Current state speed limit increase proposals

[vdeane]

I'm not really a fan of making speed limits variable.  Judging individual conditions is a require skill for drivers, and driving too fast for conditions is illegal, regardless of what the sign says.  It's hard to get the exact speed that's safe for changing conditions, so usually the sign is off, either having a limit that's too high and would be unsafe anyways (in which case, why bother), or a limit that's too low (ditto, with an addition of aggravation for those of us who like to follow or at least acknowledge the speed limit).

Ehhhh....  For a state considering a bump in Interstate speed limit from 75 to 80 mph, I have a hard time calling the existing 75 mph limit "a joke".

75 mph is equivalent to 120 km/h, which is the maximum speed limit in Norway, Sweden, Spain, Portugal, Chile, South Africa, Morocco, Turkey...  It's technically the maximum speed limit in Mexico, but the only highway I've ever personally seen it on has since decreased it to 110 km/h.

Well, I did say much of the country.  I come from a state where the maximum is only 65 even though that feels very slow on rural interstates (many interstates in urban/suburban areas - including everything south of I-287 - are only 55, the same as rinky-dink two-lane roads); one needs to go 70-75 to really feel comfortable, especially in a sedan.  The geometry on interstates in the northeast isn't really any worse than anywhere else, we just have lower speed limits (as if "population density" magically means everyone needs to go slower).

I would love to go exactly the speed limit, but it would feel like I'm crawling, and my drive times would diverge too far from Google Maps predictions.  In practice, I'm a hybrid of types 2 and 3 (outside of DC, where I'm firmly type 2 due to zero tolerance speed cameras) - I usually go 5 over on surface roads and 7 over on freeways unless conditions require otherwise, though I start to taper that on speed limits of 70 and above (I used to have a NJ Turnpike exemption due to lack of enforcement, but I abandoned that in the name of greater consistency).  I don't have a formula for Canada; if I remember right, the last time I was there, I used somewhere between 5-10 kph for surface roads and 12-15 kph for autoroutes, but since then, the use of zero or unknown/variable tolerance speed cameras has really proliferated.

[kalvado]

And to have some real-life example of speed limit consequences, let's look at another thread:
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=28523.0
Speeds clearly played a role in the event, so maybe people are not that good at adjusting speed to conditions as we want to believe?

[oscar]

Imagine that the speed limit is 55, and everyone is going 70, except for the 10% that strictly follow 55 mph. There's a 15 mph difference here. If the speed limit is increased to 70, traffic will average 74 mph (it's a 2-3 mph increase for every 10 mph increase in the speed limit), and those following the speed limit will be going 70 – only 4 mph difference, and much less chance of a crash.

I have a hard time believing that everyone going 55 will automatically go 70 simply because a sign says its okay. We always argue that drivers go the speed they feel is safe, and I'd argue that many drivers go 55 to 65 because that's the speed they feel is safe. Be it because of their age, because of their car, or because of some other factor.

When I drove I-94 and part of I-90 in 1996, when Montana had no fixed daytime open-highway speed limits for cars, there were quite a few people who didn't take advantage, and drove about 65mph (thankfully in the right lane).

That slowed me down, so I could keep the speed differential within reason. Only east of Billings, when the traffic thinned out, was I able to top 100mph. (That was in a new BMW, purchased with that kind of drive in mind. My current rides are much slower.)

[vdeane]

Speaking of variable speed limits, I present today's experience on a couple of bridges.  Crossing the Tappan Zee this morning, the speed limit was reduced to 45.  Why?  I assume due to weather, but the road was absolutely fine.  Traffic was wizzing by at 65-70, and the 52 I was going (per my formula and the 45 mph limit) felt VERY slow (mind you, even my usual 62 feels slow on the Thruway north of Yonkers, to the point where I need to use cruise control to keep my speed under control).  Meanwhile on the Throggs Neck, the speed limit was down to 35, but I took that one as advisory as the speed limit signs are not variable there, and the limit was conveyed via one line in a very long VMS message that was impossible to read in its entirety while driving (I didn't see it until I had nearly finished crossing and passed the second or third VMS sign; the message actually took somewhere between 9-12 lines on signs that can only display three at once); no idea if that one was a MTA thing or a NYCDOT thing.

I would submit that if a speed limit is low enough that I need to use cruise control to resist the temptation to speed, then it is too low and needs to be raised.

And to have some real-life example of speed limit consequences, let's look at another thread:
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=28523.0
Speeds clearly played a role in the event, so maybe people are not that good at adjusting speed to conditions as we want to believe?

If people can't drive in winter weather, then they should stay off the roads when it happens.  Just because your area is normally missing a season is no excuse - stay home if you can't handle it.  If I had my way, winter driving would be part of the road test; with realistic driving simulators that can re-create all sorts of conditions, it should be possible.  I should not have to suffer on account of the stupidity and ineptitude of other people.

I don't know how variable limits would have helped, though.  I have never seen a variable limit that actually matched what conditions require.  Always too high (in which case, what is the point?) or too low (in which case it invites non-compliance).

[J N Winkler]

I don't know how variable limits would have helped, though.  I have never seen a variable limit that actually matched what conditions require.  Always too high (in which case, what is the point?) or too low (in which case it invites non-compliance).

I am not sure variable limits are technologically mature enough for us to conclude "they don't work."  One of the ideas I was turning around in my head was using remote sensing (e.g., RWIS sensors determining that bridge decks are icing) in combination with expert systems to impose speed limit reductions that are coupled with specific warning messages.  If these systems are seen to work well without crying wolf, they might attract better compliance than has so far been observed with variable limits.

[kalvado]

I don't know how variable limits would have helped, though.  I have never seen a variable limit that actually matched what conditions require.  Always too high (in which case, what is the point?) or too low (in which case it invites non-compliance).

I am not sure variable limits are technologically mature enough for us to conclude "they don't work."  One of the ideas I was turning around in my head was using remote sensing (e.g., RWIS sensors determining that bridge decks are icing) in combination with expert systems to impose speed limit reductions that are coupled with specific warning messages.  If these systems are seen to work well without crying wolf, they might attract better compliance than has so far been observed with variable limits.

Speed limit signs, even variable ones, are taken as a joke - they are too out of touch with reality. some meaningful messages (maybe color coded? How to differentiate from traffic lights?) may be more meaningful - until they become abuse (that would happen pretty quickly, though)

[deathtopumpkins]

I love the idea of variable limits, but from my experience I'd agree they're a joke. Take the Maine Turnpike as an example - they've now done away with the variable signs on the Turnpike (though I think they still post a lower limit on VMSs?), but I've seen plenty of times they're still flashing 45 the next day after a snowstorm, when the road is perfectly clear bare pavement, and traffic is still moving at the normal 70-75. Sure, during a snowstorm 45 is fine, but not a full day after the snow stops.

I don't think any state DOT actually has the resources to manage a variable speed limit with the level of hands-on attention it would require to have it accurately reflect the current driving conditions at any given time. And until they do, compliance will be very poor.

[1995hoo]

We have variable speed limits here on the HO/T lanes on I-95 and I-395. I can't say I ever recall seeing them reduced, though–the normal speed limit in those lanes is 65, and I haven't seen it lowered. I suspect they might do so if there's an accident or similar, but I don't know.

I used to be someone who would pretty much go as fast as I thought I could get away with when I was out on rural highways, but I don't do that anymore because I like our relatively low insurance premium. I'm reasonably content to keep it to 70 mph in most 70-mph zones. When the speed limit is lower than that on an Interstate I'll likely go faster, though, if the road is suitable–for example, in the 55-mph zone on the Beltway I try to keep it to 65 (I don't pass too many people, of course, and going 55 is arguably dangerous because it's so much slower than everyone else). "If the road is suitable" is intended to recognize that there are some bad designs (the BQE in New York; I-68 through Cumberland) where a slower speed is totally appropriate.

[Mapmikey]

The 95 express lanes do lower the variable speed limits for lane blockage but I have never seen it lowered for weather conditions

[doorknob60]

I love the idea of variable limits, but from my experience I'd agree they're a joke. Take the Maine Turnpike as an example - they've now done away with the variable signs on the Turnpike (though I think they still post a lower limit on VMSs?), but I've seen plenty of times they're still flashing 45 the next day after a snowstorm, when the road is perfectly clear bare pavement, and traffic is still moving at the normal 70-75. Sure, during a snowstorm 45 is fine, but not a full day after the snow stops.

I don't think any state DOT actually has the resources to manage a variable speed limit with the level of hands-on attention it would require to have it accurately reflect the current driving conditions at any given time. And until they do, compliance will be very poor.

I agree with this. There is a variable speed section of I-84 near Baker City, OR. The default is 70 MPH. One time I was driving through there and it was lowered to 45 for ice. The road was well maintained by that point and while not completely dry, there was no new precipitation coming down and it was very safe at 65-70.

Here's one that's partially just a limitation of the system,  I ran into a reduced 45 MPH speed limit for thick fog. When I first saw the sign, it was still clear as day with excellent visibility. I kept going my usual 75-78. A few miles later, we actually did hit fog, so the signs weren't completely crazy. Though 45 was still quite slow for that level of fog (possibly to the point of being unsafe by impeding traffic), I felt totally fine at 60-65. The problem is outside of that patch of fog, the road was completely fine at 70, but the variable speeds were not precise enough to line up with reality. I would hope police would not take the signs too literally in that case.

I've also only seen those variable signs at 70, 55, and 45. I don't think they ever use 60 or 65, which is too bad because I think that would be appropriate in many moderate conditions where 55 would feel like a crawl. I think this is ODOT's test for variable speeds though, I expect them to expand over the Blue Mountains at some point, where I think they'll be a lot more useful (the 70 MPH speed limit through there is fairly generous even in summer, but the road can get treacherous in winter and I can see even 35-45 MPH being used somewhat often). I hope we don't lose the generous 70 on Cabbage Hill in summer in the process though, that makes it a fun drive.

[StogieGuy7]

Variable speeds on limited access roads are a longstanding concept; I remember those neon speed limit signs on the NJ Turnpike that would change to a lower speed during inclement conditions.  Not just those classic big neon signs, but speed limit only signs.  Does it work? Maybe - it depends how and when it's used.  If the authorities don't stay up to date with conditions, as mentioned above, people will ignore them. 

Another twist on the concept that I've seen is variable speeds by lane.  I believe that there's a bit of this in Ontario, but Argentina is where I remember this best with the nice wide, 6 to 8 lane (each direction) freeways.  The left lanes were 130 km/h, with slower speeds for each rightward lane down to 50 km/h for the far right.  Sounds cool in theory, but something that I would love to remind politicians and bureaucrats who come up with speed limits applies here: speed isn't dangerous in itself under normal road conditions, it's differences in speed between vehicles that is the most likely cause of problems. So, if you have an 80 km/h (50 mph) difference in speed between vehicles on the same roadway, there will eventually be problems. This is the same beef I have with many states' artificially low speed limits: some people will follow them but many/most will not.  And those differences in speed create conflicts and collisions.

[michravera]

I love the idea of variable limits, but from my experience I'd agree they're a joke. Take the Maine Turnpike as an example - they've now done away with the variable signs on the Turnpike (though I think they still post a lower limit on VMSs?), but I've seen plenty of times they're still flashing 45 the next day after a snowstorm, when the road is perfectly clear bare pavement, and traffic is still moving at the normal 70-75. Sure, during a snowstorm 45 is fine, but not a full day after the snow stops.

I don't think any state DOT actually has the resources to manage a variable speed limit with the level of hands-on attention it would require to have it accurately reflect the current driving conditions at any given time. And until they do, compliance will be very poor.

I agree with this. There is a variable speed section of I-84 near Baker City, OR. The default is 70 MPH. One time I was driving through there and it was lowered to 45 for ice. The road was well maintained by that point and while not completely dry, there was no new precipitation coming down and it was very safe at 65-70.

Here's one that's partially just a limitation of the system,  I ran into a reduced 45 MPH speed limit for thick fog. When I first saw the sign, it was still clear as day with excellent visibility. I kept going my usual 75-78. A few miles later, we actually did hit fog, so the signs weren't completely crazy. Though 45 was still quite slow for that level of fog (possibly to the point of being unsafe by impeding traffic), I felt totally fine at 60-65. The problem is outside of that patch of fog, the road was completely fine at 70, but the variable speeds were not precise enough to line up with reality. I would hope police would not take the signs too literally in that case.

I've also only seen those variable signs at 70, 55, and 45. I don't think they ever use 60 or 65, which is too bad because I think that would be appropriate in many moderate conditions where 55 would feel like a crawl. I think this is ODOT's test for variable speeds though, I expect them to expand over the Blue Mountains at some point, where I think they'll be a lot more useful (the 70 MPH speed limit through there is fairly generous even in summer, but the road can get treacherous in winter and I can see even 35-45 MPH being used somewhat often). I hope we don't lose the generous 70 on Cabbage Hill in summer in the process though, that makes it a fun drive.

The problem with variable speed limits is that the view that the department of transportation has is too broad and the view that the highway patrol has is too narrow. The DoT could hear or detect situations that require a temporary speed limit reduction, but their ability to do so is on a rather macro level. On I-5, for instance, speed limit signs are only placed just after entrances or every 10 miles, if the distance is longer. Do you want to reduce the speed limit for the whole 20-something miles between Utica Ave and Twisselman Rd because of one really gnarly patch of fog at PM KIN 1.0 where the speed limit should rightly be about 15 MPH, but only for about a mile or two? No, what you want in that situation is for the CHP to run a traffic break starting in an area of good visibility and slow everyone down gradually and escort them through at an appropriate speed.

How do you fix this? Unless variable speed limit signs are visible, frequent (every couple hundred meters), and show reasonable limits and DoTs have really good monitoring capabilities and much greater abilities and Highway Patrols can tie into it, varible speed limits won't really work.

[jakeroot]

Another twist on the concept that I've seen is variable speeds by lane.  I believe that there's a bit of this in Ontario, but Argentina is where I remember this best with the nice wide, 6 to 8 lane (each direction) freeways.  The left lanes were 130 km/h, with slower speeds for each rightward lane down to 50 km/h for the far right.  Sounds cool in theory, but something that I would love to remind politicians and bureaucrats who come up with speed limits applies here: speed isn't dangerous in itself under normal road conditions, it's differences in speed between vehicles that is the most likely cause of problems. So, if you have an 80 km/h (50 mph) difference in speed between vehicles on the same roadway, there will eventually be problems. This is the same beef I have with many states' artificially low speed limits: some people will follow them but many/most will not.  And those differences in speed create conflicts and collisions.

Ack. See, that "twist" is the standard operating procedure for WSDOT in the Seattle region. All variable limits in the region use per-lane signage, many with accompanying VMS displays. This is the only kind of variable limit I've ever seen deployed successfully, and it's the only one I'd personally recommend. At least from experience. There's a reason most (all?) European countries use this style.

The primary idea is for them to be used for lane-specific messages, not necessarily per-lane limits. Around here, the GP lanes are usually the same limit, with the HOV showing something different if there's some extra traffic.

As an example of how they can be used, a caution arrow used to warn of heavy merging traffic:



Or you can have lane closed signage:

[mrsman]

I love the idea of variable limits, but from my experience I'd agree they're a joke. Take the Maine Turnpike as an example - they've now done away with the variable signs on the Turnpike (though I think they still post a lower limit on VMSs?), but I've seen plenty of times they're still flashing 45 the next day after a snowstorm, when the road is perfectly clear bare pavement, and traffic is still moving at the normal 70-75. Sure, during a snowstorm 45 is fine, but not a full day after the snow stops.

I don't think any state DOT actually has the resources to manage a variable speed limit with the level of hands-on attention it would require to have it accurately reflect the current driving conditions at any given time. And until they do, compliance will be very poor.

I agree with this. There is a variable speed section of I-84 near Baker City, OR. The default is 70 MPH. One time I was driving through there and it was lowered to 45 for ice. The road was well maintained by that point and while not completely dry, there was no new precipitation coming down and it was very safe at 65-70.

Here's one that's partially just a limitation of the system,  I ran into a reduced 45 MPH speed limit for thick fog. When I first saw the sign, it was still clear as day with excellent visibility. I kept going my usual 75-78. A few miles later, we actually did hit fog, so the signs weren't completely crazy. Though 45 was still quite slow for that level of fog (possibly to the point of being unsafe by impeding traffic), I felt totally fine at 60-65. The problem is outside of that patch of fog, the road was completely fine at 70, but the variable speeds were not precise enough to line up with reality. I would hope police would not take the signs too literally in that case.

I've also only seen those variable signs at 70, 55, and 45. I don't think they ever use 60 or 65, which is too bad because I think that would be appropriate in many moderate conditions where 55 would feel like a crawl. I think this is ODOT's test for variable speeds though, I expect them to expand over the Blue Mountains at some point, where I think they'll be a lot more useful (the 70 MPH speed limit through there is fairly generous even in summer, but the road can get treacherous in winter and I can see even 35-45 MPH being used somewhat often). I hope we don't lose the generous 70 on Cabbage Hill in summer in the process though, that makes it a fun drive.

The problem with variable speed limits is that the view that the department of transportation has is too broad and the view that the highway patrol has is too narrow. The DoT could hear or detect situations that require a temporary speed limit reduction, but their ability to do so is on a rather macro level. On I-5, for instance, speed limit signs are only placed just after entrances or every 10 miles, if the distance is longer. Do you want to reduce the speed limit for the whole 20-something miles between Utica Ave and Twisselman Rd because of one really gnarly patch of fog at PM KIN 1.0 where the speed limit should rightly be about 15 MPH, but only for about a mile or two? No, what you want in that situation is for the CHP to run a traffic break starting in an area of good visibility and slow everyone down gradually and escort them through at an appropriate speed.

How do you fix this? Unless variable speed limit signs are visible, frequent (every couple hundred meters), and show reasonable limits and DoTs have really good monitoring capabilities and much greater abilities and Highway Patrols can tie into it, varible speed limits won't really work.

You make a good argument that these speeds should be advisory, like the speed on most yellow signs warning of tight curves.  The speed limits are advisory and generally for a short stretch.

[doorknob60]

...

You make a good argument that these speeds should be advisory, like the speed on most yellow signs warning of tight curves.  The speed limits are advisory and generally for a short stretch.

Yeah definitely. I think there is a time and place for actual lowered speed limit, like if the highway is packed snow for example, but in most cases I think advisory speeds may be more appropriate.

[michravera]

...

You make a good argument that these speeds should be advisory, like the speed on most yellow signs warning of tight curves.  The speed limits are advisory and generally for a short stretch.

Yeah definitely. I think there is a time and place for actual lowered speed limit, like if the highway is packed snow for example, but in most cases I think advisory speeds may be more appropriate.

In California, the actual force of law is that ALL speed limits below the state maximum are advisory. Some are just a little more strongly advisrory than others. Now, don't say that Mich Ravera said that you could feel free to drive 65MPH between the speed bumps in from of your apartment complex. The law that governs there is what speed is safe.

[hotdogPi]

...

You make a good argument that these speeds should be advisory, like the speed on most yellow signs warning of tight curves.  The speed limits are advisory and generally for a short stretch.

Yeah definitely. I think there is a time and place for actual lowered speed limit, like if the highway is packed snow for example, but in most cases I think advisory speeds may be more appropriate.

In California, the actual force of law is that ALL speed limits below the state maximum are advisory. Some are just a little more strongly advisrory than others. Now, don't say that Mich Ravera said that you could feel free to drive 65MPH between the speed bumps in from of your apartment complex. The law that governs there is what speed is safe.

You mean prima facie, not advisory, right? Prima facie speed limits basically mean you're guilty unless you can prove you were driving safely at the speed you were going (basically reversing innocent until proven guilty), while advisory speeds, such as curve warning signs, can't be legally enforced at all (not that that stopped Massachusetts from trying on one exit ramp...)

Prima facie[edit]
Most states have absolute speed limits, meaning that a speed in excess of the limit is illegal per se. However, some states have prima facie speed limits. This allows motorists to defend against a speeding charge if it can be proven that the speed was in fact reasonable and prudent.

Speed limits in various states, including Texas, Utah, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Connecticut, Ohio, Oregon, and Rhode Island are prima facie. Some other states have a hybrid system: speed limits may be prima facie up to a certain speed or only on certain roads. For example, speed limits in California up to 55 mph, or 65 mph on highways, are prima facie, and those at or above those speeds are absolute.

A successful prima facie defense is rare. Not only does the burden of proof rest upon the accused, a successful defense may involve expenses well in excess of the cost of a ticket, such as an expert witness. Furthermore, because prima facie defenses must be presented in a court, such a defense is difficult for out-of-town motorists.

(I think only default speed limits in Massachusetts are prima facie, not posted ones.)

[michravera]

...

You make a good argument that these speeds should be advisory, like the speed on most yellow signs warning of tight curves.  The speed limits are advisory and generally for a short stretch.

Yeah definitely. I think there is a time and place for actual lowered speed limit, like if the highway is packed snow for example, but in most cases I think advisory speeds may be more appropriate.

In California, the actual force of law is that ALL speed limits below the state maximum are advisory. Some are just a little more strongly advisrory than others. Now, don't say that Mich Ravera said that you could feel free to drive 65MPH between the speed bumps in from of your apartment complex. The law that governs there is what speed is safe.

You mean prima facie, not advisory, right? Prima facie speed limits basically mean you're guilty unless you can prove you were driving safely at the speed you were going (basically reversing innocent until proven guilty), while advisory speeds, such as curve warning signs, can't be legally enforced at all (not that that stopped Massachusetts from trying on one exit ramp...)

Prima facie[edit]
Most states have absolute speed limits, meaning that a speed in excess of the limit is illegal per se. However, some states have prima facie speed limits. This allows motorists to defend against a speeding charge if it can be proven that the speed was in fact reasonable and prudent.

Speed limits in various states, including Texas, Utah, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Connecticut, Ohio, Oregon, and Rhode Island are prima facie. Some other states have a hybrid system: speed limits may be prima facie up to a certain speed or only on certain roads. For example, speed limits in California up to 55 mph, or 65 mph on highways, are prima facie, and those at or above those speeds are absolute.

A successful prima facie defense is rare. Not only does the burden of proof rest upon the accused, a successful defense may involve expenses well in excess of the cost of a ticket, such as an expert witness. Furthermore, because prima facie defenses must be presented in a court, such a defense is difficult for out-of-town motorists.

(I think only default speed limits in Massachusetts are prima facie, not posted ones.)

The Yellow curve signs in California carry the weight of presumption in favor of the state as well. I am personally unaware of anyone not driving for hire who's been ticketed and lost in court for barely exceeding the speed on a yellow sign in good weather who didn't get into an accident, but the same goes for a white sign that wasn't the state maximum. I'm not saying that it couldn't happen, but you'd think that I would have heard complaints from someone by now. I've been driving  or talking about driving for 45+ years now.

[kphoger]

advisory, like the speed on most yellow signs warning of tight curves.  The speed limits are advisory and generally for a short stretch.

And then there's Texas...   

[jeffandnicole]

advisory, like the speed on most yellow signs warning of tight curves.  The speed limits are advisory and generally for a short stretch.

And then there's Texas...   

Well, yeah, but not in the same sense.  If you're on a roadway signed for 60 mph, and you go 60 mph into a curve signed with a 40 mph advisory speed, you can't be cited for speeding.  But you could be cited for careless driving, driving at an unsafe speed, or other "catch-all" type infractions, especially if your speed causes you to leave your lane of travel and you hit something.

[kphoger]

Well, I was going along this line of reasoning.

White rectangular sign = Regulatory sign
Obey warning signs = State regulation
Speed advisory tab on curve = Part of warning signage
Speed advisory tab on curve = State regulation to obey

[stevashe]

I love the idea of variable limits, but from my experience I'd agree they're a joke. Take the Maine Turnpike as an example - they've now done away with the variable signs on the Turnpike (though I think they still post a lower limit on VMSs?), but I've seen plenty of times they're still flashing 45 the next day after a snowstorm, when the road is perfectly clear bare pavement, and traffic is still moving at the normal 70-75. Sure, during a snowstorm 45 is fine, but not a full day after the snow stops.

I don't think any state DOT actually has the resources to manage a variable speed limit with the level of hands-on attention it would require to have it accurately reflect the current driving conditions at any given time. And until they do, compliance will be very poor.

As a counterexample, there have been variable speed limits over Snoqualmie Pass on I-90 for at least 20 years and I don't ever remember them displaying a speed that was unreasonable, this despite having driven up there for skiing most weekends for the past 15 years. So I'd say WSDOT is more than capable.

[jakeroot]

I love the idea of variable limits, but from my experience I'd agree they're a joke. Take the Maine Turnpike as an example - they've now done away with the variable signs on the Turnpike (though I think they still post a lower limit on VMSs?), but I've seen plenty of times they're still flashing 45 the next day after a snowstorm, when the road is perfectly clear bare pavement, and traffic is still moving at the normal 70-75. Sure, during a snowstorm 45 is fine, but not a full day after the snow stops.

I don't think any state DOT actually has the resources to manage a variable speed limit with the level of hands-on attention it would require to have it accurately reflect the current driving conditions at any given time. And until they do, compliance will be very poor.

As a counterexample, there have been variable speed limits over Snoqualmie Pass on I-90 for at least 20 years and I don't ever remember them displaying a speed that was unreasonable, this despite having driven up there for skiing most weekends for the past 15 years. So I'd say WSDOT is more than capable.

I can't speak for Snoqualmie Pass, but the variable limits in the Seattle region are mostly managed by computers. The posted limits are not randomly selected by some DOT employee, but instead are based on vehicular speeds preceding the signs. Based on the refresh rate of the signs (that flashing they do), they seem to update at least once per minute. If the pass doesn't operate this way yet, I suppose that's more due to constant damage snow and ice would cause to the in-pavement loop detectors.

On the other hand, the variable messages (red X over a lane, for example) are definitely handled by the traffic management center. If there's a lane closed by construction, a crash, or something else, I believe WSDOT feeds that info into the system and the signs change accordingly. I don't believe the ATDM systems are smart enough to close lanes on their own.

[deathtopumpkins]

I love the idea of variable limits, but from my experience I'd agree they're a joke. Take the Maine Turnpike as an example - they've now done away with the variable signs on the Turnpike (though I think they still post a lower limit on VMSs?), but I've seen plenty of times they're still flashing 45 the next day after a snowstorm, when the road is perfectly clear bare pavement, and traffic is still moving at the normal 70-75. Sure, during a snowstorm 45 is fine, but not a full day after the snow stops.

I don't think any state DOT actually has the resources to manage a variable speed limit with the level of hands-on attention it would require to have it accurately reflect the current driving conditions at any given time. And until they do, compliance will be very poor.

As a counterexample, there have been variable speed limits over Snoqualmie Pass on I-90 for at least 20 years and I don't ever remember them displaying a speed that was unreasonable, this despite having driven up there for skiing most weekends for the past 15 years. So I'd say WSDOT is more than capable.

WSDOT may be the one state DOT that's closest to getting it right, though I have yet to experience their system in person.

[Great Lakes Roads]

https://landline.media/speed-limit-revisions-discussed-in-eight-statehouses/

Update on some state's speed limit proposals from West Virginia, North Dakota (failed again), Indiana (get rid of split speed limits failed again), Maryland, New Hampshire, New Jersey, South Carolina, and Vermont (which they are crazy enough to lower the speed limits on freeways to 55).