Brownhill & Keswick Creek Stormwater Project

As Council awaits the next report from Worsley Parsons we were presented last night with a petition by Mr Ron Bellchambers on behalf of the No Dam in Brownhill Creek group.
Mr Bellchambers also presented a compelling case on behalf of the group for a no dam option for the Brownhill Creek, Keswick Creek Stormwater Project. He articulated their case very well and he was received well by Council.
Unley Council has refrained from entering the political debate, preferring to gather as much information as possible, before taking a stance. Unley is the one council that will see the majority of infrastructure work undertaken within its borders. We therefore have a vested interest in knowing the right solution, whatever that may be, is agreed to.
As your elected representatives the members of Council need to be aware of all the information available out there before making a decision to proceed with the detailed design of any particular option. Hearing from Mr Bellchambers is an important part of the gathering of information.
During his presentation it became apparent that a previously unavailable option is now being investigated as one of the no dam options. We were led to believe that running drains along a section of the Hills rail corridor was a no go zone as far as the State Government was concerned.
I am heartened to hear that this option is being explored as a potential for us to consider particularly given my concerns (as posted last year on this blog site) re the other 5 options that were dumped on our desk as the public consultation commenced on the Worsley Parson preferred engineering option.
Watch this space for further news on this project. I expect Council will be briefed again in the not too distant future.


  1. Anonymous   •  

    Cr Palmer
    From my experience with the Bruce Eastick dam on the North Para River, it appears that Brownhill Creek’s ‘No Dam’ campaign is addressing only the steady, soaking rainfall event. Any assurances given to downstream ratepayers will therefore have extensive caveats. For the ‘quick deluge’ event, excess falls need to be detained upstream until downstream flows are cleared without overbanking. The Eastick dam does this for Gawler, without affecting the utility and heritage aspects of the riverscape.

    Brownhill/Keswick creek ratepayers deserve flood mitigation without onerous caveats that would invite property insurers to void claims on the floodwater/stormwater exclusion. A detention dam needs to be part of a robust, resilient solution.

    Chris Williams
    Burnside ratepayer

    • Cr Don Palmer   •  

      Thank you for your input Chris.

      The plan under consideration reamins the one with a dam, unless other options prompted by the City of Mitcham are found to be feasable enough to consider ahead of this one.

      The Worsley Parsons proposal covers a number of flooding situations, not just the 36 hour flood in the foothills. The dam is indeed a very small portion of the ovcerall scheme in addressing the one flooding condition.

      I think they may be a lot of water to flow down the drains before the right soltuion is found and proceeded with.

      We don’t have enough information yet to make a decision. Rest assured that this one councillor is far from ready to make that decision. So all observations made to me will be taken on board.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *