Last updated: 23 March 2026 (postscript 1)
Glenorchy does not have a place like Sullivans Cove where many 19th century buildings can be seen in plain view. They are in fact hard to avoid. But Glenorchy does not. It has many small, inconspicuous, hard to find, pieces of history. While some are well-known like the Austins Ferry Cottage, most are small. Many which only the dedicated searcher with a good map could find. Many which people might pass without noticing. Easily overlooked. A small well in Austins Ferry (261 Main Road). A small bridge in Claremont (Windermere).
On Monday (16/2/26) the Glenorchy Planning Authority (view agenda) will discuss an application for a subdivision in Chigwell in which a “local heritage place” plays a part. It appears in the list of officially recognized “local heritage places” in our planning scheme. It is described as:
“A 19th century culvert spanning Faulkner’s Rivulet and marking the location of an all-weather historic carriageway from the Main Road through what was part of the Lowestoft property. The culvert demonstrates 19th century road construction techniques that potentially reflect the scale of infrastructure projects able to be undertaken on large country estates under Lieutenant-Governor Arthur’s system of convict assignment.“
It is considered worthy of listing because:
- it is a fine and intact example of a 19th convict period bridge (culvert) constructed in permanent materials, that demonstrates the scale of projects able to be undertaken on large country estates and provides insights to the characteristics of all-weather land routes of that era that are locally uncommon.
- it exhibits the principal characteristics of a 19th century masonry bridge (culvert) forming part of an historic rural land route.
The presence of the bridge, labelled as Lowes Bridge in Google Maps, is uncontroversial. The bridge is on a portion of the parcel to be subdivided that is of no value to the developer. The proposed solution will extend the land on the other side of the rivulet to, in effect, produce a Public Open Space to be managed by Council. A convenient donation to Council by the developer.
But if you were to visit the bridge, you would need a map. There is no signage indicating its existence or anything that you could describe as useful for wayfinding. Without a map you would walk past it without noticing it. It is not on any tourist trail – it will not be found accidentally.
The bridge goes nowhere. It starts on weeds and grass for which mowing appears to be the only maintenance. It ends in bushland, bushland which seems to teem with wildlife.
It is not a destination that attracts. Nowhere to sit and rest. No recreation facilities of any sort. Google Maps also shows a “water filling station” within a few metres of the rivulet. It is locked and covered in cobwebs. The condition of the bridge makes it unsafe for activity, certainly for children.
So it is unsigned, it is hidden off-street, it has no facilities, it is unsafe. It is nowhere near any site promoted for tourism by Council or anyone else.
One of the sources below says it “enjoyed by the community of Chigwell and is a treasured place in the local environment.” A laughable statement unless my eyes deceive me.
So what is the culvert being protected for?
Postscript 1 — 23 March 2026
On 17 March I submitted these questions to council to try to better understand the situation. I’ve inserted the answers (received on 19 March) below. You can see the actual email response here.
Q1. Can you tell me when the bridge last received any work to conserve/preserve it? and what was done?
A1. I am not aware of any work having been done on the bridge in recent years. If and when issues are identified that warrant intervention, an assessment would occur at that time.
Q2. Has council ever contemplated signage pointing at or providing information about the bridge?
A2. We don’t have any plans for interpretive or way finding signage to minimise the potential for graffiti and vandalism.
If invisibility is regarded as the best protection, the bridge is clearly of greater interest to the professional historian than the public of Glenorchy.
Sources
1. Undated photo from book “Glenorchy 1804 – 1964” by Alison Alexander published by Glenorchy City Council in 1986, page 10, source given as Mr J. Hinks.
That photo was posted in Facebook by “Pictorial History of Collinsvale – Bismarck and surrounding areas” on 21 August 2018. Irene Schaffer commented with:
“The bridge over the Faulkner Rivulet (at what is now Chigwell) would have been built by Thomas Y. Lowes well before 1832, possibly about the same time as the barn, allowing him access from his property on the south-east where his farms were, to his north-west land.
Tradition has it that this may have been an alternative route used in winter when the main road was muddy and impassable for the horses and carts. This would have been a very long way round and as it would have had to have gone over the Faulkner’s Rivulet, its possible this route would have been much in the same condition at the main road. There is no suggestion of a road or track on any of the early maps and I believe that this bridge was used by Lowes and his farm workers, and not by the general public.”
2. Listing in Glenorchy Planning Scheme – https://tpso.planning.tas.gov.au/tpso/external/planning-scheme-viewer/15/section/2431?effectiveForDate=2026-02-14
3. Chigwell History Project – https://glenorchyarts.com.au/lowes-bridge/, https://www.tasfamily.net.au/~schafferi/index.php?module=blog2&page=viewpost&post=chigwell-project-2004.php&pageback=kop32.php
4. Council email response to questions about Lowes Bridge received 19 March 2026.
Notes
Close examination of the current bridge certainly give the impression of extensive “repair” or “renovation” at some point. By Council? So it is not clear how much of the current bridge is 19th century. Research?
Glenorchy City Observer 
