Transport for London agrees to scrap 'Stay Back' stickers

GrahamSt wrote:

"Cyclists: Stay Back. I have a dangerously large blindspot"

(because I've folded in my right wing mirror).

Van drivers are often instructed by their employers to turn in their door mirrors when they park their van at the side of the road, to reduce the chance of the mirror being knocked off by passing vehicles.

There will always be a danger that 'Share' will be interpreted the same way toddlers do ... "Mummy, Timmy won't share that toy" (i.e. I want that toy and he won't give it to me).

The idea behind 'share the road' is to encourage respect and patience with all other road users, an effort to limit recklessness, selfishness and road rage.

giff77 wrote:

Quote: "The next challenge is to encourage all those transport companies who have put ‘Stay Back’ signs on the wrong vehicles to take them off.”

Why encourage? Why not just order with the line that they are not regulation signage...

These stickers have been given away. They are not the property of TfL once they're out of TfL's hands. TfL can't make anyone take them off, unless it's a TfL vehicle. Buses are not TfL vehicles, though of course they have a lot of power as they award route contracts to bus operators.

It's a bit like expecting TfL to turn London into a cyclists' paradise when they're responsible for only 5% of the roads (though, granted, those roads carry 35% of the traffic).

It'll be interesting to see what message will finally be approved, especially after the scorn lavished on the National Express (I think) coach stickers produced in partnership with the very forward-thinking Sustrans, as reported on these pages. The suggested new sticker designs suggested by the cyclist groups look not unlike the Sustrans one.

'Stay Back' came about because they wanted to boil the message down to as few words as possible to make it legible and understandable in a quick glance. Unfortunately, the boiling down made it less meaningful (and more offensive).

It'll probably be a return to the 'Beware passing this vehicle on the left side'.

And Another Thing ...

Ben Plowden is not director of Surface Transport. Pedantry, yes, but there should be some journalistic standards maintained here. Research, people! Research!

Sean Kelly wrote:

It'll be interesting to see what message will finally be approved, especially after the scorn lavished on the National Express (I think) coach stickers produced in partnership with the very forward-thinking Sustrans, as reported on these pages. The suggested new sticker designs suggested by the cyclist groups look not unlike the Sustrans one.

My main issue with the National Express / Sustrans ones is that they look like a big arrow pointing left, and have graphics on them showing a bike and a left arrow, but their intended meaning is "don't go left" ?!?!

The actual wording on them isn't too bad: "Caution Blindspots: Please take care" at least it actually tells people what the danger is instead of barking nonsensical orders.

Sean Kelly wrote:

giff77 wrote:

Quote: "The next challenge is to encourage all those transport companies who have put ‘Stay Back’ signs on the wrong vehicles to take them off.”

Why encourage? Why not just order with the line that they are not regulation signage...

These stickers have been given away. They are not the property of TfL once they're out of TfL's hands. TfL can't make anyone take them off, unless it's a TfL vehicle. Buses are not TfL vehicles, though of course they have a lot of power as they award route contracts to bus operators.

It's a bit like expecting TfL to turn London into a cyclists' paradise when they're responsible for only 5% of the roads (though, granted, those roads carry 35% of the traffic).

This has been the matter of discussion we had with TfL yesterday (see http://rdrf.org.uk/2014/06/26/transport-for-london-sees-sense-at-last-ov...). Some of the operators are members of TfL's Fleet Operators Recognition Scheme (FORS), and TfL can tell them what to do otherwise they may lose their membership, or at the very least not advance further up the accreditation scale.

Some of the stickers have TfL and Mayor of London logos, so they would have some justification in mentioning issues to operators. Also, they are an authoritative body so can at least mention to operators their responsibilities, particularly with regard to the need for motorists to “stay back” where there is inadequate room to overtake (Highway Code Rule 153) and/or to use nearside wing mirrors (Highway Code Rules 159,161,163, 169, 179, 180, 182, 184, and 202)

Very glad to hear about this move. However I think the horse has already bolted on this one as far as drivers of other private vehicles are concerned, and the misplaced sense of entitlement these stickers engender among them about road 'ownership' and their responsibilities to other road users will take years to eradicate.

abudhabiChris wrote:

Some states in the US have "Share The Road" as the message on their licence plates (or "license" plates as they insist on calling them).

Why not use something like that. It's also a reminder to cyclists, some of whom in my experience confuse being assertive with being aggressive.

As they're not visible at all to the driver inside the vehicle, and probably not very visible to drivers outside it, their apparent sole function is to be 'a reminder only to cyclists'.

They would be visible to the driver seeing them on other cars and they are visible to the driver every time he or she looks at their own car. How visible would depend on the design including size and colours.

As for the message, I grew up in Australia - I haven't lived there for more than 20 years - but I could still tell you all the messages on the licence plates of the various states.

They are something you see many times every day and the message doesn't have to be in huge letters, but it would be a constant reminder that having a vehicle does not give ownership of the road.

It certainly appears that TfL has an anti-bicycle agenda. And many cities and states in the US are far ahead of Bristol, from what I could tell during a recent visit, but the "Share the Road" slogan can also be turned against cyclists. Not long ago, in an effort to avoid potholes, I was riding three feet in from the side of a countryside road when a car crossed a double yellow line to pass me. The mother leaned out through the passenger window and yelled at me, in front of her children, "Sharing the road means you don't take up the whole lane!"

pablo skils wrote:

It certainly appears that TfL has an anti-bicycle agenda. ...

I disagree, based on the amount of work they're putting into cycling. However, I do think there is sometimes a clash between their cycling aims and their aim of 'smoothing traffic flow'.

What would help the former is having more representation on TfL's Board of Directors from activists for a liveable city, e.g. LCC, Sustrans, CTC, RoadPeace, Living Streets, etc. The Deputy Chair is a big advocate of sustainable transport, and there's a guy from London Travelwatch on there, which is great, but you also have people from the LTDA, the main private hire (minicab) group, and people with a background in the financial sector in London, the global centre of financial fraud. You can't expect the latter group people to take a stand and make London a less attractive place to drive in (expanding the Congestion Charging zone, giving more road space over to cycling, etc.). The Mayor appoints people to the Board, and that's why London needs a more progressive Mayor.

We, as cyclists and people seeking a cleaner, safer, more enjoyable environment to live in, need to support the move (demanded by the Stop Killing Cyclists campaign and probably others) for representation from cycling/sustainable transport groups on the TfL Board. WRITE TO THE MAYOR!