On this very conservative report you can easily make the economic case for a default speed limit of 30km/h and for a maximum speed of 50km/h on inner city arterials (not pedestrian separated motorways) on crash costs alone.
The Amenity and reduced severance benefits are staggering. These are VC investment type numbers. Who wants to invest in a startup that switches 50km/h signs to 40km/h signs on roads adjacent to major trip generators for 6800% return?
Reduced severance benefits would be much larger for people on bicycles just due to the extra distance you can travel on a bicycle you are cut off from more possible services you could otherwise have had access to and that isn't included in these numbers
Something the report also pointed out which makes this report even more conservative in it's estimate of travel costs: "We note that there has been some recent debate around whether it is reasonable to value very small changes in travel time for motorists and freight (i.e. a one-minute increase in journey time on an average commute time of one hour) given these variations are likely within the ranges of typical variability in journey times making them relatively imperceptible. It could be argued on this basis that there is a
threshold below which travel time costs are irrelevant and should not be valued."