The dispute over the future of a Shag Point roadside memorial to Dunedin man Riley Baker is regrettable.
At a time when family and friends are still coming to terms with Mr Baker's death, a letter from infrastructure company Downer saying the memorial must be removed will have done little to help heal the pain of the loss of a loved one.
Mr Baker died after a Chinese tourist crossed the centre line and collided into Mr Baker's oncoming motorcycle on State Highway 1 in August 2016. The accident came at a time when there was widespread concern about the dangers of foreign drivers on New Zealand's roads.
The memorial, which includes a bench seat and plaque, was unveiled in January on Mr Baker's birthday.
It appears, however, a breakdown in communication led to confusion over what the NZ Transport Agency approved and what was actually installed.
Mr Baker's family had sought, and been granted, permission to place a seat and plaque at the site.
The NZTA said it signed off on a seat overlooking the ocean and a plaque was to be included as part of the seat. However, after the seat was installed changes were made to the plaque by Mr Baker's family.
In short, what was thought to have been a simple plaque attached to a seat ended up a raised concrete plaque which included some of Mr Baker's ashes.
NZTA conceded it had ''not clearly communicated'' to the family at the time.
Downer, in consultation with the NZTA, feared the plaque would set a precedent for memorials ''which it would find hard to control in the future'' and asked it be removed.
NZTA has a difficult task trying to manage the needs of grieving families with those of road safety.
Some will argue Mr Baker's memorial is slightly different. It is placed on NZTA land, well away from the roadside and shrouded by bushes.
The memorial has received one public complaint, which prompted the review by Downer.
But NZTA also has a valid point when it said allowing a raised plaque, and some of Mr Baker's ashes, may create a precedent which would be difficult to control.
Road memorials, in various forms, are, sadly, all too common in this country which often has an annual road toll in excess of 300. While driving, it is not uncommon to spot a white cross signifying a loss of life.
It is up to the NZTA to manage these memorials and it has some clear guidelines in place. A spokeswoman said NZTA understood the desire of families to commemorate those killed in road crashes with memorials, with the hope of preventing similar tragedies happening to other families.
NZTA generally allows memorial white crosses within state highway road reserves, provided the installation of the cross does not pose any risk to road users, or have the potential to distract drivers. The agency said it recognises white crosses identify to the public locations where fatal crashes have occurred in recent years, and can serve as a
positive and often potent road
safety reminder.
NZTA tries to accommodate requests from families for memorials, but also has to balance this with the responsibility of protecting other road users from distractions and potential hazards, particularly in a high-speed environment.
Crosses are not permitted on motorways, as they are high-speed, high-volume places where stopping is illegal and potential distractions must, by law, be kept to an absolute minimum.
Police say the memorials are a sombre reminder to be alert and mindful of driving safely at all times as a momentary lapse in awareness or judgement can have tragic outcomes.
To NZTA's credit, it has said it wants to find a solution to the problem for Mr Baker's family. It is to be hoped, for the sake of his family and friends, one can quickly be found.
