Graphics show how the Wellington waterfront would appear with balustrades. Photo: Supplied / Wellington City Council
Wellington City Council has voted against spending $7 million to fence a stretch of its waterfront.
On Thursday, the environment and infrastructure committee debated fencing sections of Kumutoto and Queens Wharf - from about the Maritime Police Station to Shed 6 - to address safety concerns.
Councillors wanted more time to assess the effectiveness of the safety measures that had already been put in place, such as extra lighting.
The effort to improve safety followed recommendations made to the council after a coronial inquest into the death of 30-year-old Sandy Calkin.
Coroner Katharine Greig found Wellington's waterfront lacked adequate measures to prevent Calkin's death and recommended installing permanent edge protection.
Council officers recommended installing the balustrades on Kumutoto and Queens Wharf without community consultation to give urgency to the coroner's recommendations.
Chief operating officer James Roberts told the meeting balustrading was the only practical option for those areas, which were narrow in parts and busy, with a high concentration of bars and restaurants.
"Our advice is that, given the limited options available, which is either balustrade or do nothing, you are able to make that decision today, enabling officers to get on and address this outstanding public safety issue without delay.
"For the rest of the waterfront, there are multiple practicable options and public consultation can help guide your decision-making."
He acknowledged council had improved safety already with measures like extra lighting, but said the risk of an accidental fall was not fully removed.
"If council wants to improve public safety here, there really is no other way of doing it."
Councillor Iona Pannett urged councillors to heed both expert advice and the coroner's report, and said the council's first obligation was to keep people safe.
"While I'm generally in favour of public consultation... what is the purpose in this case?" she said.
Some councillors felt they had mitigated danger with the extra measures and wanted to find out whether it had made enough difference before deciding whether to spend the money.
Councillor Ben McNulty said, while he voted against the spend, he still wanted improved waterfront safety.
"I'll be voting against the paper, so that we can have some time given to monitor the effectiveness of the improvements that have already been made or are underway.
"Targeted safety improvements could be presented to a future council, if required."
Councillors Sarah Free, Iona Pannett, Laurie Foon and Nureddin Abdurahman voted for, with the remaining 13 councillors voting against.
What would happen now was not clear.
"Council officers will be working through next steps related to edge protection, following today's decision," a council spokesperson said.
