• New Highway Code to cede priority to pedestrians & cyclists (Forbes)
• Gravesend & Tilbury river bus day trips to London (ThamesClippers)
• Silvertown Tunnel: pollution solution or environmental disaster? (AirQualityNews)
• Europe leads fight against climate change with Fit for 55 policy (MediaRail)
• Boston – building a better T (RailwayGazette)
• LAX people mover LRT connector breaks ground (TheSource)
• China metro openings hit record high (MetroReport)
Check out our other sections:
- Webinars and Online Conferences
- Industry News – updated every business day
- Podcasts
And some of our most popular articles:
- Schrodinger’s Cab Firm: Uber’s Existential Crisis
- You Hacked – Cyber-security and the railways
- On Our Line Podcast #8: Talking Uber, Lyft and Mobility disruption
Feel we should read something or include in a future list? Email us at [email protected].
Reconnections is funded largely by its community. Like what we do? Buy us a cup of coffee or visit our shop.
The Forbes report on the changes are a bit of a misreading of the situation. The highway code isn’t really a legal document, it’s a summary of the relevants laws (and you have to show you know it to be issued with a full driving licence) but it’s not a legal document in the sense related in the article.
In the three legal systems in the UK, it’s the laws listed in the highway code’s list of references that are the law, and of course the case-law built upon these.
Which means that there aren’t really any changes in the legal situation, the listed priorities are the current law. Rule 170, for example currently says “watch out for pedestrians crossing a road into which you are turning. If they have started to cross they have priority, so give way”.
I’m pretty sure that no-one has ever been prosecuted for breaking the Highway Code, but for the listed things in it directs towards such as “Laws RTA 1988 sect 36 & TSRGD regs 10(1),16(1) & 25”.
The Blackwell tunnel will soon be in a Ultra Low Emissions Zone. If the new tunnel goes ahead it must be a Zero Emissions Zone, this will also reduce the ventilation construction and operation costs.
The Highway Code *is* a legal document and breaking it *can* have consequences.
Section 38(7) of the Road Traffic Act 1988:
A failure on the part of a person to observe a provision of the Highway Code shall not of itself render that person liable to criminal proceedings of any kind but any such failure may in any proceedings (whether civil or criminal, and including proceedings for an offence under the Traffic Acts, the Public Passenger Vehicles Act 1981 or sections 18 to 23 of the Transport Act 1985) be relied upon by any party to the proceedings as tending to establish or negative any liability which is in question in those proceedings.
I’m afraid that I regard the four significant figure $898.6 million “cost” of the LA scheme as fatuous in the extreme. I suspect that many components have been estimated to what seemed to be an appropriate precision for them then simply added. Does anyone believe that even 900 million will be accurate to even the nearest 10 million?