest be declared the benefited area, and which could be also made the sanitary area. As there has been little or nothing done in the township for some time past, a sum equivalent to the rates collected in this area for last year and this year, I would suggest, be placed to the credit of the drainage fund, and also a special rate struck therein. This, I should think, would provide the necessary funds. 

In conclusion, I would suggest the following resolutions for your consideration:-
1. That the township of Rosewood be drained, and the storm water diverted, on similar lines to the scheme suggested by Mr. Harding Frew, B. E., and that the council carry out the sections work themselves.
2. That the work be carried out in sections–“A” diversion of the storm-water; “B” alignment of the township; “C” town drainage.
3. That Mr. Frew be instructed to prepare working plans and sections, and supervise the work generally, at a renumeration of 5 per cent of the cost of the work.
4. That the Chairman and overseer consult with Engineer Frew, and inform him of the manner the council desire sections “A” and “C” carried out, before he prepares his working plans.
5. That section “A” be proceeded with forthwith.
6. That a benefited area of 250 acres be declared, and a special rate struck therein which rate, together with the ordinary rates collected for 1908 and 1909 in this area, be set aside as a drainage fund. [2]

The Council met again on 4th August to discuss the matter. The Chairman, John Pender, emphasised the need to implement the scheme and thought that some of the material excavated for the drains could be used to fill up the footpaths. He thought they could define an area of 318 acres including Nos 2 & 3 divisions, although those ratepayers weren’t as interested as No 1 in the scheme. (Division 1, the Rosewood proper, consisted of 160 acres, sold and built on in small allotments and the streets and drainage were very imperfect. In fact, they were a disgrace to anyone.)

John Pender said Rosewood was the only Queensland town with a sewer down its main street and a drainage and sanitary system would benefit the whole town. The rush of water often washed the metal off the streets. A report form the Chief Inspector of Dept. Public Heath was read and advised that because of the black soil, the council should only have the most substantial drains. As part of the scheme, the dam would be cleaned and fixed up. Council would lay down water-tables, starting at Railway Street, and let the people have drains from their houses into them.

Councillor John Yates (Div. 3) thought the scheme was really necessary, although he thought the residents within the defined benefited area would carry the burden of the cost. He suggested a backing be put in the old Mason’s dam and it would then hold the storm water. He thought a sanitary system was more important than a drainage scheme.

Cr. Thomas Armstrong (Div. 3) said was unjust to ask men to pay for a thing they would not benefit from and he said that his division would do their own drainage if needed.

Cr.  P. Ahearn said his division (2) was not going to be dragged into the “benefited” area.

The Chairman said he thought it was absurd to get an Engineer’s report and then see Councillors pit their own ideas against it and ignore it. He didn’t see why No 1 division had to foot the bill for the lot, and said they had to strike at the root of the evil and divert the water if they wanted to repair the roads and footpaths.

The arguments continued to and fro until Cr. Yates moved that the matter be on the table for six months which was eventually carried.

At the 7th October meeting, Cr. Hall moved that he motion for the drainage matter to lie on the table for six months be rescinded. Cr. John Kurt Just seconded the motion and said the council should proceed with the town alignment, but he was still not in favour of the big drain. Cr. Yates opposed the scheme but was in favour of the sanitary works and alignments. Cr. Armstrong agreed so that the improvements would not be held up.

A poll was taken at the Shire Office in January 1910 in connection with a proposed loan of £2000 from the Treasury Department to carry out the work. Of the 117 ratepayers in the area who would benefit, 20 were absent. Only 48 people voted. 29 were for the proposal, so it was carried.

On Monday 18th April Mr. Herbert Ernest Bellamy, C. E., of the Water Supply Department, paid a visit to Rosewood to inquire about the proposed loan for the new drainage works. He was conducted round the town by Mr. Percy Adams, and returned to Brisbane that evening. 

In September, engineer Harding Frew posted plans to the Council. The first was a plan of the town of Rosewood indicating the extent of the proposed drainage improvements to be undertaken at a cost of £2000. The second plan showed typical sections of the drain leading from John Street through Demas Akes’s property to the gully in Moran’s land; the nature of the proposed timber culvert over the main drain where it crossed John Street (the culvert would have a clean width of 18ft, a typical section of the proposed water-tabling to be laid down in the main street and part of the way down Railway-street); a section of the proposed concrete dish drain leading from the concrete water tabling in Railway Street to the proposed foul water filter, which was to be constructed in the vicinity of Moran’s Bridge; and typical sections of the water-tabling at the street corners.

He asked that after inspection the plans be returned to him to avoid delay in having the loan sanctioned by the Home Secretary. He had apportioned the proposed loan as follows:-

1. Division of main creek through Akes’s property, including the purchase of a strip of land 27ft wide, together with the necessary fencing, &c., £1,000.
2. Timber culvert over drain in John Street, £50.
3. Concrete water tabling, John Street (40 chains), side-street (5 chains), and Railway Street (18 chains), £560; street crossings, £60; concrete dish drain in Railway Street (8 chains), £50; foul water filter beds, £50; pitching, invert and forming road, &c., at Moran’s Bridge, £50; side ditching, &c., £60; and plans and professional supervision, £100.  Total £2,000. 

In January 1911 the Treasury wrote to the Council asking if any arrangements had been made with the owners of the land which the drainage water would run through. In February Council received a letter from the solicitors for Mrs Mary Moran (P. L. Cardew & Simpson) stating she strongly objected and would not  consent to water to be drained onto her property, and should Council do so, they would be held responsible for any damage she might suffer. The Chairman John Yates, and the overseer Percy Adams, went to see Mary to ask her if she would withdraw her objection. There was discussion about resuming part of her land as a solution, which she was against. Demas Akes also objected and said he would fight to the last. His was not such a hard case as the water only passed through his property, but it would discharge onto Mary Moran’s. 

The Council decided that the only solution was to resume part of Mary Moran’s property and submitted the case to the Local Authorities Association for advice. 

In June the money was lying in Treasury awaiting the Council’s pleasure. The Association advised that council could go ahead, but would have to pay Mary Moran compensation for any damage. They decided to get Mr. Harding Frew to come to Rosewood. Frew then sought advice from Brisbane solicitors. The solicitors were of the opinion that an owner of land was not entitled to claim compensation for damage they thought would be done to their property by one part of a drainage scheme, without making allowance for the general benefit of the work. They believed, in this instance, that the benefits more than outweighed any of the disadvantages. They were, therefore, of the opinion that the engineer was fully justified in recommending the fulfilment of the scheme to the local authority. Mary was unsuccessful in her battle.

It was announced in the Brisbane Courier on 12th September that the Governor in Council had granted the £2,000 loan to the Rosewood Shire Council for the town’s drainage works. The loan would be repayable in 10 years by half yearly instalments at a rate of £12 6s 7d per centum per annum. Once the bond was executed and returned they would advance the money.

There was a lot of discussion amongst the ratepayers in the “benefited area” about the heavy rate to be imposed in order to pay off the loan in a period of 10 years. It was generally agreed that the period of the loan should be at least 20 years so the rate would be considerably reduced. It would be nearly 3d-in-the £ on the rateable value, which was a sudden rise, and one not highly appreciated, when the rate had been no more than 2d in the £ for many years.

Chairman John Vincent Creedy listened to the residents and said he would try to have the time of repayment extended to the longest term possible, and get the rate reduced as low as possible.

Henry Moreton Stevens M.L.A., accompanied by Mr Frew, interviewed the Treasurer who promised that part of the loan (£800) would be granted under 21 years. 

The work finally started in March 1912.

By April the work of constructing the drain was making good progress, and about 10 men were constantly employed on the job under the supervision of Mr. James Sheehan as foreman of works. Initially it was thought it was possible to do the work without interfering with the awning posts in the street, but they found that it was not possible. Consequently several posts had to be shifted, including the awning of Joseph William Evans’s two-storied premises. Additionally, some of the awning-posts were out of proper alignment. The sand and metal required for the work was procured locally.

Sadly, a number of valuable and ornamental shade-trees were demolished to make way for the concrete water tables and it drew a lot of criticism. The beautiful camphor laurels which ware a landmark at Bulcock Bros.’ store were the last to fall and some of the foliage was used to decorate the supper-room at a ball in the Farmers’ Hall. The loss of these trees was greatly deplored by many people in the next summer season. The residents thought it was a pity that the narrow streets precluded the possibility of planting shade-trees in the centre of the thoroughfares, for, in a hot climate like ours, some shelter was necessary in the summertime.

Harding Frew wrote to the Council about his initial estimate for the construction of the timber bridge in John Street, estimated at a cost of £50 in August 1910. The price of timber as well as the cost of skilled labour had increased, and he now feared the cost of the bridge would considerably exceed £50, and perhaps reach £80. He therefore suggested that a concrete culvert be substituted for the timber bridge. The culvert would be about 18ft wide, and if made the full width of the street (say 40ft) the estimated cost would be £100, or about £2 10s per foot.

Since the scheme began, Albert Street (a new street) was opened up, which necessitated the construction of a culvert or bridge over the main drain. Frew pointed out that not a penny of loan money could be expended on this bridge unless the necessary cost (say £50) could be saved in the construction. He advised the council to save as much as possible on extras, &c., so that the bridge in question might be constructed without taking its cost out of general rates.

In April, the Chairman of the Council (J.. K. Just) reported that the cost the work was coming in below the estimated cost. £3 per month had been set aside to pay Mr. Frew’s secretary, who was doing the clerical work. He thought the council’s clerk and overseer, Percy Adams, should be paid 12s 6d to do the clerical work instead. Crs. Kingston and Dutney didn’t think he should be paid any extra as his tender was accepted and he knew what work had to be done. Crs. Hogan, Coulson and Yates argued that Percy should be paid for the extra work.  It was decided to pay Percy Adams 10s per week while the work was being done.

At a meeting of the Rosewood Shire Council on 29th May 1912, the overseer, Percy Harry Adams, presented the following report about the drainage scheme: –
This work is cracking very much, and is very crumbly, and some of it has fallen to pieces. A new end was put on at Allan’s Crossing, and it is now cracking again. The water-table at this place is also crooked. The ends of the large pipes at Ruhno’s store have opened, apparently by their own weight, and require cementing together again. The drain for the other pipes, measuring 1 chain 15 yards long, 3ft wide, and 3ft deep, have been left open for four weeks. and complaints have been frequently made to me of the inconvenience and annoyance caused to Messrs. Fing and Muller, whose premises are blocked by this open drain, and, furthermore, on account of dray loads of earth being placed there. Mr. Ruhno has also complained of the state his place has been left in. The concrete water tables at the police barracks and also at Ruhno’s corner, Albert-street, appear to require attention. Three weeks ago the foreman in charge of the work asked for some large stones for the corner near the police barracks. They have not yet been used, and are a nuisance to the travelling. public. The foot-bridge at this corner has been cut in two, and one half left lying on the footpath at the corner; the other blocked with large stones. These are a source of danger to pedestrians. No protection has been placed against the concrete at this corner, or at Ruhno’s corner. No attempt has at any time been made to preserve the cement laid down. The crossings into the various premises are being left temporarily in an unsatisfactory state, and complaints have been made. Complaints have also been made re the lack of sanitary conveniences for the men working at the scheme near Akes’s. The men-or some of them-have used, and misused the closet at the rectory, and have also used the water out of the tank. During the month I asked to be supplied with the gravel excavated from this drain for blinding over the newly metalled road at Allan’s corner, but have only, so far, received four loads, which should not be used for filling up the gully near Akes’s. [3]

Work was suspended in July because of bad weather. It took several days before it resumed. The new drains were partly filled with water from the surrounding high lands. The original watercourse overflowed again and the water, which was blocked near Elder’s, found an outlet down the main street, in new channels.

By August the work was again well underway. The bridge in Albert Street was completed and the men were employed at John Street crossing.

In July Demas Akes wrote to the council asking, in view of the fact that his agreement with the council about renting a portion of his land for the drainage scheme expired on July 31st, that the council should erect the fence in order to protect his property. He also intimated that considerable more than 12ft of his property, as stipulated in the agreement, was being used.

Council overseer, Percy Adams, and ganger Henry Berlin, were busy renovating the main street in keeping with the new drainage improvements. A very large supply of blue metal had been placed on the roadway and a lighter blinding material was being applied. It was said that the work would be of a permanent nature and should last for many years. The blue metal was procured from Mr. Boughen, who had a stone crushing plant nearby, and from Mr. Tom O’Shea.

At the end of October 1912 the work was almost completed and the Foreman of the works, James Sheehan, was let go. Several small jobs were finished and the men employed on the drainage scheme were dismissed not long after.

Council forwarded some of the money it had decided to pay Demas Akes (total £100), via Cardew and Simpson, for the land resumed for the drain and money for the Albert Street extension. Both were returned. The chairman met with James Sheehan and reduced his account by £2 10s.  As it seemed impossible to deal with Mr. Akes, he recommended the council to ask for a further sum of £500 on the loan account. It was also decided to apply to the Railway Department for a rebate on the freight charged on some of the pipes that were broken during transit.

The drainage work was passed by the Government inspector, and the expenditure on the work totalled over £2,250 with an instalment of £803 due by the Government. Demas Akes was still fighting for compensation in 1914 and settled for £180, the amount he had originally asked for. 

(It took until 1936 before the loan for the Drainage Scheme had been fully liquidated.)

In the coming years the cement drain at the top of John Street overflowed almost annually.

• In February 1916, a storm, accompanied by vivid lightning and heavy thunder, passed over the town and district at 1 o’clock in the morning. Rain fell in torrents for an hour and a half, the fall registering 3.16 inches. In a very short time the water overflowed the big drain at the top end of John street, and rushed down the main street. The water tables overflowed and several business places suffered, particulary Bulcock Bros. Shovels had to be used to remove the mud and slush that had entered under the doorways. The rush of water down John and Albert Streets carried away most of the dressing that had been recently laid down by the Shire Council. A large quantity of water rushed through the Catholic Church ground and over the railway line, submerging the line for 200 or 300 yards. Residents living in the low lying parts of the township were completely surrounded with water, in several cases water being up to the floor of the houses. William Domrow had the verandah of his house blown down and James Coveney had a horse struck with lightning.
• In November 1923, four inches of rain fell in 45 minutes causing the water to over-flow the banks of the deep drain at the north end of the town, and the main street was under water for a short time. The railway line between Rosewood and Thagoona was also submerged in many places and the Toowoomba train passed over 12in. of water on the rails.
• In January 1927, the drain overflowed. In its course through Moran’s paddock to join with the creek waters, the flood waters rose to within about three feet of the rails at Moran’ railway bridge. Bridges and low lying culverts were all submerged. (260 points in 24 hours). The plight of two horses which had become trapped by the flood waters on the flat was noticed by sightseers (comprising men, women, children, and dogs gathered at Moran’s Bridge). With difficulty, the horses swam through deep water to a higher place on the bank of the creek. Two other horses were hemmed in by the waters at the pumping ground on the flat, but their position was less precarious. 
• In April 1929, thirty-six ratepayers in Rosewood drew the Council’s attention to the state of Mill Street, and asked that, owing to the absence of drainage, the matter should he brought under the notice of the Medical Officer. A deputation, comprising Messrs. Edward O’Sullivan, John Kenny, Albert Roberts, Edward James Connolly, and Jules Aumand Paroz, discussed the trouble in Mill Street with the council. They pointed out that the water from the hills and the three streets on the other side of the railway was all allowed to run into Mill Street, where it washed the soil from the street into the water tables, which had silted up. The result was it could not escape. The bridge under the street could not carry off the water, and a quantity stagnated beneath it. This became a mosquito breeding ground and gave off offensive smells. In wet weather the water became knee deep in the street and flooded the footpaths making them impassable for women, while the men had to wade through to get out. Water also flowed over private properties, but this got away quickly. The deputation said it was the responsibility of the council to remedy the matter. The land owners were prepared to accept an additional rating if the work was undertaken. The Council assured them that the drainage work would proceed.
• In June a survey of the town was conducted and it was found that whole of the streets in the town were suffering from the ineffective water tables which were always being clogged and flooded. The lower portions of the town suffered the most. The Council felt that the time was ripe to have a good drainage system in the town, but because it would be too expensive, the water tables in John Street. Matthew Street, Albert Street, and Walloon Road should be attended to immediately.
• In March 1932, Mr. Wilson tendered a report to Council on the open concrete drain in Rosewood. The abutments of the bridge over the drain in Albert-street are in danger of collapsing on account of the slopes between the abutments, and the top of the drain. The slopes are pitched with spawls and the bridge abutments are now secure. A water table should be cut on each side of the street for about 60ft. on the left, and 20ft. on the right, the lower ends, where they would discharge, to be stone-pitched and cement grouted. About seven sections of the drain, averaging 40ft. each, are badly cracked, and are being pushed in by the pressure of earth. These should be repaired. At the outlet end of the drain to 16ft. beyond the end of the concrete should be stone pitched, and cement grouted, and about five cubic yards of spawls should be placed in the water hole at the end of the pitching upon which the water would discharge. [4] The council decided to do the job.
• In January 1934, one of the worst storms experienced for a number of years passed over Rosewood. Some old residents who were sheltering in shops during the storm said that it was more than 10 years since such a body of water had come down John Street. The whole street was covered with water and some shops and houses were inundated, and in some places the water was lapping on the top steps of shops. A circus was camped on a vacant allotment in the centre of the town and it was completely inundated. The circus folk’s personal belongings and cooking utensils washed 100 yards away. Reports of 4 and 5 inches of rain were received.
• In February 1946, water rushed in torrents down the streets moving huge boulders of stone and turning over water tables.
• In March 1947 the main street business premises were flooded. All of the top dressing in the main street was washed into the water tables which caused blocking at all crossings, and water then ran down the footpaths. In places damage to the bitumen footpaths was considerable. In William Street the water was within a few inches of the floor of Mr. Keith Cecil Greet’s house. It was the first time for over 30 years that water has gone over the railway line in front of St Brigid’s Church. Damage to roads and streets in the shire was estimated at hundreds of pounds.

At a meeting on the 13th March 1947, the Rosewood Shire Council decided to borrow £1500 for reconstruction of the town drain for mosquito eradication in Rosewood. The Treasury approved the loan in June. The work was supposed to start at the beginning of 1948, but they were still trying to find an acceptable tender for the work in September.  

Only one tender by Messrs. Chesterfield and Jenkins, Brisbane was received for loan works estimated to cost £6613/8/10. The tender price was £8753/18/ The works were: Reconstruction of town drain. Rosewood, estimate £4680, tender price £5193/5/6; Mill Street drain estimate £799/5/6, tender price £1575/1/; road works on Calvert-Hidden Vale road, estimate £1134/3/4, tender price £1985/1l/6.

Comparing the tender prices with the estimates, Mr. R. Hopkins, a member of the firm of John Wilson and Partner (the council’s consulting engineers) said that the town drain job price was 11% above the estimate, the Mill Street drain price 91% higher. Unless the last mentioned price was revised and reduced he would not recommend that the work go ahead.

Hopkins was instructed to see if he could try and negotiate a lower price. Failing that he was to proceed with the reconstruction of the towns’ drain at the price quoted, subject to Treasury approval. 

The work finally began January 1949.

March 8th – Work on the new town drain which was held up during the wet weather was resumed on Monday morning. Continual wet weather has slowed up the work on this job, and at present the old drain, which is banked to divert water from the new work, is full of water, and residents are concerned about the stench arising. Complaints also have been made that the blockage of the water has brought an increased number of mosquitoes. Approximately 300ft. of the new drain is complete, and a further 200ft. is ready for the pouring of the cement. One carpenter, 10 cement workers, one truck, one cement mixer, and one power shovel are employed on the job. Foreman Miller is in charge. The old drain which was 3ft. 6in. wide and 2ft. 6in. deep is being replaced by a drain 9ft. wide at the top, 3ft. 6in. wide at the bottom, and 5ft deep. The new waterway should eliminate the present trouble of excess water flowing under houses and into the main street. [5]

At a Council meeting in March 1949, Harold Freeman said that his property alongside the town drain being constructed in Albert Street had been damaged by workmen having cut a watercourse through it. He asked for compensation. The Engineer said that the contractors had assured him that the watercourse was only temporary and would be removed when the permanent work was completed.

Two hundred and fifty feet, or a quarter of the entire length of the Rosewood town drain, had been poured. The contractors were proceeding satisfactorily, though hampered by rain.

For the 24 hours ending 9 a.m. on 25th October, a total of 463 points of rain was registered at the Post Office. The milk van and one bus conveying miners to work crossed the Seven Mile at 6.30 am., but on the return trip at 8 o’clock the milk van was unable to cross as water was 4ft over the bridge. The driver had to make the trip through Minden via Tallegalla to Ipswich. At 1 p.m. the water was 12ft. over the Seven Mile and on the flood gauge at Keane’s Bridge a rise of 18ft was shown with the water rising steadily. The new town drain held water within 1ft. of the top of the concrete at 6.30 a.m. As the carrying capacity of the drain was about twice that of the old drain, the water quickly disappeared and no flooding of the streets occurred.

It was announced in July 1952, that plans and specifications for underground drainage in William Street, estimated to cost £13,310, were to be prepared. Messrs. John Wilson and Partners recommended that the scheme be carried out before any road works in William Street, or any street south of William Street. Mr. J. Buchanan reported to the Moreton Shire Council that the total length of the drain would be 2800ft., made up of reinforced concrete pipes, manholes and catch-pits. The project would take all run-off from the north of William Street, including the flow down Matthew Street, John Street, and Albert Street from a storm producing rain of 1½ inches an hour, and this would reduce flooding in Railway Street and Mill Street. In September the Treasury advised that plans, specifications, and estimates for work (to cost £18,975) had been approved; £11,600 was a loan, and the balance a subsidy. 

One year later the Council was still debating about whether to do permanent works to the whole of the town instead of sections. At a meeting in December 1953, Cr. Ernest Richard Blake said that the council had made a survey of the whole of the town for road and drainage works, and a start would be made on this with the William Street project.

In August 1954 they started work on the William Street drainage work. 

The wheels of bureaucracy turn slowly. 

And so it continued……

I took these photos of a section of the drain from Albert Street in June 2023 and during the flood in March 2025.

References:
[1] The Queensland Times, (Ipswich, Qld) Wednesday, 3 March 1909, page 7
[2] The Queensland Times, (Ipswich, Qld) Friday, 16 July 1909, page 7
[3] The Queensland Times, (Ipswich, Qld) Friday, 31 May 1912, page 6
[4] The Queensland Times, (Ipswich, Qld) Wednesday 23 March 1932, page 4
[5] The Queensland Times, (Ipswich, Qld) Wednesday 9 March 1949, page 4