It’s been an eventful week as always, so here’s a few things that we have found interesting. We also hope everyone had a happy and relaxing Waitangi Day!
This week in Greater Auckland
We’re still running on summer time, but provided two chewy posts:
- On Tuesday, a guest post by Nicolas Reid discussed the use of gondolas for mass transit.
- On Wednesday, Matt questioned why Auckland’s trains are now slower after all the upgrades.
This post, like all our work, is brought to you by the Greater Auckland crew and made possible by generous donations from our readers and fans. If you’d like to support our work, you can join our circle of supporters here, or support us on Substack!
One weird trick to beat congestion!
New Yorkers are already seeing an impact one month in. Along with fewer drivers in general, the vehicles that still travel through the area are dealing with less traffic. Those crossing through the Holland Tunnel see the most time savings, with average trip times down 48% during peak morning hours. The Williamsburg and Queensboro Bridges are both seeing an average of 30% faster travel times. During afternoon peak hours, drivers in the entire zone are seeing travel times drop up to 59%.
More commuters are opting for buses to cross Manhattan, and those buses are now traveling more quickly, too. Weekday bus ridership has grown 6%, while weekend ridership is up 21%, compared to January 2024. (Subway ridership has also grown by 7.3% on weekdays and 12% on weekends, part of a larger trend in ridership growth happening since the fall, per the MTA.
Can they hurry up and introduce this in Auckland?
E-Buses for West and South Auckland
Auckland Transport announced they’ve signed new contracts for some west and south Auckland bus services.
New Zealand’s largest ever tendered bus services contract has been awarded today, with Auckland Transport (AT) signing on Ritchies Transport to deliver expanded operations in west and south Auckland.
AT’s Director of Public Transport and Active Modes Stacey van der Putten says the new nine-year, $1.068 billion contract with Ritchies is particularly exciting as it will see 175 new electric buses introduced on the network while delivering value for ratepayers and public transport users.
“Because of the large scale of this bus contract we have been able to secure strong value for ratepayers and continue the fast pace of electrification of Auckland’s bus network,” Ms van der Putten said.
“This signifies a major step forward in enhancing Auckland’s public transport infrastructure and reflects AT’s commitment to delivering a robust, future-ready public transit system.
“For our customers the modern new electric buses will make catching the bus a quieter, more comfortable and enjoyable way to travel.
“The inclusion of zero emission buses and advanced environmental standards in the contract aligns with AT’s Mission Electric and sustainability goals to significantly reduce carbon emissions, contributing to a cleaner, greener Auckland,” she said.
The new contract will see some bus routes completely operated by electric buses and also includes the Airport Link, where the existing electric buses will be replaced with larger vehicles with more capacity from late 2025.
…..
Once operational, the new contract will deliver more frequent and reliable bus services, directly benefiting west and south Auckland communities by improving connectivity and reducing wait times. The contract will add at least three new frequent bus routes, which run at least every 15 minutes, 7am to 7pm, 7 days a week.
In addition, new communities in Clarks Beach, Paerata, Red Hills and Whenuapai will benefit from additional bus services. These service improvements are funded through Auckland Council’s Climate Action Transport Targeted Rate (CATTR).
…..
“All buses used on these contracts will be fitted with advanced driver assistance systems, which include collision avoidance, lane departure warnings, and pedestrian and cyclist detection. They will also be fitted with a driver fatigue management system.
Interestingly, AT says Auckland currently has180 electric buses in the fleet – which is already the largest for any Australian city – and a further 75 are to be added by June. By August next year, there will be 450 e-buses which will make up about a third of Auckland’s total bus fleet.
No-interest e-bike loans starting in Tasmania
A fantastic (and low-cost) new policy in Tasmania offers interest-free loans of up to $10,000 AUD to buy e-bikes and cargo e-bikes. This is a great way to make it easy for people to switch to biking, especially for those short local trips that make up the majority of urban journeys:
The loans are being delivered through the existing Tasmanian Energy Saver Loan Scheme, which offers loans for home appliances that reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Adding e-bikes to the mix of products that can be purchased with the loan makes sense as transport accounts for a significant proportion of households’ emissions.
The loans give people the money to buy an e-bike up to the value of $10,000 and then 1–3 years to pay off the loan without having to pay interest.
As the purchase cost of an e-bike, and especially a cargo e-bike, can be a disincentive to many people, these loans will allow for a greater uptake.
Having $10,000 as the limit will allow the purchase of many cargo e-bike models which can help people get rid of a second car.
Swapping car trips for an e-bike means the loan can be paid back with money saved from petrol, parking and other vehicle costs.
The $10,000 is the cap for all products purchased so if you’ve already used the scheme to buy solar panels or a heat pump, then you’ll have less to spend on an e-bike.
Car dependency and school drop-off
Great article on the consequences of car dependency for school drop-off.
I’ve come to see that the inherent chaos, inefficiency, and safety risks of school drop-offs by car mirror the paradox of car dependency more broadly: the more that people who have the choice or the privilege of driving are incentivized to drive, the more difficult, less comfortable, and less safe it becomes for people who don’t.
[…]
What if, instead of thinking about transportation access for non-driving children and youth as requiring unique and separate interventions, we develop solutions that work for all non-drivers?
For instance, all non-drivers benefit when we invest in safer routes to schools by reducing car speeds, shortening crossing times, and building better sidewalks and protected bike infrastructure. Giant cracks or uplifts in the sidewalk prevent wheelchair access, they also make it really hard to push a stroller, or if you’re a kid, you’re probably going to wipe out if you hit one of these on a bike or scooter.
School traffic – and the productive time wasted by parents and caregivers (and everyone else) – is a perpetual issue, as this recent NZ Herald story illustrates. And when official policies give people no choice but to drive, we won’t solve it anytime soon.
Power to the (electric) trains!
Caltrain in California has found new electric trains are performing above expectations, with regenerative braking systems returning approximately 23% of consumed energy back to the electric grid:
Caltrain had initially projected its annual electricity costs for the new fleet to be around 19.5 million USD. However, with average energy use now measuring 207 MWh on weekdays and 175 MWh on weekends, annual cost estimates have been revised to 16.5 million USD.
Furthermore, the agency expects to receive approximately 6 million USD annually in energy credits through California’s Low Carbon Fuel Standard Program, bringing the total fuel costs for electric service below those of the previous diesel-powered trains.
Regenerative braking, a technology introduced in 1886, functions by reversing an electric motor during braking, converting kinetic energy into electricity rather than dissipating it as heat. Caltrain’s electric fleet is equipped to transfer this recovered energy to the Overhead Contact System (OCS), which supplies power either to other trains or back to the grid via the system’s traction power facilities.
Currently, the energy returned to the grid is provided free of charge, as no legislation mandates reimbursement for the regenerated electricity.
Strict road behaviour enforcement working in Vietnam?
The government in Vietnam has recently begun ramping up a crackdown on speeding and dangerous driving, to address its high road fatality rate.
Some found it charming, the ballet of many wheels dancing around pedestrians. But Vietnam’s road fatality rates have long been among the highest in Asia. And after cracking down on drunken driving, the country’s leaders are now going after everything else.
Under a new law, traffic fines have risen tenfold, with the biggest tickets exceeding $1,500. The average citation tops a month’s salary for many, and that’s more than enough to change behavior. Intersections have become both calmer and more congested by an outbreak of caution. Faulty green lights have even led scared drivers to walk motorbikes across streets the police might be watching.
The crackdown has led to traffic stopping in many places, and many find it extreme.
Caution, by all accounts, has disrupted the flow.
In major cities, motorbikes playing by the old rules now frequently rear-end drivers trying to be careful, stopping early, sometimes even when lights are green. Truck drivers have paused wherever they could to avoid fines for working too many hours straight. Intersections are now noticeably louder, as honking drivers squeal where traffic used to gurgle and move like a river around stones.
But the approach seeing some success, first in tackling drunk driving a few years ago, and again in more recent efforts.
And yet, as many acknowledge, there is a logic to the effort. Since stepped-up enforcement started, beer sales have fallen by 25 percent, and drunken driving has declined across Vietnam.
Vietnam’s national leaders — just a few months into power, with many who started their careers in state security — are eager to go further. The pursuit of safety and government surveillance seem to be aligned: In Hanoi, officials announced a plan last week to add 40,000 cameras to the roughly 20,000 already in place across the capital.
[…]
A twitchy balance between chaos and order has started to emerge. Though some motorbike riders still speed against traffic, and on sidewalks, far more stop when they should alongside the country’s growing ranks of cars and trucks.Sensing success, some commentators have begun to wonder what else could be changed with large fines — perhaps big tickets for littering would help reduce trash all over the country?
Credit Linh Pham for The New York Times
What will Simeon Brown bring to the field of health?
Dr Kirsty Wild and Prof Alistair Woodward discuss the implications of Simeon Brown’s track record in transport for his new gig as Minister of Health. The verdict: his anti-safety campaign doesn’t bode well.
Nearly two thirds (63 percent) of serious injury in New Zealand is caused by transport crashes. They keep our hospitals full to overflowing; and efforts to avoid these horrific and frequently life-changing injuries are necessary for the sustainability of the health system.
Officially, reducing transport injury is a health priority, yet Brown made a number of decisions, against health advice, that are likely to make the problem worse. The decision to reduce funding for pedestrian and cyclist safety infrastructure was inexplicable, given the high rates of severe injury per kilometre travelled among these groups.
Who is even in favour of Simeon’s speed limit increases?
More and more local communities are speaking out against the government’s unilaterial, un-evidenced, and unsafe speed increases.
In Hawkes Bay:
Parents of children at Hōhepa in Hawke’s Bay fear an increase of highway speed limits from 80km/h to 100km/h will put residents and staff turning into its driveway at risk.
Hōhepa – a service provider for special needs children and adults with an intellectual disability – has a centre and store on State Highway 51 north of Clive.
The stretch of road, along with State Highway 5 between Napier and Taupō farther north, is part of the National and Act coalition agreement to reverse speed-limit reductions implemented under the previous Labour Government.
The section between Napier and Clive is classed as a rural connector and will automatically revert to 100km/h by July.
Mark Witchalls, who has a daughter at Hōhepa and is part of its Families Association, said the decision to raise the speed limit from Clive to the bridges just past the organisation was “nuts”.
And in Ashburton, not only does the council object to proposed speed limit increases, so does the local National MP (and Minister for the South Island) James Meager:
Ashburton District Council wrote to the NZ Transport Agency (NZTA) to strongly oppose the speed limit increasing on State Highway 1 through Rakaia – and it appears the Government is willing to listen.
The speed limit through the town is set to increase to 70kph by July 1, nine months after it was reduced to 50kph.
It’s one of the 38 sections of the state highway network that the NZ Transport Agency (NZTA) will automatically reverse speed limits on.
Transport Minister Chris Bishop said he was aware of the immediate backlash to the announced speed reversal in Rakaia.
[…]
Rangitata MP James Meager said reversing the blanket speed limit reductions may be welcomed in some parts of the country – but not Rakaia.
“I know there has been a lot of confusion and a bit of surprise about this one.”
Meager supported the reduction when it was introduced last year and “I still support that to be a sensible, safe speed through town which still allows traffic, people and goods to flow north and south”.
The concerns aren’t just about safety, either. A reader recently wrote that by his calculations, lifting speeds from 100kmh to 110kmh will result in 5% more emissions. With widespread urban speed increases planned as well, this doesn’t look great for climate progress in New Zealand.
A sidewalk that never ends
Montevideo, Uruguay is home to a 14-mile waterside promenade called ‘La Rambla’. We ask, could this be Tamaki Drive in Auckland?
One of the longest sidewalks in the world, La Rambla meanders along the shimmering estuary Río de la Plata, past beaches, wine bars and purple-blossomed jacaranda trees, statues and sculptures, soccer matches and friends engrossed in conversations over cups of yerba mate.
If you go in the summer — as the Northern Hemisphere shivers in the cold — you may find yourself part of a mass migration of locals toting folding chairs to the promenade, turning it into, essentially, the city’s outdoor living room.
Will National regret scuppering John Key’s cycleway legacy?
Here’s an excellent write-up by Gill Higgins of 1News, about whether the coalition government may come to regret the defunding of active modes under former transport minister Simeon Brown.
As well as reducing the burden of disease, cycling’s an effective way to reduce harmful emissions and cut pollution that causes respiratory disease. “I can’t believe they don’t know the evidence, which makes me think and conclude that, for whatever reason, they’re just ignoring it,” says [Simon] Kingham [former science advisor to the Ministry of Transport].
So it’s ironic that the big push for cycleways in New Zealand came when National was previously in power. On a cloudy day in August in 2014, then-Prime Minister John Key got on a bike and wobbled off for a photo shoot to mark the opening of the Grafton Gully cycleway. He announced $100 million in funding for urban bike routes, and another $333 million the following year.
(As longtime readers might recall, Greater Auckland covered the Grafton Gully opening ceremony, including recordings of key quotes from Key himself.)
The 1News write-up is based on an excellent longform video piece by Higgins, which cuts through the culture war and slogans to really examine the value of cycleways. It’s viewable on TVNZ OnDemand, and Bike Tauranga has uploaded a version:
New Design Manual for New South Wales
Across the Tasman, a new roads and streets manual has been released, and it’s apparently a lot better than the draft version:
[To] help designers, planners, state government and local councils make the best possible use of our most important public spaces, Transport for NSW has published a new Design of Roads and Streets (DORAS) manual.
DORAS describes 22 street types for 6 ‘place’ contexts. There are multiple examples of different treatments in a variety of formats – plans, sections, overviews, photographs and case studies.
It aims to be a really practical ‘how to’ guide for practitioners delivering new and re-imagined streetscapes that strongly embed the Movement and Place framework.
As Bicycle NSW writes, the final version addresses many (but not all) of the concerns raised around active modes during the consultation process:
Bicycle NSW provided feedback on the draft DORAS in 2024. We had many concerns. The draft was very wordy without a clear structure. There was a lack of ambition for reallocating road space on arterial roads, and little mention of the role of street design in reaching net zero.
And we were very worried that 30km/h as a speed limit was largely ignored. This is despite the UN and a raft of other organisations, both in Australia and overseas, backed by plenty of research and evidence, calling for 30km/h to be the maximum speed on streets where people live, work and play.
We heard from senior staff at Transport for NSW that our comments were very useful, and so were keen to see how our recommendations were incorporated. The good news? The final DORAS is much better!
It’s encouraging to see good design being normalised. And reminds us of Auckland Transport’s much-heralded Transport Design Manual and its Urban Street and Road Design Guide (see here for Version 1.1 from 2022) – which promised “a 21st century approach to designing urban streets to be safer, healthier, greener and more enjoyable for all”. Anyhow, let’s hope NSW does a good job of implementing their new standards.
That’s us for this short, summery week. Enjoy your weekend!
Processing...
Hard to know ,whether the Health Minister will recognize any synergies with his previous role. He could be advised to “follow the science”, but his track record suggests not. Whatever he decides,the bicycle remains a key component in the Health Portfolio as it does in the Transport realm, it sits there, non judgemental,ready to be unleashed,when pragmatism overcomes ideology.
Imagine having a tool ,like the bicycle in your toolkit,and choosing not to use it.
The 28 year old Bluebridge ferry Strait Ferronia broke down this morning and most of its passengers were put on the Kiwirail owned Aratere. Which is 26 years old and the only remaining purpose built rail ferry. There are rumours Bluebridge is scratching around trying to find a cheap second hand ferry but none are available. None that aren’t complete liabilities although Bluebridge has a history of buying boats that were laid up for years. You can guess why they were not being used and therfore “affordable”.
It’s less than a month since it last had engine trouble – https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/538762/cook-strait-ferry-delayed-by-engine-trouble.
Nice the New York congestion charge working as intended.
Thanks for the link to the 1News cycling video. A couple of times Simeon Brown said it was quicker to drive. Very often it’s quicker by e-bike, but he doesn’t seem to know that. Is it possible to educate this government, or do they just not want to know?
And he doesn’t have time to cycle anywhere but he does have time to drive to the gym….
The video just showed how ridiculous and dangerous he is. Willingly ignoring benefits to transport and health because he likes cars. An embarrassment to offices of Government.
Yes, he’s a total plonker and I fear for the harm he is now going to wreck on the Health system having done his best to f-up the transport system. The sooner this wanker and his cohort of idealogs get the boot the better.
His insistence that he’s only doing what he was elected for shows a total unwillingness to listen and learn from others so be damned if I want to listen and learn from him. Maybe a few years on the opposition benches wondering about how he got there will be good for his growth and development. Maybe not. Ad hominen attack intended.
I’m wondering what the “three new frequent routes” might be. Perhaps the long-ago foreshadowed new routes to support urban development in the Papakura-Drury area (Routes 40, 41 and 42)? Or the upgrading of existing routes to frequent status? Does anyone have firm knowledge on this?
Or maybe two of them are the proposed new Route 15 (New Lynn to Henderson via Glen Eden) or 17A/B/C/whatever, replacing 170/171/172?
37 and 39 in South Auckland seem likely. I don’t think Drury was covered in this package
Unless the units have changed since 2023, Drury is indeed included in this package. It’s in the same unit as the Papakura routes.
I don’t know where they got three from, but I know exactly which frequent routes are being introduced: 15, 17, 37, 39, 40, 41, 42. All of these are included in the contract, as far as I know, and they are all scheduled to start in 2026 except 41, which is planned for 2029.
“Interestingly, AT says Auckland currently has180 electric buses in the fleet – which is already the largest for any Australian city”
Last time I looked we are NOT part of Australia! Australasian perhaps??
It would be really good to see some numbers, facts and figures about how electrification of the fleet is working out for the providers and AT but I guess we never will as they will all claim commercial sensitivity when it’s our money they are spending. There are myriad of ways numbers can be reported without showing the actual numbers so if you’ve got a good story to tell AT please share.
These speed limit reversals are almost entirely bought on by the serious lack of good infrastructure in NZ. I’ve seen plenty of people criticise the move to raise speeds but not once stop to think why the govt would do this. Why? Well it’s pretty simple why to appease the public and give them what they want. They want unsafe speeds but why is that? Because often there is no alternative when the speed limit is lowered and it simply ads time to their trip. Even zones that have been 80 (like dome valley) for years still draw criticism, to be fair that’s probably because the police only seem to stalk for tickets on the passing lanes. But long story short the reversals are a symptom of poor infrastructure around NZ and lack of alternative gaslighting people into demanding higher speeds because there is no other option. NZTA shouldn’t be allowing developments near state highways because for many regions it’s there lifeline it’s critical for their economy. Lowering speeds because some developer found some cheap land (because it’s on the state highway) then egging NZTA on to lower the speed so their development is worth more is wrong. AKL to Whangarei should be a motorway but it isn’t so the public made NZTA chicken out on their plan for a blanket 80k limit because they do not want 15+ mins added to their trip each way the issue is we have to accept the unsafe road for now knowing their will be deaths in the years to come. Speed limits shouldn’t have to be political but because the building of new roads is so politicised it stalls progress on wider safer speed implementation because there is simply no alternative. I do believe most NZers support an 80k speed limit for rural roads in theory but they want a. 110k alternative before that happens meaning we remain with higher speeds until a bypass is built. As for 30 areas about to be reversed sorry but no one wants that. I am yet to see one car follow 30 that isn’t stuck behind me following the law, every time I do 30 the car in front pulls away and a queue of cars forms behind me and then someone does about 60 to overtake. EVERY. SINGLE. TIME. Even I know all the evidence about 30k areas but the lowest I would support for a permanent urban speed limit is 40 as we don’t really have 70-80k arterials like Syd, Melb,Bris to zip us across the city in a hurry meaning we need 50k rat runs to save us time.
“Because often there is no alternative when the speed limit is lowered and it simply ads time to their trip”
Ugh. Its been proven that most of the “controversial” speed reductions that Simeon railed against add either very little delay, or essentially (for many rural roads) none. But keep talking up the need for more road maintenance, because our car-centric system needs more and more of that, thanks to the heavier and heavier trucks National alllowed on the road (google HPMV and axle load to the power of four).
“NZTA shouldn’t be allowing developments near state highways”
Lol. We shouldn’t allow people to live where the roads are!
I’m sorry, didn’t you hear Luxon – we got to stop saying NO! (Well, unless it’s housing of course – National keeps saying no to that!)
Road maintenance? No I said we need brand new roads to replace the existing goat tracks. Stop lying where’s the evidence that it adds “essentially none” time. Do the test yourself time a drive at 100 then time a drive at 60 the trip at 100 is much faster! Time a drive at 50 vs 30 the 50k trip is way faster. But you already know this you’re just hoping the speeds stay low to frustrate people out of their cars, (Which is fine of course) but don’t use the guise of safety. At least some other GA readers are more honest bringing up concerns about emissions and mode shift without talking about safety. If you were really concerned about road safety you would’ve been begging for more roadside drug tests when the greens delayed it. You would’ve been demanding driver retraining often. You would be demanding that alcohol be limited to a few drinks even for pedestrians (because yes even pedestrians drinking can cause deaths on the road (falls, walking onto the road suddenly etc). You should’ve been demanding every person with a drivers licence goes for regular tests for illicit drugs. But no all I’ve heard from you Damian is wanting to keep the speed limit as low as possible and to infest streets with as many speed bumps as possible making life hell for ambulance patients and other emergency services. As for your wilful disregard for democracy which is arguably the most disgusting part I have no words how could you be so arrogant as to ignore the will of the people. A clear majority wants speeds to go UP (65%) and that’s what must be done.
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/522281/kiwis-want-lower-speed-limits-around-schools-high-risk-areas-survey-shows
don’t bother KLK, this rightist is unfortunately inflicted with the common trumpist affliction of “democracy is when I get what I want”.
KLK why do you keep posting survey which asked leading questions. Besides how does that survey size compare to the official consultation with thousands submitting in detail for both arguments and ultimately faster and ignore evidence came out on top 65% support for faster! Democracy is when the a majority in the example of the offical speeds consultation 65% wanted the speeds to rise. I know you’re not pro Democracy at all Burrower but just be open about that and I wouldn’t need to respond but trying to lower speeds under the guise of safety and lies is not the way to do it. If the evidence was so strong and the support for safer speeds was there the argument would barely exist. The slower speeds would just stand up on their own merits without the need to constantly defend them. Causes it might make someone’s trip in a car a bit quicker *gasp*.
Can we get a link to that 65% result?
correct Colah, I am against uneducated selfish fools like yourself getting their own way. I suppose you’d also be entirely for the complete destruction of forests for suburbs and farms and logging if “the majority wanted it”. Pathetic imbecile.
The evidence for slower speeds benefiting travel times congestion and the economy is there and is strong, unfortunately nothing exists in a vacuum and while the car lobbyists who have this country in a pseudofascist chokehold can spew their propaganda people are unfortunately going to get swayed by appeals to their “me go vroom vroom fast” individualism. Like George carlin said, most people are dumb as rocks.
Thank you for your honesty Burrower I do genuinely appreciate reasonable debate. I’m glad you recognise you’ve lost and the speeds (where the majority want it) will rise. Democracy isn’t when I get what I want it’s about when the majority get what they want. That’s the key difference I’m not selfish so as to step in the way when the majority clearly want something. I disagree with plastic bottled water but the majority clearly seem to keep buying the stuff so what the heck if they want to pay way more for water let them. Slower speeds do not make travel times faster let’s just get that right, now I agree you’re right slower is safer that’s an undeniable fact but there are some idiots like Geoff Upson out there that keep spewing faster is safer nonsense. The difference is with me you’ll hear it bluntly and I will never intentionally lie, I know slower is safer but I don’t want any time added to my trip and again I’m actually genuinely sorry my car brain has made me like this but I’ve seen the consequences first hand of lowering speed limits and installing speed bumps. No one ever mentions lowering speed limits slows the rapid ambulance response times but anyway that probably doesn’t matter too much to you and that’s fine. Just remember Simeon was very kind to have a public consultation about this and they listened to that. If this didn’t happen you would’ve pissed people off enough to vote somone like Geoff Upson into transport minister then you’ll really regret ever complaining about listening to democracy.
If I can get a survey with 65% in favor of allowing the public to shit on your lawn, would you be cool with that?
Yeah thats absolutely fine if the majority want it. Just know because I’m Gen Z I don’t actually own a house or even live somewhere with a lawn so they might have to use yours cheers. But the point still stands Democracy > Evidence end of story.
Leading question?
KLK I don’t know why I have to provide a link for the 65% for faster it’s been posted on Greater Auckland, News outlets and the govt press releases many times. I’d also take it you never read the submissions for the draft rule and just wanted to keep being argumentative. But I’ll post the link for you to have a read anyway. https://www.transport.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/Summary-of-submissions-Draft-Land-Transport-Rule-Setting-of-Speed-Limits-2024.pdf
Just another thing before I forget KLK. Your precious NZTA survey which is the only one you refer to over and over again had leading questions like talking about “survivable collisions” which has been pre inserted into the question to get the answer they want. Which btw all these respondents were sat down in person in a room for 35mins so I doubt they would be any of the working public who actually use the roads for work.
An independent survey produces a very different response with just 12% of respondents agreeing with the notion of lower general speed limits.
Even when respondents were asked a leading question only 17% wanted highway limits dropped. The public are very much against speed reductions. https://www.thepost.co.nz/politics/350074748/public-politicians-dont-lower-speed-limits