I will defer to the likes of @Karl Bridges on the psychology of this, but it seems to me a bad idea to normalise seeing children in the road that you don't have to react to.

but it seems to me a bad idea to normalise seeing children in the road that you don't have to react to. — Craig Marriott

Or the potential to be distracted from an actual risk by the sign, or to cause evasive action that results in an incident to happen if surprised by the sign...
I wonder how much more some speed bumps or other similar physical (engineering) controls would have been for the car park?

I wonder how much more some speed bumps or other similar physical (engineering) controls would have been for the car park? — MattD2

That seems to be something that is conspicuously lacking with a lot commercial/retail zones, rather than have dedicated flow in, circulate around and then flow out, the theory appears to be how many collision points/ blind spots and combined entry/exit points (entering vehicles turning right and exiting ones doing the same) can we create.

I like the roadworks sign that says "Slow down, my Dad works here", was impressed by the plonker that overtook us driving through some of the EQ remedial work on SH1 just south of Kaikoura after we had just passed that sign.

Hi Craig, Thanks for the mention. I think you hit the nail on the head to some extent but I would hope that common sense would prevail. There is research to suggest that when individuals are in a heightened state of risk, their behaviour is more cautious. Although that is subject to debate and very much focused on context.

I can imagine that a car driver seeing this for the first time would be initially startled which could distract them from other things, maybe a kid attempting to cross from the other side? But then over time would get used to it and thus the effectiveness of the signage is likely to diminish.

I would be interested in a prolonged study to measure the effectiveness of this sign on car driving and maneuvering.

There is also the (somewhat cynical) consideration whether this car park is special in that kids are prone to run across the road, and others are not, because they do not have a sign such as this?

And a final comment is maybe the problem resides with the kids and dare I say the parents and maybe there should be signage for the pedestrians too in a similar sort of fashion as they have with some level crossings.

Just a few thoughts of mine at the end of a somewhat taxing day.

Thanks again and Merry Xmas all. :D

In our work complex we have 40 units. Commercial and a motel. The motel has been taken over by social housing. The speed limit around the carparks is 5 km/hr. I reckon I am the only one that complies with that limit.

Recently I was meandering along and a kid about 4 years old shot out between two parked cars. I had the time to stop. Had I been doing 20 km/hr the result would have been different. If it has happened once to me it could happen again.

In my view as in the song, children are our the future, teach them well.......In my view they are the most precious gifts to us all. We need to protect them.

So what can I do to change the behavior of the other 40 unit holders occupants and visitors.

How can I prevent something bad happening. It troubles me often.

The sign I thought was one step in the right direction. Some people see the bad in it, but what can we do to protect the kids.

Dedicated, demarcated and physically separated zones for pedestrians and vehicles would seem the trick here Stuart. Have seen it done effectively in some carparks where guardrails guide pedestrians and prevent people crossing anywhere other than a dedicated crossing point. Relatively low cost. Signs (no matter how great) should only be supplementary to real 'hard' controls.
I would also suggest the carpark in the photo (plus many others I come across) could benefit from a reverse parking policy. Risk is increased when exiting these places in reverse (skinful after visiting the brewery, excited to get home and try on new clothes, etc) so best to reverse in upon entry. Plus if ever need to evacuate it would be so much easier and safer.

I would also suggest the carpark in the photo (plus many others I come across) could benefit from a reverse parking policy. — Matt Ward

Not enforceable in this location, a company can "require" visitors to their site park in a given manner, but in a location where joe public is going to park, it will mostly be ignored.

Dedicated, demarcated and physically separated zones for pedestrians and vehicles would seem the trick here Stuart. Have seen it done effectively in some carparks where guardrails guide pedestrians and prevent people crossing anywhere other than a dedicated crossing point. Relatively low cost. Signs (no matter how great) should only be supplementary to real 'hard' controls. — Matt Ward

Yes, don't have store entry/exit next to a driveway, don't have long corridors that vehicles can build up speed anywhere peds are going to be. A classic fail is to have the Mall on one side of a road and a car park on the other.

I have seen cut outs at civil sites or mannequins in high vis. I would see this being effective short term but possible having a negative impact if left in place for a long time.

In Japan they have silhouette cut outs with animated arms waving a beacon to have people slow down.

This could work well if they were moved around occasionally at random intervals, and perhaps changed up a bit each time.

I'll remind you all. Eliminate, Substitute, Administrate. I choose Eliminate. Remove the cars!

I see where you are coming from Bruce Tollan. The 60's promised us flying cars, that would eliminate vehicles as a hazard to pedestrians. We would still need admin controls though for low flying cars.

I'll remind you all. Eliminate, Substitute, Administrate. — Bruce Tollan

I always find the hierarchy of control interesting when it is simplified to the basic EIM (or more like EIEngAPPE) - When in fact the regs state if you cannot eliminate a risk you must either Substitute, Isolate or Implement Engineering Controls (or a combo of those) ... then if there is still a residual risk administration controls need to be implement and where require suitable PPE provided.
So for this car park before sticking up the sign what did they do to either Substitute, Isolate or provide Engineering Controls to minimise the risk to pedestrians?

The sign I originally thought would be a way of getting people in our building complex to slow down. There are kids there and they behave in unpredictable ways. The ideas put forward are valuable and thanks for that. Matt Wards ideas are a good starting point.

I think if we can get as much of the traffic away from where the kids are likely to be is a start. If we get Judder bars put in. Put in signs with reason for the speed limit may reduce the risk of the kids in the carpark getting hurt.

I also will put forward a commitment to each unit holder to stick to the speed limit. Hope that it may bring about a culture change so that it becomes self enforcing.

If there are any ideas on how to slow cars down in our carpark that would be helpful. There are 40 business units and no shops just commercial business.

Bit challenging to eliminate cars from a car park :smile: Better to "engineer" a solution that "isolates" peds from moving cars, tricky in Stuart's situation where the car park is already formed. Judder bars,spaced fairly close together will be easy to do in this location and should slow moving vehicles down so their drivers can react to the unexpected.

It's a heart stopping moment when you see a toddler ditch mum's hand and just take off into a road way in front of you, it's happened to me twice, fortunately no one was harmed either time. As a three year old, living at my Grandad's house, I wasn't so lucky. The classic driveway fail, a back door opening straight onto the driveway, and a hedge obscuring drivers view of door meant that when I heard my Uncle's Bel Air Chev coming home and, I rushed out to see him, I wound up getting run over by a 1600Kg car (broken arm,leg and pelvis- 3 months in hospital so I'm told).

Semiotics are only useful when they are of interest to the person and can be embedded in memory
A classic example of this is the McDonald golden arches, which in depth research over time has proven it triggers a gut reaction to cause people to drive off the road and purchase a Big Mac
Only when the person perceive a benefit will they take notice and unconscious thoughts trigger an action or reaction
The NZTA traffic adverts are fantastic at relaying then downsides of drink or drug driving, but how many people when they put on their seatbelt and drive to work are thinking about the video they watched last night?
In Denmark there have be many studies done where all the signs and traffic calming measures have been removed from a street and the number of accidents have reduced significantly as a result
I sometimes wonder if we are being paralysed by over protection and too much paperwork, which simply doesn’t allow people to think?

WorkSafe has recently released these site traffic management guidelines.
I'm no expert, so perhaps a Forum member with some expertise can take a look at these guidelines and tell us if a good solution to this specific situation emerges?