1. 29 April 2019 – BID group presentation
Karangahape Road Business Association Upgrade or Disruption ….
29 April 2019 – BID group presentation

2. 600+ members
Target Rate $435K
Sectors – hospitality, accommodation, professional, retail, IT, creatives, social assistance , arts and galleries.
Vision: K Road is a place that celebrates diversity and supports culture and creativity and opportunities for business to flourish in a safe and welcoming environment.
Everyone has a story.
K Road Business Association - unique, cultural, creative, with a maximum diversity.

3. AT “want to make K Road a more attractive place for businesses, residents, and its other users while also making sure it is ready for the changes ahead”
(AT website)
The project is funded by Auckland Council, with AT and central government making up the balance.
The budget reflects a design-led project, constructed using high quality materials, appropriate to Karangahape Road’s city centre location and unique character.
Research and consultation – residents and business
Update April 2019 – project changes
K Road Streetscape Enhancements and Cycle lane project possibly

4. Benefits of the project
A safer, more appealing pedestrian environment.
More space for outdoor dining and street activities.
A safer, more attractive route for people on bikes.
Improved transport choices for the local community.
Improved bus efficiency and reliability.
A greener, more attractive environment.
An environment that reflects Māori cultural values.
Benefits of the project

5. Features Improvements for pedestrians.
A separated cycleway in each direction that will connect to a network of existing and planned cycleways in the area.
Peak hour bus lanes and bus stop relocations.
Rain gardens, trees and landscaping.
Changes to parking.
Upgraded street lighting.
Street furniture, cycle parking, arts and culture.
Opportunities for outdoor dining and street activities.
(AT Website)

6. This is Promised!

7. April 2019 – AT funding shortfall/ Potential changes to design
2015/2016
2016/2017
2017/2018
2018/2019
DRO funding
Precinct Parking Plan/ Street Design
Open Streets
Planning and Communications
Auckland Transport
ACCAB funding
Survey – Residents & Businesses
April 2019 – AT funding shortfall/ Potential changes to design
Auckland Council
“Open Streets”
Fait Accompli,
Can we stop it? Members are in support of many aspects
Development Response Office
How do we make the best of it…
KBA
KBA Survey 1
KBA Committee ‘Stance’
Parking & diversity of transport
KBA Survey 2
Lobbying for Development Response DRO and AT
Development Response Plan
Design Reference Group
ACCAB
ACCAB funding

8. But that’s not all that’s happening up here… CRL Light Rail
CRL (completed 2024)
Light Rail

9. Risks
Manager new to the BID. KBA had a lack of expertise in managing this kind of project.
Who to go to for help? DRO, legal experts, planners, KBA members
Timing – overlap of several projects
Business disruption drop in revenue (Doing their best business)
Committee divided
Risk between completion of this project and start of CRL
‘Over gentrification’ - blandness

11. What is the role of a BID in these situations?

12. How has KBA responded to this?
Development Response- AC, AT, CRL
A little and often – AT stakeholder engagement people
Subcontracting [local contractor, familiar with area]
Committee unity (for example, stance)
Accepted its being done to us
Looked at member feedback and took action
Insistence on communication
Constant dialogue
Advocacy- action
How has KBA responded to this?

13. KBA’ s Development Response
❏ Business support events monthly
❏ Subsidised/facilitated walking tours bi monthly
❏ Information pack created to inform and support businesses
❏ Sunday Trading campaign- ongoing
KBA’ s Development Response

14. AT Development Response
General liaison with stakeholders
Site walkovers
Site fencing/hoarding project management
Wayfinding + Temporary Signage Project Management
Universal Access Audits
Place Activation/Tactical Urban Interventions
Monitoring and Evaluation
AT Development Response

15. KBA Learnings ‘Council’ approach vs. business approach
Sense of urgency – differs between stakeholders
Emotional response vs. strategic response
Roles of the stakeholders involved
AT – project owner, understanding of development response, internal issues
AC – development response funding and advise
KBA – representing our members and helping the committee
DRO – learning from them
WLB – advocacy on behalf of KBA and sharing our learnings

16. AT vision was not clear to KBA members
AT strategic outcomes [e.g. cycle lanes approach] was not understood or well communicated
People got stuck talking about parking, it was important to them
Parking Mitigation Plan was never prioritised
Development Response Office vision never linked to the AT project
KBA had little influence over major parts of the project - focus on what we could influence

17. Communications roles
KBA communicates AT messages on their behalf
KBA communicates KBA messages separately
Used local contractors to do some of role – what happens if timelines slip?
Need to continue working with the stakeholders – keep it professional
Impact on K Road environment
Look and feel of the area. We need to follow our members wishes, DLG
Perception of a ‘construction zone’ and ‘hard to travel through’
Visitor numbers – decline?

18. A marathon, not a sprint – you need to be in for the long game
Its not over until its over… we keep thinking we have got there but there has been nearly a year of postponements

19. Even the best laid plans can change if there is a…..
budget shortfall

20. Cycle lanes down both sides of K Road plus streetscape enhancements

21. Or, in the words of Jim Morrison
“The future is uncertain but the end is always near “

22. Short of keeping “your eyes on the road and your hands upon the wheel”
have you got any good driving tips??