Skip to text

 2016 Calendar available

The 2016 Waterfront Watch calendar is now available. To order, either email or phone Pauline Swann (472 8417).

The calendars are $20 each and come with an envelope ready for posting.

Payment can be by:

• Cash: Direct to the seller

• Cheque: Direct to the seller or posted to Waterfront Watch Inc. Box 19045, Courtenay Place, Wellington 6149; cheque made out to Waterfront Watch Inc. please

• Internet banking: Our account is BNZ 02-0560-0364988-000. In the reference boxes put your name, then Calendar(s), then the number of copies required.

The calendars will make wonderful Christmas presents and have been designed with posting in mind. In their envelopes they weigh about 180gms and are of standard A4 dimensions so they conform to standard post (airmail) requirements. (If they weighed over 200gms they would be classed as parcels.) The cost to post to Australia is $3. The cost to post to the rest of the world is $3.60. The cost to post an A4 size envelope within NZ is $2.40.

The mail closing dates are: Sth Pacific, Asia, Nth America, UK and Europe 4 December.   Rest of the world 2 December.  Australia 9 December




Debate: "Developing Wellington's waterfront is too hard"

   NZ Institute of Building 2015 Moot Debate:  24 September

The topic for this year's annual Building Institute debate was very topical, following closing after the Environment Court hearing on the large office building proposed for Site 10, currently occupied by the campervan park. At the Court hearing, Waterfront Watch put forward the view that purely commercial buildings have no place on the waterfront, and that the development of Wellington’s gem should be focussed on recreational uses with a mixture of open space and appropriately sized buildings that meet the needs of people enjoying what’s special about the area. The Court’s decision is expected before the end of the year.

The debate was arranged without the involvement of Waterfront Watch. Speakers for the affirmative in the debate were Ian Pike (Manager of the council's "City Shaper" group), Gerald Blunt (WCC) and Guy Marriage from VUW School of Architecture. Councillors Paul Eagle and Nicola Young were on the team presenting the alternative view.

Several Waterfront Watch members attended the debate which was a good opportunity to better understand how different people think the waterfront should be developed. Hopefully the dialogue will lead to a better planning process for agreeing how the development of the waterfront should be completed. 

The real meaning of the District Plan's 35% limit on waterfront building coverage

The Environment Court hearing in August 2015 about a five-storey office building on the campervan park opposite the Post Office building highlighted the potential for more buildings on the waterfront.

The District Plan sets a limit of 35 per cent for the area of buildings allowed across the waterfront. The city council included the limit in a plan change in 2001. Councillors took comfort in the thought that 65 per cent of the waterfront would remain public space, open to the sky.

But in an unusual quirk, the site coverage rule relates to the whole area of the planning zone rather than to individual land titles. Also unusually, the waterfront area as defined in the District Plan includes road area of the adjacent Waterloo and Jervois Quays and Cable Street.

In the outer city and suburbs, the District Plan sets site coverage limits as a percentage of land title area, excluding streets and reserves. In the outer residential areas, the maximum site coverage on a section without a resource consent is 35%.  In Mt Victoria the planning limit is 50% and the actual built coverage is about 40%. On the same basis, excluding roads, the building coverage limit on the waterfront allowed in the plan is 45%.

The Environment Court heard that the proposed new building would bring the site coverage to 23%, well short of the allowed 35%. The planner representing the applicants – the building developer who applied with the support of the council – emphasised that the district plan meant that the proposed building was entitled to be considered on its merits. Waterfront Watch asked the court to consider the impacts of the building and not to simply assume that it is acceptable, just because it was within the limit laid down in the plan.

Within the 35% building coverage limit, there is in fact room to accommodate the footprint of two more Te Papas or over 16 more of the office building proposed for Kumutoto. Though 65% of the area would still be open, including the area of the Quays, if the building footprint is stamped 16 times across a plan of the waterfront it is plain that it is time to shout “stop building on the waterfront”.

Download a PDF plan showing the absurdity of the District Plan's building limit that would allow 16 more footprints the size of the building proposed for Site 10 on Kumutoto.

A line has to be drawn well before the 35% limit is reached. Waterfront Watch believes that each proposed building must be critically examined and should be approved only if it serves the needs of people enjoying the recreational values of the waterfront.

There was a similar message in evidence to the Environment Court by Graham McIndoe, a designer who as chair of the council’s independent Technical Advisory Group has contributed much to the high design standards of waterfront developments. He said “the issue of ‘should there be another building’ comes down to what is the benefit of that building to the waterfront, what is its impact on the waterfront, [and] how does it contribute to a high quality public environment on the waterfront”.

The decision of the Environment Court on the application for the new office building at Kumutoto is expected before the end of the year.

This article was published on where it stimulated an informed debate.


Kumutoto Site 10 Environment Court Hearing:
August 2015

The Resource Consent application for a proposed 5 storey building at the Northern end of the waterfront was heard in the Environment Court over three days in August 2015.

The application had been referred direct to the court without the usual council hearing.  The applications had been lodged by Willis Bond Ltd as developer of the building and the Wellington City Council which would develop the surrounding public space.  Waterfront Watch joined the case under the Resource Management Act representing the public interest along with 5 individuals who appeared at the hearing as separate parties.

The Court's decision is expected to be released before the end of 2015.

Copies of the applicants' evidence are available on the Wellington City Council's website.

You can download the evidence filed prior to the hearing on behalf of Waterfront Watch by our President Patrick McCombs and by Barbara Fill, our expert witness on historical issues.


            Proposed Willis Bond office building on Kumutoto Site 10


WCC’s Wellington Waterfront Development Plan for 2015- 2018.

WCC’s Wellington Waterfront Development Plan for 2015- 2018 can be seen at


Newsletters, Submissions & Reports

Please see Communications for previous newsletters, reports and stories.


Account Access

Processing... please wait