The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCHILDREN AT PLAY SIGNS.pdfPhone: 253-931-3010 http://www.auburnwa.gov Engineering Division 25 W Main Street, Auburn, WA 98001 Traffic Engineering Traffic Engineering Engineering Division Tel: 253-931-3010 Cautionary Signs: Do Children at Play, Autistic Child, or Blind Child Signs Improve Safety? Why Signs Are Not Installed The main reasons the City of Auburn does not generally install “Autistic Child,” “Blind Child,” Deaf Child,” or “Children at Play” signs are: These signs do not describe where the child might be. Most streets within a residential area have children who react in the same way, and each driver must be aware of all children in a neighborhood environment. These signs provide parents and children with a false sense of security that their chil- dren are safe when playing in or near the street. When the novelty of such a sign wears off, the signs no longer attract the attention of regular passersby. Unique or unusual warning signs are a tar- get for vandals and souvenir hunters and have a high replacement cost. Unique message signs have no legal mean- ing or established precedent for use in basic traffic engineering references. Their use is discouraged because of both the lack of proven effectiveness and undesirable liabil- ity exposure. http://mctrans.ce.ufl.edu/transportationTopics/tips.htm References of Signs to Avoid “Children at Play Signs: Seldom Effective, and Usually Unnecessary and Confusing,” Technology for Alaskan Transportation, v27, n2, Summer 2002. "'Children at Play' Signs Can Cause Confu- sion," MASS Interchange, Fall 2001. "Why are traffic engineers reluctant to in- stall DEAF CHILD or BLIND CHILD warning signs?," Traffic Information Pro- gram Series, Institute of Transportation En- gineers, District 10, Florida Section. “Won't a CHILDREN AT PLAY sign help protect our kids?,” Traffic Information Pro- gram Series, Institute of Transportation En- gineers, District 10, Florida Section. “Won't a STOP sign slow traffic on our Street?,” Traffic Information Program Se- ries, Institute of Transportation Engineers, District 10, Florida Section. At first glance, it might seem that a CHIL- DREN AT PLAY sign would help protect neighborhood youngsters from traffic hazards. It doesn‟t. In fact, these signs send an unclear message about what the driver and the child are supposed to do. Because of that, these signs are seldom effective. This also applies to DEAF CHILD, AUTISTIC CHILD, or BLIND CHILD signs. Signs are Not Approved by the MUTCD The City of Auburn follows the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), the national standard for traffic signs. The MUTCD does not designate DEAF CHILD, AUTISTIC CHILD, BLIND CHILD, or CHILDREN AT PLAY signs. The MUTCD requires that “all regulatory and warning signs installed on public roads and streets within recreational and cul- tural interest areas shall conform to the require- ments” regarding general, regulatory and warn- ing signs. http:// mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/ The only similar signs approved are the W11-2 Pe- destrian and the W15-1 Play- ground signs . However, the MUTCD does allow for addi- tional regulatory, warning, or guidance information subject to specific caution- ary guidelines: “The use of warning signs should be kept to a minimum as the unnecessary use of warning signs tends to breed disrespect for all signs.” http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/HTM/2003r1/part2/part2c.htm#section2C02 Signs Send the Wrong Message Children should not be encouraged to play in the street, and they should be taught to look before crossing or darting out into the street. The CHIL- DREN AT PLAY sign may well be understood by kids and families as a suggestion that it is accept- able for children to play in the street, and, thus, produces a false sense of security. Furthermore, CHIL- DREN AT PLAY signs tend to propagate through neighborhoods, popping up on every block that has a child living on it. Signs lose credibility with motorists when they appear too often. Instead of being extra diligent, drivers tend to ignore the signs, particularly if no children are playing near the CHILDREN AT PLAY signs. When these signs appear too often, they raise questions like: if there is no sign does that mean there are no children pre- sent and no need to watch for children? Signs Are Not Effective The Institute of Transportation Engineer‟s (ITE‟s) Design and Safety of Pedestrian Facilities states that “No accident-based studies have been able to determine the effectiveness of [such] warn- ing signs.” ITE‟s Traffic Control Devices Hand- book, states that “Children at Play” and “Slow Children” signs should not be used since they may encourage children to play in the street and may encourage parents to be less vigilant. The National Cooperative Highway Re- search Program (NCHRP) Synthesis of Highway Practice No. 186: Supplemental Advance Warn- ing Devices (1993) states that these signs are “not considered effective.” It is also noted that “The use of this sign and its variations has been discouraged by many agencies because the mes- sage implies that it is acceptable for children to be playing in the street. It is nonstandard due to the use of a symbol not contained in the MUTCD.” Signs Are Not Enforceable Such signs also provide no guidance to mo- torists in terms of a safe speed, and the sign has no legal basis for determining what a motorist should do. Furthermore, motorists should ex- pect children to be “at play” in all residential areas, and the lack of signing on some streets may indicate otherwise. The signs are unen- forceable and act as another roadside obstacle to pedestrians and errant motorists. Use of these non-standard signs may also imply that the in- volved jurisdiction approves of streets as play- grounds, which may result in the jurisdiction being vulnerable to tort liability. http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/ped_bike/univcourse/swless14.htm Existing Signs Should Be Removed NCHRP Synthesis of Highway Practice No. 139: Pedestrians and Traffic-Control Measures (1988) states that “non-uniform signs such as „CAUTION—CHILDREN AT PLAY,‟ „SLOW—CHILDREN,‟ or similar legends should not be permitted on any roadway at any time” and that “the removal of any nonstandard signs should carry a high priority.”