Last week was Road Safety Week, which Auckland Transport marked by sharing a happy little video about safety at the school gate, while quietly beginning the reversal of safe speeds on 1500+ streets, mostly around schools. Strange times.
There was no media release about the speed reversals, but perhaps strangest of all was the missed opportunity to celebrate the last-minute rescue of (parts of) two neighbourhoods from speed reversals. You’re reading it here first.
A quick recap: Auckland’s out in the cold
Auckland Transport (AT) believes the Speed Rule requires it to reverse speed reductions anywhere that mentioned schools as “a reason”.
At the same time, other cities, like Dunedin and Hamilton, have interpreted the same rule as letting them keep safe speed areas, including around schools – even when they’d used identical language to Auckland (see here). The new Minister of Transport is apparently fine with this.
So Auckland stands alone…
… except for Waiheke, which has reportedly asked for (and received!) an exemption via the previous Minister.
This is a confusing situation. Under urgent pressure from advocates and community groups, AT’s Chair of the Board and CEO agreed to ask for clarification from Minister Chris Bishop.
AT is pressing ahead with raising speeds all over the city, damaging its credibility and reducing safety across the transport network:
- even though we all now see this is a choice, not a mandate.
- even though Auckland Council opposes raising speeds, especially around schools.
- even though AT’s CEO has confirmed to Council that AT opposes the speed limit reversals.
- even though the reversals will be harmful to public safety, a point well understood by the Minister, by Council, by AT’s executives, safety experts, and governors. People will be injured as a result of these actions, and some may die (we don’t yet know who, but tragically, we will find out).
- even though the climate implications are also obvious and harmful.
- and even though there is major legal risk for all involved, as Patrick’s post noted yesterday.
To raise your voice on this, you can add your name to this petition (see more options for action here).
There’s still a chance of saving everyone involved from inflicting unnecessary harm on Aucklanders (and their own reputations). If this happens, we’ll be the first to praise them for their timely, commonsense, ethical action.
In the meantime, let’s look at the two wins for safe speeds you won’t have heard about. They highlight the scale of the harm ahead – and also the scale of the opportunity to do the right thing.
Small miracles in Ponsonby and Manurewa
Last Wednesday, AT’s Speed Limit Reversal Viewer map was briefly offline. When it returned, two areas originally set for speed raises had been quietly saved, one in Ponsonby and one in Manurewa.
This small miracle was entirely due to eagle-eyed community members and advocates, who pointed out (among other things) that the original consultation on these two areas didn’t mention schools. AT looked into it – and conceded the point!
For this, we can thank Brake the Road Safety Charity, All Aboard, Bike Auckland and Living Streets Aotearoa, with the support of elected members including Councillor Angela Dalton of Manurewa, and Alex Bonham of the Waitematā Local Board.
Why didn’t AT publicise this significant road safety win in Road Safety Week? Let’s take a closer look at the two locations, and what they tell us about fine print, phrasing, and interpretive choices made by human beings.
Spot the Difference (1): Ponsonby’s narrow heritage streets
The two maps below show Ponsonby as it appeared on AT’s Speed Limit Reversal map first in March, then last week in May.
Green streets are 30km/h but going back up to 50km/h. Purple patches are schools. Pink dots are proposed “variable” zones: short periods of 30km/h at the start/ end of school days only. In practice, this means early birds, latecomers, kids at after-school activities or visiting school grounds on the weekend, and people walking and biking will be in 50km/h traffic at all other times.
Anyway, spot the difference:
Yes! A bunch of streets on the lower right of the map now won‘t be going up to 50km/h. This is very good news for Richmond Road School as well as residents of Brown St, Douglas St, Norfolk St, Lincoln St, tiny Kent St and Mira St and Fitzroy St, and (most of) Vermont St.
But it’s tough luck for Marist School, St Paul’s, Ponsonby Intermediate and the whole rest of the neighbourhood, whose identically narrow, historic, walkable streets will revert to 50km/h (barring brief moments at school gates).
[Ed: the following section was updated at 11.15am, thanks to an eagle-eyed commenter]
Is it because AT’s late 2021 consultation map mentioned schools? Well, check out the language used on the consultation map, for John St, Islington St, Pompallier Tce, Clarence St, Prosford St, Blake St, Sheehan St, Redmond St, Bayard St, Cowan St, Ponsonby Tce, Tole St, O’Neill St, Summer St, Scott St – all of which AT is reverting to 50km/h. (The same words were used for other areas, like Freeman’s Bay, which is likewise reverting to 50km/h and is a striking example of unintelligibility.)
As you read on, remember this phrasing – because it is identical to that used for the Manurewa area that’s been saved.
“Residential areas are where many people, young and old, walk, cycle and drive. A safe speed limit will reduce the chances of serious injury crashes.”
Whatever AT’s reasoning for this small reprieve, it is deeply ironic that the rescued streets – around Richmond Road School – only gained safe speeds due to requests made in that 2021 consultation. Residents asked to add 30km/h limits to these streets for a bunch of reasons including the nearby daycares, playgrounds and school, because of course!
But apparently when AT came back in 2022 to consult on these streets, it didn’t mention schools?
(Unfortunately AT has disabled the consultation map and videos for that 2022 Phase 3 consultation, but you can see this Greater Auckland post from the time.)
The upshot – by AT’s reasoning – is the bonus safe streets can stay, while the original safe streets they tie into must go.
Yes, this is absurd!
It demonstrates how ridiculous the Speed Rule is, how unusual AT’s reading of it is, and it underscores why AT should have queried everything from the get-go.
But wait, it gets wilder. Remember how I said “most of Vermont St”? One teeny-tiny 30m dead-end bit of Vermont St will go back up to 50km/h, because it was in that first consultation. Presumably it gets its own special 50km/h sign, too: a ludicrous waste, or the key to “getting Auckland moving again”? You decide.
Spot the difference (2): Manurewa’s myriad cul-de-sacs
The other rescued area in Manurewa offers an even starker illustration of the weird, dangerous hole AT is digging itself into/ being dug into, by sticking to its guns/ refusing to explore the alternative approaches.
This part of Manurewa was an early poster-child for AT’s prizewinning road safety programme. In 2020, AT installed raised tables and speed bumps to address long held concerns about speeding. The work showed great early results – more people walking and cycling locally, and a net 76% rise in feelings of safety.
So in late 2021, AT asked residents if they’d like lower speed limits too. It helps that there are heaps of schools in the area, but on the 2021 consultation map (see screenshots below), AT phrased it in general terms…
“Residential areas are where many people, young and old, walk, cycle and drive. A safe speed limit will reduce the chances of serious injury crashes.”
… except for two small blue tendrils on the map: one to the left, towards Roscommon School (uh-oh), and another to the north, which we’ll come to in a minute. For these streets only, AT mentioned the existence of schools:
“AT proposes to reduce the speed on roads near schools to keep everyone, especially school kids, safe.”
Then, in early 2022 after this initial tranche of 30km/h streets was implemented, AT came back to consult on adjacent areas, looking to extend the benefits to more people, and more schools – in Clendon Park, Weymouth, Manurewa South (south of Weymouth Rd) and part of Wattle Downs.
(Again, unfortunately AT has disabled the consultation map and videos for that 2022 Phase 3 consultation, but you can see this Greater Auckland post from the time.)
The result: a consistent 30kmh limit across a swathe of intricate network of short streets and cul-de-sacs, in a broad residential area that happens to be home to twenty-one local schools and kura (shown in purple on the two maps below).
Here’s AT’s Speed Reversal Viewer as of March 2025, and then last week after the correction. Spot the difference.
You spotted it! That middle area will now stay a 30km/h zone, because of how the first consultation was worded.
Great news for Clendon Park School, Rowandale School, St Anne’s Catholic School, Manurewa Intermediate, Manurewa West School, and Finlayson Park School, all of which are inside the zone…
… but tough luck for Te Wharekura o Manurewa (and Te Kura Kaupapa Māori o Manurewa next door); Roscommon School; Te Matauranga; Waimahia Intermediate; Leabank School; James Cook High School… and, just off the edges of the above screenshot, Manurewa South School; Manukau Christian School; Greenmeadows Intermediate, Manurewa East School; Reremoana Primary; and Weymouth School.
It’s especially concerning news for the Homai Campus of Blind and Low Vision Education Network New Zealand (BLENNZ), which sits at the top of the map above. In that 2021 consultation, AT mentioned the presence of a school, without spelling out what kind of school.
As its name suggests, BLENNZ is “a specialist school for children and young people who are blind, deaf blind or have low vision, including those with additional disabilities.” The main entrance is on McVilly Rd, a quiet cul-de-sac which (as you can see below) has been a permanent 30km/h zone.
Because of the wording of the initial consultation, AT is now raising this quiet, dead-end street back to 50km/h at all times, aside from short periods* in the morning and afternoon on school days.
*as per the National Speed Limit Register, the window of safety is “35 minutes before the start of school until the start of school; 20 minutes at the end of school, beginning no earlier than 5 minutes before the end of school; 10 minutes at any other time when children cross the road or enter or leave vehicles at the roadside.”
Can anyone make it make sense? Because the other thing to know about McVilly Rd – something that is not obvious on the speed reversal map above – is that it provides local access between the school and Homai train station.
CRL-watchers will recall that AT recently upgraded Homai Station as part of its level-crossing removal programme, to prepare for more frequent passenger trains when CRL opens next year.
As well as constructing a new accessible-ramp bridge, AT also invested in rebuilding and widening the footpaths on Browns Rd and McVilly Rd, to make it safer and easier for people to get to and from the station. This includes members of the BLENNZ school community, as per this Auckland Council good-news story from just four months ago:
BLENNZ School Homai Principal Saul Taylor says, “BLENNZ (Blind Low Vision Education Network NZ) have been delighted with the excellent level of inclusion and connection with Auckland Transport’s project team.
“The engagement with BLENNZ has been invaluable and we have felt listened to throughout the project. By including our suggestions and working alongside us so closely, the walkways and new ramp for the station will be more accessible, safe, and enjoyable for our whole school community.
“The benefits will be felt for many years to come,” Mr Taylor says.
And yet AT now is raising the speed limit on McVilly Rd from permanent 30km/h back up to 50km/h. You wouldn’t read about it.
It turns out that Homai Station isn’t the only station where AT finds itself bizarrely implementing a public safety downgrade in the ramp-up to the opening of the CRL. Other locations, including Avondale and Meadowbank, are being made more dangerous by these reversals.
Speed reversals are also set to undermine high-profile investments in new cycling infrastructure, include the Glen Innes to Tamaki Drive path, and the refreshed streetscapes of Point Chevalier – where raising speeds on feeder streets is being described as “like removing fences and lifeguards from a popular new public swimming pool.”
I’ll cover these examples in more detail in a future post, along with the ludicrous “fine print” of the variable speed zones, which are already attracting international derision.
TL; DR: if you can save some areas, why not save them all?
What the Ponsonby and Manurewa examples show is not just the arbitrary nature of the Speed Rule, but the inequities of how it’s being read by AT. The impacts are random, and – as the examples of other cities show us – to a large extent optional.
Having learned that a close reading of the rule can minimise harm, then why isn’t AT reading the rule even more closely along the lines of Hamilton and Dunedin? Why not an early appeal to the Minister(s), as apparently worked for Waiheke?
AT’s CEO has said that AT did the right thing by consulting on safe speeds with schools as a reason; and it did the right thing by consulting on safe speeds with residential neighbourhoods as a reason. Ditto town centres, and around public transport hubs.
All of the reasons for safe speeds are good reasons.
In trying to arbitrarily differentiate between reasons, the Speed Rule is harmful. But clearly it can be – and has been – read in different ways, to preserve as much safety as possible.
So if AT means what it says, it would do that too. For the children of Auckland, for people trying to safely get to train stations and nearby cycleways, for neighbourhoods who just want calmer streets.
In what way is this hard?
This isn’t personal – but it is about people
One of the persistent challenges of advocacy is how to call our public organisations and systems to account, without losing sight of the humanity of those who run them. We all benefit when our public service serves us well, and our public servants – who are in many cases our family, friends and neighbours – deserve credit for the good work they do.
Leadership is the key.
As Patrick wrote on Monday, “this situation seems to get to the very heart of governance, and urgently calls for wisdom and caution of the highest degree.” For me, it recalls a certain pickle Auckland Transport got itself into in 2014-2015, with what came to be known as the Pohutukawa 6.
At the time, AT insisted – in the face of growing public disbelief, and right up until the last minute – that they were entirely boxed in. They were adamant there was “no alternative” to chopping down a stand of century-old pohutukawa opposite MOTAT in order to widen an already wide road.
Turns out there was an alternative. Calling on the governance role of board members won a reprieve for the trees. Six old trees were saved – and so, to a headline–worthy extent, was AT’s crediblity.
At the time, my questions for the Board were: “How did we get here? What are we doing here?” I meant this very literally. In that room we were all people of good will, and on the day, we managed to reason our way through the impasse.
Likewise, the solution today rests with the people who’ve stepped up to serve the public in high-profile, challenging roles. Between the Board, the CEO, and the Minister, there must be enough smarts, pragmatism and clear-eyed risk-aversion to fix this so they can get on with more important stuff.
They have the backing of elected representatives, as well as hundreds of ordinary people around the country who have volunteered time and expertise to solve the riddle of the weirdly written Speed Rule. They can fix this.
If not, what are we doing here?
I want to give the last word today to one of those ordinary people. Children are voiceless in most transport planning, despite having a very clear idea of what they want and need and expect from us. So let’s hear from one of many young people who’ve been engaged by the older people who run this city to put a human face on the appeal for safer, evidence-based, reasonable and more humane streets.
Listen to her. Will the grown-ups in the room give her a safer, evidence-based, reasonable and more humane approach to the chaotic fallout of this highly irregular Speed Rule?
What’s the old saying? Where there’s life, there’s hope?
Processing...
Excellent post, Jolisa. wonder if real people had to make these pathetic street by street calls. What a way to strip them of dignity, Kimpton.
Keep the posts coming. This is the biggest, most unnecessary, most hauntingly pathetic transport stupidity we’ve seen yet. Mind blowing.
Really, Bishop, just denounce Simeon as the untethered fool he is, and roll this back. You don’t get your kicks from seeing the little people squirm, do you?
Great post, I hope the pressure works like the tree example.
Another side effect I’ve noticed is that the variable speed zone (40) flashing signs near our local schools have been disabled. How is that logical?
The citywide maps of the reversals also show how small and compact the neighborhood areas are, completely avoidable for through traffic.
The vast majority of the map was never affected by safer speeds.
Even within those areas, the arterials around and through them were almost entirely unchanged.
For anyone feeling a bit of civil disobedience coming on, Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004 2.1.2 essentially says that you can go any speed below the limit, so long as you stay left for others to pass.
Drive to the conditions as you see fit.
Yes. And it’s not disobedient anyway. There are so many parts of the Road Rule that can’t be followed if you try to go above 30 km/hr.
I’m a former student of the two schools AT filmed that “happy little video” school video outside of, and I found it extremely tone-deaf.
Farm Cove doesn’t have a crossing outside the gate; the nearest one is 200m down the road at Wakaaranga, and there are no crossings for students walking east. Every assembly the Deputy Principals would tell us off for running across the road after school, but it never stopped anyone. That was 10 years ago, and there’s been zero improvement in safety since then. A kid was even hit outside the gates a few years ago, and nothing was done about it! Butley Dr has a roundabout on either side, neither of which has any pedestrian crossings at all!
Surely, actual pedestrian safety infrastructure to make it safe for kids to walk around their school would mean parents feel comfortable dropping their kids a little further from the school gate safely and legally (or even better, walk/cycle the whole way!).
If it was 20 metres away kids don’t use it – look at Taka Grammer – right outside the front gate and at 3.15 pm kids everywhere.
Next people will want kids wrapped in cotton wool
You literally come on here and Facebook to argue your contrary opinions for the sake of it. Instead of being an Internet troll go out and speak to your local schools and parents and find out whether they want their streets made safer for kids to move around. I guarantee your dumb contrarian opinions will be challenged by ordinary bog-standard Devonport people. You don’t represent anybody other than yourself. If you are so convinced you are right stand for local elections with all the other spiteful/nutters who no-one votes for.
For streets like John Street, O’Neill Street, Summer Street etc in Ponsonby, the AT consultation maps from 2021 didn’t mention schools either….they just talk about a range of users including Children. The general introduction refers to schools more generally (using the term predominantly), but doesn’t tie all of these changes to schools specifically. AT and elected members are choosing to do this.
Crikey give it break – before the speed limits were dropped – we did not drive all the time at 50 kph – if it’s a narrow street, schools just out etc – we used our common sense and slowed down. Just like those narrow gravel country roads that are 100 kph – do we drive at 100 No. Irrespective of the 30 zones or 50 zones – there are always idiots that don’t use common sense and there always will be – humans.
Each year there are more rules, regulations and laws telling (Controlling Us) how we should live our lives, so we don’t need Greater Auckland lobbying to add more
It is the exact same number of laws or rules though, just with different content.
What? … this is for keeping things AS THEY ARE.
It would be remarkably easy to take some white paint to that variant speed sign and turn it into a permanent 30km/h zone. Just saying….
Better yet you could advocate better for lower speed areas so we can keep the change permanently.
good to see [insert NSW town name here] back again using a different victim-blaming tactic of trolling!
though they do seem to have really actually put in more effort to “blend in” which is a surprise, but if you genuinely believed in better communication in support of lower, evidence-proved safer speed limits, why, a genuine person would be actually making constructive suggestions instead of “nyeh nyeh this is your fault you failed” mockery
Dean Kimpton has to go. For any other rule change that required this amount of analysis and cost AT would have just ignored it and said we’ll get to it when we can i.e. TERP.
Instead they are literally busting a nut and going all out to do the wrong thing.
Here is the kicker. If AT ignored the Rule, who would challenge them? It would be up to the government to challenge them. AT is in breach of rules all the time and yet I am not aware of a single case where the government has initiated court actions against AT.
This speed limit reversal is through choice. Independent legal advice would advice AT as such. The people who are pushing for it to be carried out have backed themselves into a corner and risk losing their jobs for providing hung advice so are doubling down on the need for them and trying their hardest to push it through quickly.
AT is broken.
This suggestion is for Graham Adler and all those who think lower limits are not required because “we used our common sense and slowed down”. We’ll create a new category of Driver’s Licence called “Licensed Speedster” which allows you to prove it and get special privileges . It must be applied for and renewed annually with a race track based driving test (in the driver’s own car). The driver must carry $1m in public liability insurance and display big “LS” labels front and rear like the Heavy Truck labels. This LS category of licence will allow the driver to drive UP TO 20kph faster than the posted speed limit because they have more common sense than the rest of us. Any takers?
Hmm could we possibly have a special catergory for just expressways? I would love to do 130 on the Waikato expressway and would be happy to carry the liability on that as I know 130 is safe. Probably wouldn’t take the risk elsewhere though. I’m hoping the speeds are raised to at least 120 for these modern expressways it’s ridiculous NZ must have some of the slowest speeds in the world for these extremely safe expressways. I am aware Australia has expressways maxed at 110kmh but ours are designed much safer (Australia’s have at grade intersections and no proper median/side run off barriers like ours have). For other speeds I think to get public support maybe 90 for the traditional state highway, 60 for urban arterials and 40 for minor urban roads. Trying to understand why the public is so insane in demanding these increases I believe is some of the key to actually keeping the safe speeds (how on earth most people wanted the 60 zone just north of the Puhoi-Warkworth motorway to be 100 is exactly what we need to ask them why? Then we can educate them. Trying to force some blanket speed reductions through without support just leads to pushback.
If you were cycling along there, would you consider the car next to you doing 130 safe?
I laughed when brown said other countries have 130 speed limits; ironically we could only achieve that by building cycleways!
Yeah true let’s ban cyclists from the expressways too. Problem solved. Also if they get hit at 80/90/100/110/120/130 is completely irrelevant it’s the same result for each.
Nit-picking, but I feel the licensed speedster tag “LS” is too similar to “L”.
“LSR” would be clearer.
There may be other options which come across in a similar manner
LS was chosen as would quickly be taken to mean “Loser”.
That would still work. LSR is just an even bigger Loser.
Of course the systemic speeding is all through our society. I remember how shocked I was when I read that in the US, when various companies received trial permits for self-driving cars, the computer settings were explicitly set to 10-20kph (probably 10 miles?) ABOVE whatever the local speed limit was. In a govt-approved trial. If they had any honesty, after hearing the Musk and Co crowd set their speeds above the legal limit, they should have pulled the license to operate at all. But no, speeding is so normalised that someone probably, with a straight face, argued that cars driving AT the legal limit was dangerous as other drivers would get impatient.
We have had drivers impatient for more and more preferential treatment for a century. It hasn’t ended well, usually.
While I have made a few posts saying that this is just democracy in action, I also wonder why central government needs any involvement in local road speed limits. Why not let the locals decide?
Glad you realised this. The last government did not “impose blanket speed limit reductions”. They just made it possible for RCAs to let their communities decide to set safe speeds. This government has imposed unsafe speeds without allowing local democracy a choice.
For a community to be confronted with freedom to drive at a deadly speed or restraint to save deaths, with realistic information on the time they might surrender and the harm they might avoid, the previous Rule enabled local democracy. It didn’t remove it.
Meanwhile, just in from London the evidence is clear that 20mph (~30km/h) zones are a lot safer, and don’t affect overall traffic speed:
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/transport/20mph-roads-london-research-injuries-collisions-tfl-will-norman-b1228903.html
The evidence of 50kph to 30kph and 30mph to 20mph speed reductions reducing injuries and collisions by a third, is remarkably consistent around the world. And now in Auckland.
But the reduction of collision damage costs, whilst saving insurance costs, as proved in Wales, do come at a considerable cost to some influential, and big political donor industries.
Modern cars with expensive lighting arrays and sensors concentrated at their corners, do not need much of a bump, to become constructive write offs. And thus collision damage replacements, form a significant sector of the new car market. And if not quite a write off, a significant sector of the parts and repair market.
This is a seriously unproductive use of our countries constrained assets.
The antithesis of becoming more economically efficient.
And happening under a government claiming to be better economic managers.
The higher injury rates from higher speeds too, have horrific economic, as well as social costs.
It’s just an insult, they preach safety yet remove it. Time related speed limits don’t work for any road users. They are admission the road and infrastructure are inherently unsafe for a class of user, to limit their safety to ‘time slots’ is wrong
Appreciate the post. I live and own my home on one of those culdesacs in Manurewa. Trounson Avenue and I would like to keep it and the surrounding areas of schools as 30kmh. Add more humps though along everywhere else to calm down these hormonal drivers.
Thanks M.R. – indeed, Trounson isn’t just a short dead-end street, it also leads to a kura and a park. Yet another prime example where flipping speeds back to 50km/h defies all logic. How do your neighbours feel about it?
(Also: if you’re keen to connect with the growing citywide pushback against the silly and unnecessary speed raises, may I drop you a line?)