Seven people have died at Wellington Waterfront since 2006. What should be done about it?
In 2021, 30 -year -old Sandy Calkin died in Wellington Harbor after a night drinking with friends in the city center. The report of a coroner about Calkin’s death, released last week, confirmed that the cause of death was an accidental drowning and found that there were no adequate security measures along the waterfront. Since 2006, seven people have lost their lives in similar ways throughout the waterfront.
The coroner’s report has amplified a public debate on security protections along the Wellington edge. Since March 2024, temporary fences have aligned with the water. A constant complaint of people upset by their scenic journey now seems like a construction site. Some of the best views of the city – such as the angle of comfort in the sculpture of the wind that look at the horizon – are stained. Some popular pier jumping points are surrounded, while others – such as Porto’s dive plate – are still accessible through a gap in the fence.
Wellington City Council approved $ 11.1 million for protection by the waterfront, but there will be public consultation about how it is. There are four options on the table:
- Remove temporary fencing and complete lighting works
- Keep the temporary fencing and complete lighting works
- Install fences in important places and complete lighting works
- Install the full edge protection fencing and complete lighting works
It is important to discuss the safety options around the waterfront, but it is a difficult conversation. Families and friends are still suffering, and for some, pain will never disappear. All seven deaths were tragedies and must be treated with respect.
The waterfront is a public space, owned and appreciated collectively by all Wellingtonians and tens of thousands of visitors annually. Any decision on what to do with space is subject to democratic debate – including a debate on how much weight we give to health and safety risks.
Deputy Brooke Van Venden took some crisis in 2024, when he said, “When it came to Covid, we completely exploded what was the value of a life.” It was not a pleasant way to express it, but it is a perfectly valid opinion – through Covid, the government had to weigh the risk of death against the economic costs of blockages, and everyone has its own opinion on how they should be balanced. There are health and safety risks on the waterfront, and approach them have costs.
Let’s put the risks in the context. New Zealand calculates an average of about 90 deaths a year, which means that there have been about 1,700 drowning deaths since 2006. Seven of them occurred on the waterfront of Wellington. Six of them happened at night and all involved people with alcohol in their systems.
We may never know what happened in the final moments of these people. Did they stumble and fell from the edge as they walked? Did they lose their balance while taking a small and risky? Did they do a night dive and had problems when they couldn’t find the ladder to climb back? There is such little information and such a small sample that it is difficult to say what would be the most effective way to avoid other incidents.
In all cities with channels, Harbourfront or Paredão tours, there are occasional reports of deaths because people fall into the water or drown after a dive late at night. An estimated 18 people a year die in the channels of Amsterdam – Especially drunk men who fall as they urinate.
Now, let’s put costs in context: $ 5,000 per month for temporary fences and $ 11 million for permanent installation is a decent piece of change, but it does not go to the bankruptcy. We do not need to exaggerate whenever the local government spends money.
More significant than the financial cost is the impact on convenience and visual appeal. This is harder to quantify, but should not be discarded. When it comes to the waterfront, aesthetics is important. The natural beauty of Porto and the friendly design to people attract people to enjoy the space and spend money on companies that align the waterfront. Have some ugly fences prevented people from visiting the waterfront? Of course. But it makes the experience a little less pleasant and diminishes the inherent value of the area.
It is likely to be a controversial and confused consultation. The unpopular temporary fencing has positioned the debate as a zero-summed game between aesthetics and security-but it doesn’t have to be so. There are results here that can benefit both.
Wellington could copy what Amsterdam is doing stairs and ropes along the waterfront, so anyone who falls is never far from something to grab and get up. This would also mean better amenities for people to jump from the pier to swim during the day.
Better lighting about the stretch around you can help avoid accidental falls, while also making the space more welcoming after dusk, helping to attract multitudes and night trade.
There will probably be some physical edge protection in the -chave sections. But that does not mean that they need to be utilitarian safety blocks. If Wellington will surround the waterfront, let’s at least ensure that the fences are beautiful.
