DOCSLIB.ORG

Crossrail Bill

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Crossrail Bill HOUSE OF LORDS Select Committee on the Crossrail Bill 1st Special Report of Session 2007–08 Crossrail Bill Volume IV: Evidence Ordered to be printed 19 May 2008 and published 19 August 2008 Published by the Authority of the House of Lords London : The Stationery Office Limited £price HL Paper 112–IV CONTENTS IN VOLUME II Page List of Proceedings 19 February 2008 Chairman's Opening Address 1 Promoter's Opening Address 3 General presentation by the Promoters on noise and vibration 16 20 February 2008 General presentation by the Promoters on compensation 33 General presentation by the Promoters on ground settlement 46 26 February 2008 Promoters presentation on people with reduced mobility 59 The Petition of the London Borough of Newham 84 27 February 2008 The Petition of the London Borough of Newham 106 28 February 2008 The Petition of the Cyclists' Touring Club 146 3 March 2008 The Petition of Iver Parish Council, the Ramblers Association and the Open Spaces Society 169 4 March 2008 The Petition of the London Borough of Tower Hamlets 195 The Petition of Mr James Middleton 211 5 March 2008 The Petition of Mr David Saunderson 222 10 March 2008 Promoter’s opening remarks on Spitalfields 249 The Petition of Spitalfields Community Association 259 11 March 2008 The Petition of Selina Mifsud and others 273 The Petition of Nicholas Morse and others 294 The Petition of Selina Mifsud and others 296 The Petition of Spitalfields Community Association 312 12 March 2008 The Petition of Spitalfields Community Association 321 The Petition of Spitalfields Small Business Association Ltd 328 Spitalfields – Settlement Issues 346 Spitalfields – Noise Issues 361 CONTENTS IN VOLUME III Page 13 March 2008 The Petition of the Spitalfields Society 372 General Issues relating to the Spitalfields area 397 Promoter’s closing statement on the settlement issues in the Spitalfields area 420 17 March 2008 The Petition of Kempton Court Residents 427 18 March 2008 Chairman’s Ruling on compliance with the Environmental Impact Directive 85/337/EEC, as amended 451 The Petition of Ms Patricia Jones 454 19 March 2008 The Petition of Canary Wharf Group Plc 488 The Petition of Trustees Of The SS Robin Trust 508 The Petition of the Association of West India Dock Commercial Ship Owners 510 20 March 2008 The Petition of Souzel Properties Ltd 520 The Petition of the City of London Corporation 530 26 March 2008 The Petition of Michael Pritchett 532 1 April 2008 The Petition of London Borough of Bexley 555 The Petition of Mr Roy Carrier 597 2 April 2008 The Petition of Mr Roy Carrier 606 3 April 2008 Statement on the Office of Rail Regulation 618 The Petition of the London Borough of Camden 619 The Petition of David Monro and Adam Scott – The House of St Barnabas- in-Soho 22 April 2008 Promoter's opening address on Crossrail services and operations, the Access Option, general railway industry issues and Bill powers 641 The Petition of Jean Lambert MEP and others 666 The Petition of Association of Train Operating Companies (ATOC) 682 23 April 2008 The Petitions of London Borough of Havering, Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea, and Brentwood Borough Council 690 29 April 2008 The Petitions of the Freight Transport Association Ltd; The Rail Freight Group; Freightliner Group Ltd; Mendip Rail Ltd; Quarry Products Association Ltd; Hutchison Ports (UK) Ltd; The Felixstowe Dock & Railway Company; Harwich International Port Ltd; and Maritime Transport Services Ltd 700 CONTENTS IN VOLUME IV Page 30 April 2008 The Petition of Network Rail Infrastructure Ltd 751 Heathrow Western Link 784 The Petition of English Welsh & Scottish Railway Ltd 790 1 May 2008 The Petitions of the Freight Transport Association Ltd; The Rail Freight Group; Freightliner Group Ltd; Mendip Rail Ltd; Quarry Products Association Ltd; Hutchison Ports (UK) Ltd; The Felixstowe Dock & Railway Company; Harwich International Port Ltd; and Maritime Transport Services Ltd 805 The Petition of the Rail Freight Group 833 The Petition of the Trustees of the SS Robin Trust 835 Promoter’s Closing on railway issues 838 2 May 2008 The Petition of Smithfield Market Tenants’ Association 862 6 May 2008 The Petition of Westminster City Council 911 The Petition of Paddington Residents Active Concern on Transport (PRACT) 919 The Petition of Woodseer and Hanbury Residents Association 949 7 May 2008 The Petition of Westbourne Park Villas Residents Association 973 The Petition of Hammerson (Paddington) Limited and Domaine Developments Limited 990 The Petition of Westbourne Park Villas Residents Association 992 The Petition of Mr John Payne 1011 8 May 2008 The Petitions of the Crossrail Coalition of Residents and Petitioners; and the Residents Society of Mayfair & St James's Mayfair Action Group 1031 The Petition of Mr Leo Walters 1074 The Petition of Woodseer and Hanbury Residents Association 1076 Promoter’s Closing statement 1082 Processed: 14-08-2008 19:47:59 Page Layout: LOENEW [SO] PPSysB Job: 404689 Unit: PAG1 committee on the crossrail bill: evidence 751 DAY TWENTY-FOUR WEDNESDAY 30 APRIL 2008 Before: Colville of Culross, V (Chairman) Jones of Cheltenham, L Brooke of Alverthorpe, L Snape, L Fookes, B Young of Norwood Green, L James of Blackheath, L Ordered that Counsel and Parties be called in. The following Petition against the Bill was read: The Petition of Network Rail Infrastructure Limited. MrRobinPurchasQC andMsSairaKabirSheikh appeared on behalf of the Petitioner. MessrsBirchamDysonBell appeared as Agent. 9195. CHAIRMAN: Mr Purchas? infrastructure manager for the purposes of the ROGs; that is not in dispute. The diYculty is that this 9196. MR PURCHAS: My Lord, I appear for is an issue which arises under current legislation. Network Rail with my learned friend, Ms Saira What Network Rail are seeking to do is to seek Kabir Sheikh, who is on my right. undertakings from the Secretary of State which would fetter his discretion under existing legislation, 9197. CHAIRMAN: I wonder whether Mr Elvin and to give an undertaking would be unlawful wants to say anything about this. because there is a negotiation both on regulatory and commercial terms where, frankly, the Secretary of 9198. MR ELVIN: Briefly, my Lord. State sees the logic in Network Rail having a considerable involvement in the regulation of the 9199. CHAIRMAN: This is the ordinary method, central tunnel, as I said to you yesterday, and TfL are Mr Purchas. arguing, or were arguing, for almost complete exemption such as is the case with London 9200. MR ELVIN: My Lord, I foreshadowed it Underground and the Docklands Light Railway. yesterday and we have just received materials from That is not acceptable to the Department for it to be Network Rail which I have not been able to look at completely exempt, but the precise nature of the overnight. regulatory system which is to operate in the central tunnel is a diYcult matter and, as I said yesterday, it 9201. CHAIRMAN: So have we. involves negotiations outside the powers of this Bill. 9202. MR ELVIN: It says what I more or less expected it to say. The position is this, as I explained 9205. Therefore, in our respectful submission, whilst yesterday: that there is currently an issue as to how we note Network Rail’s concerns and we do see the central section of Crossrail, that is to say, the Network Rail as having a major role to play, not least tunnel section, is to be regulated. because of course we have to access the central section from Network Rail’s national network and 9203. CHAIRMAN: This is the infrastructure infrastructure, this is unfortunately a matter which manager point? has to continue under existing legislation outside the bill process and, therefore, in my respectful 9204. MR ELVIN: Yes, this is the infrastructure submission, although we are sympathetic to what manager point. Just taking a step back, this involves Network Rail have to say, it is a matter for further at least a three-way negotiation between the negotiation and not a matter where Network Rail Promoter, Network Rail, represented by my learned can properly ask your Lordships to do anything friends, and Transport for London. It is a negotiation about it. as to what precise regulatory mechanism should apply in terms of the infrastructure manager for access and general purposes under the central 9206. CHAIRMAN: It is the European Directive section. It is agreed that Network Rail should be point, is it? Processed: 14-08-2008 19:47:59 Page Layout: LOENEW [E] PPSysB Job: 404689 Unit: PAG1 752 committee on the crossrail bill: evidence 30 April 2008 The Petition of Network Rail Infrastructure Ltd 9207. MR ELVIN: In part, it is the transposition of nothing about any negotiations at all. It is about the European Directives into national law. something pretty simple; it is about the operation and maintenance of the railway. The 1993 Act, as your 9208. CHAIRMAN: Yes, it is the statutory Lordships will know, was careful to distinguish instrument which transposes it. matters of commercial interest, no doubt real interests to TfL, from safety and performance of the 9209. MR ELVIN: And indeed under the Railways rail network, and that is all we are interested in. Act. Whatever TfL may want to negotiate with us or anyone else is nothing to do with our Petition. It is 9210. LORD JAMES OF BLACKHEATH: You quite interesting we heard my learned friend because have an extraordinary situation. It sounds like one of it is exactly what we suspect has been going on, that these problems that is so stupid it should not possibly the financial interests of TfL have obfuscated what be allowed to exist for five minutes, but how long is we see as the very important public interest of that situation going to be allowed to continue and ensuring safe and eVective operation and still be able to proceed to the next stages of Crossrail maintenance of the system.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Operator's Story Appendix
    Railway and Transport Strategy Centre The Operator’s Story Appendix: London’s Story © World Bank / Imperial College London Property of the World Bank and the RTSC at Imperial College London Community of Metros CoMET The Operator’s Story: Notes from London Case Study Interviews February 2017 Purpose The purpose of this document is to provide a permanent record for the researchers of what was said by people interviewed for ‘The Operator’s Story’ in London. These notes are based upon 14 meetings between 6th-9th October 2015, plus one further meeting in January 2016. This document will ultimately form an appendix to the final report for ‘The Operator’s Story’ piece Although the findings have been arranged and structured by Imperial College London, they remain a collation of thoughts and statements from interviewees, and continue to be the opinions of those interviewed, rather than of Imperial College London. Prefacing the notes is a summary of Imperial College’s key findings based on comments made, which will be drawn out further in the final report for ‘The Operator’s Story’. Method This content is a collation in note form of views expressed in the interviews that were conducted for this study. Comments are not attributed to specific individuals, as agreed with the interviewees and TfL. However, in some cases it is noted that a comment was made by an individual external not employed by TfL (‘external commentator’), where it is appropriate to draw a distinction between views expressed by TfL themselves and those expressed about their organisation.
    [Show full text]
  • Solent to the Midlands Multimodal Freight Strategy – Phase 1
    OFFICIAL SOLENT TO THE MIDLANDS MULTIMODAL FREIGHT STRATEGY – PHASE 1 JUNE 2021 OFFICIAL TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................................................................................................................................... 4 1. INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY .......................................................................................................................................................... 9 2. STRATEGIC AND POLICY CONTEXT ................................................................................................................................................... 11 3. THE IMPORTANCE OF THE SOLENT TO THE MIDLANDS ROUTE ........................................................................................................ 28 4. THE ROAD ROUTE ............................................................................................................................................................................. 35 5. THE RAIL ROUTE ............................................................................................................................................................................... 40 6. KEY SECTORS .................................................................................................................................................................................... 50 7. FREIGHT BETWEEN THE SOLENT AND THE MIDLANDS ....................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Midland Main Line Upgrade Programme Economic Case Department for Transport
    Midland Main Line Upgrade Programme Economic Case Department for Transport 30 August 2017 Midland Main Line Upgrade Programme Economic Case Report OFFICIAL SENSITIVE: COMMERCIAL Notice This document and its contents have been prepared and are intended solely for Department for Transport’s information and use in relation to Midland Main Line Upgrade Programme Business Case. Atkins assumes no responsibility to any other party in respect of or arising out of or in connection with this document and/or its contents. This document has 108 pages including the cover. Document history Job number: 5159267 Document ref: v4.0 Revision Purpose description Originated Checked Reviewed Authorised Date Interim draft for client Rev 1.0 - 18/08/2017 comment Revised draft for client Rev 2.0 18/08/2017 comment Revised draft addressing Rev 3.0 - 22/08/2017 client comment Rev 4.0 Final 30/08/2017 Client signoff Client Department for Transport Project Midland Main Line Upgrade Programme Document title Midland Main Line Upgrade Programme: KO1 Final Business Case Job no. 5159267 Copy no. Document reference Atkins Midland Main Line Upgrade Programme | Version 4.0 | 30 August 2017 | 5159267 2 Midland Main Line Upgrade Programme Economic Case Report OFFICIAL SENSITIVE: COMMERCIAL Table of contents Chapter Pages Executive Summary 7 1. Introduction 12 1.1. Background 12 1.2. Report Structure 13 2. Scope of the Appraisal 14 2.1. Introduction 14 2.2. Scenario Development 14 3. Timetable Development 18 3.1. Overview 18 4. Demand & Revenue Forecasting 26 4.1. Introduction 26 4.2. Forecasting methodology 26 4.3. Appraisal of Benefits 29 4.4.
    [Show full text]
  • Network Rail Completes Major Work on £1.5Billion Midland Main Line Upgrade
    Network Rail completes major work on £1.5billion Midland Main Line Upgrade May 18, 2021 Network Rail has completed the biggest improvements to the Midland Main Line since it was built, meaning more seats, faster journeys and more reliable services for passengers travelling between the East Midlands and London. In the latest stage of the upgrade, teams have carried out vital work to install new overhead line equipment between Bedford and Corby, as well as improvements to station platforms and major work to upgrade bridges on the route – to make way for electrification between London St Pancras International and Corby. All of this work means there will be 50% more seats for passengers travelling at peak times between Corby and London. The new train timetable was introduced last Sunday (16 May), and East Midlands Railway launched its new all-electric service between Corby and London St Pancras International, providing a sixth train per hour. The upgrade, along with the new timetable, also boosts the number of seats on services across the East Midlands and cuts travel time between London and Derby, Leicester, Sheffield and Nottingham. It’s hoped the improvements will take more cars off the roads, as COVID restrictions ease and passengers return to the railway. Electric trains are quieter and much better for the environment that diesel trains. They produce almost 80% less carbon, benefitting people who live and work near the railway. Gary Walsh, Route Director for Network Rail’s East Midlands route, said: “As passengers return to the railway, it’s great to be welcoming them back with the biggest improvements in a generation on the Midland Main Line.
    [Show full text]
  • Railway Upgrade Plan – London North Eastern and East Midlands (LNE&EM)
    Railway Upgrade Plan – London North Eastern and East Midlands (LNE&EM) 2017/18 London North Eastern and East Midlands Glossary CaSL – Cancelled and Significantly Late. This measures how many trains are cancelled or are more than 29 minutes late at their terminating station. MAA – Moving Annual Average. PPM – Public Performance Measure. This is the percentage of trains that arrive at their terminating station within five minutes (for commuter services) or ten minutes (for long distance services) of when they were due. Reduction in railway work complaints measure – We believe that the number of complaints that we receive from the public about our work could be reduced if we improve how we inform people about work due to take place, and ensure all our staff behave considerately towards those living and working close to the railway. Each route is therefore aiming to reduce the number of complaints it receives in the coming year. Right Time Arrival – This measures the percentage of trains arriving at their terminating station early or within 59 seconds of schedule. 16 London North Eastern and East Midlands London North Eastern and East Midlands 17 London North Eastern and East Midlands (LNE&EM) Introduction from the route managing director – Rob McIntosh On LNE&EM, our purpose can be summarised with a simple phrase – we care about our people, we are proud about our work and we are passionate about railways. Each day, we serve around 20 per cent of the UK’s travelling public, with hundreds of commuter and leisure services connecting major cities and conurbations, supporting regional economies up and down the country.
    [Show full text]
  • Bedford the East West Rail Connection
    Bedford The East West Rail Connection The government and East-West Rail Company are planning new rail services linking Oxford and Cambridge to improve connections between East Anglia and central, southern and western England. Bedford lies at the heart of this route. Cambridge Bedford Bletchley Oxford This leaflet explains the case for east-west rail to directly serve Bedford. We are keen to keep you informed about these plans and hear your views. Find out more over the page Bedford The East-West Rail Connection East-west rail presents a once in a life time opportunity to locate Bedford at the centre of an international and national transport hub. Achieving this will re-establish Bedford on the inter-city network, reversing recent changes and optimizing travel north, south, east and west of Bedford. As a council we recognise the importance of rail and how it can boost the local economy and are calling on the government to support plans for east-west rail through Bedford. The case for east-west rail through central Bedford focuses on three key benefits: 1. Excellent connectivity - locally, nationally and internationally 2. Creating an international business hub 3. Regeneration - boosting jobs and the local economy East-West Rail Company is currently consulting on the future route of the central section of the east-west rail line. Securing east-west rail through Bedford is vital to creating opportunities not only as a key transport hub for both Bedford and the wider national transport network but also in providing key growth and vitality. East-West Rail and International Connectivity East-west rail plans present an excellent opportunity to not only connect the centre of Bedford with Oxford and Cambridge, but also enhance our international connectivity.
    [Show full text]
  • Capacity on North-South Main Lines
    Capacity on North-South Main Lines Technical Report Report October 2013 Prepared for: Prepared by: Department for Transport Steer Davies Gleave Click here to enter text. 28-32 Upper Ground London SE1 9PD +44 (0)20 7910 5000 www.steerdaviesgleave.com Technical Report CONTENTS SUMMARY ..................................................................................................... I 1 CREATING THE TIMETABLES THAT DETERMINE CAPACITY PROVISION IS A COMPLEX ISSUE .................................................................................................. 1 2 EUROPEAN COMPARISONS ........................................................................ 5 3 HOW CAPACITY CAN BE MEASURED ............................................................ 7 4 TECHNOLOGICAL ADVANCES ..................................................................... 9 5 CAPACITY AND THE NORTH-SOUTH ROUTES ................................................ 11 West Coast Main Line .............................................................................. 11 Midland Main Line .................................................................................. 13 East Coast Main Line ............................................................................... 14 Route section categorisation: green/orange/red ............................................ 15 FIGURES Figure 5.1 Assessed post-2019 Capacity Pressures on North-South Main Lines 19 Contents Technical Report Summary 1. This note assesses the capacity of the North-South Rail Lines in the UK from the perspective
    [Show full text]
  • Hsuk London Terminal Strategy
    HSUK LONDON TERMINAL STRATEGY In the development of high speed rail systems, the issue of terminal location and onward distribution of passengers assumes almost as much importance as the more obvious question of route. The new lines are designed to carry large volumes of passengers on trains operating at high frequencies, and these factors combine to create major flows arriving at city terminals which must then be efficiently dispersed onto the local public transport networks. This demands full integration of high speed and local systems, with optimised transfer at dedicated and fit-for- purpose terminals. These issues apply at all UK cities where high speed lines are planned, but are most acute in London, where passenger flows are greatest, and congestion in the existing public transport system is most critical. The following diagrams review existing central London connectivity issues, and compare and contrast the London terminal solutions proposed for HS2, and for the alternative High Speed UK proposals. For precise details of the core High Speed UK proposals (as included in the cost estimates), see the ‘200k’ series of plans. LTS1 : LONDON MAIN LINE NETWORK CIRCA 1963 LTS2 : EXISTING CENTRAL LONDON RAIL NETWORK INCLUDING CROSSRAIL SCHEME These diagrams show the rail network of central London, dominated by the classic terminus stations of the Victorian era. These are mostly reliant for onward connectivity upon the Tube network, which tended to form ‘nodes’ around the busier/more important termini. However, the change from main line to Tube is inherently inefficient, with passengers forced to detrain en masse, and with massive congestion occurring especially at rush hours.
    [Show full text]
  • The Midland Main Line and the Influence of HS2 a Short Report for North West Leicestershire District Council
    The Midland Main Line and the influence of HS2 A short report for North West Leicestershire District Council 1. Introduction Concerns have been raised recently about the relationship between the Midland Main Line (MML) and HS2, and whether the high-speed line is likely to have adverse effects on the existing network. At first sight, these concerns do not appear unreasonable in the context of recent Network Rail/Department for Transport decisions: There will be no electrification north of Kettering as this work has been halted in this and other locations. This raises a question about the viability of the Classic Connection with HS2 at Toton The new East Midlands contract will be 7+2, reducing the incentive for a new train operator to invest in new rolling stock; HSTs are scheduled to come out of service by 2019; possible replacements will not be able to attain the same speeds and this could adversely affect journey times. These points together make depressing reading, and it is understandable why there is a feeling that the MML is being sacrificed in favour of HS2 to make it a more attractive prospect for this part of England. The relationship between the MML and HS2 is an important one in the District, and currently it is finely balanced. The Council has been broadly supportive of the scheme because of the economic benefits that will follow on from the construction and operation of HS2, but there is a danger that this could change, particularly if continued opposition from residents and businesses alters the view of the elected members.
    [Show full text]
  • Northern Rail Priorities Statement Five Priorities for Immediate Action and Investment
    NORTHERN ECONOMIC FUTURES COMMISSION NORTHERN RAIL PRIORITIES STATEMENT FIVE PRIORITIES FOR IMMEDIATE ACTION AND INVESTMENT March 2012 © IPPR North 2012 Institute for Public Policy Research 1 IPPR North | Northern rail priorities statement: Five priorities for immediate action and investment Foreword in skills.2 Rail investment will provide the platform for The Northern Economic Futures Commission is sustainable growth for the northern regions. More developing a medium-term strategy for sustainable specifically, investment in infrastructure priorities that economic development in the North of England. This is a make rail franchises cheaper to run reduce long-term sizeable challenge, yet one which needs to be taken on subsidies, increasing productivity and making growth if the North is to be at the vanguard of the UK’s recovery more sustainable. and able to compete in the global economy. Alongside • The economic interdependence of the North’s eight skills and innovation, transport infrastructure is crucial city-regions will only increase: Much economic growth for ensuring that the northern economy is the driver of over the coming years will be driven by the expansion of national prosperity that it has the potential to be. knowledge-based sectors that increasingly rely on larger Our work in the area of transport continues to develop employment catchment areas. To ensure that growth is not the Northern Way Transport Compact’s previous constrained, transport provision will need to be improved consideration of what the strategic transport priorities and better joined up between and within the city regions. A for the North of England should be.1 But the urgency is report by LSE’s Spatial Economics Research Centre (SERC) now far greater.
    [Show full text]
  • Investigation Into the Department for Transport's Decision to Cancel Three
    A picture of the National Audit Office logo Report by the Comptroller and Auditor General Department for Transport Investigation into the Department for Transport’s decision to cancel three rail electrification projects HC 835 SESSION 2017–2019 29 MARCH 2018 4 What this investigation is about Investigation into the Department for Transport’s decision to cancel three rail electrification projects What this investigation is about 1 In July 2017 the Secretary of State for Transport announced the cancellation of three electrification projects serving different parts of the UK: the Midland Main Line north of Kettering (to Nottingham and Sheffield); the Great Western Main Line between Cardiff and Swansea; and the Lakes Line between Oxenholme and Windermere. Electrification of the Midland Main Line to Sheffield was a 2015 Conservative party manifesto commitment. The 2015 manifesto also stated that work was underway to electrify the railway in South Wales. These three projects are part of wider electrification projects for which works are either ongoing or already complete for large sections of these lines (Figure 1). 2 This investigation sets out the decision-making process, leading to the July 2017 announcement. It covers: • the original case for electrification; • why the Department for Transport (the Department) chose to cancel projects; • how it selected which projects to cancel; and • the Department’s assessment on the impact that cancelling the projects would have on promised benefits. 3 This investigation focuses on the three electrification projects the Secretary of State announced as cancelled in July 2017. Our investigation does not seek to evaluate the value for money of the projects or the decision to cancel.
    [Show full text]
  • Tony Meadows Associates
    Tony Meadows Associates Tony Meadows Associates provides architectural design and technical development services to support the emergence and delivery of transport infrastructure tma tony meadows associates www.tma.uk.com tma Capability Tony Meadows Associates provides architectural design and technical development services to support the emergence and delivery of transport infrastructure. We have been exclusively committed to the design of transport infrastructure since 1986, and are the only architectural design practice with this pedigree. We are based in Central London with ready access to our clients, our sub-consultants, the services we require to operate and the authorities that approve our work. We comprise architects and planners with unparalleled experience in the development of transport infrastructure, with skills in construction planning and design management, and with proven reliability in the transport industry’s approvals processes. We have a long-term relationship with our sub-consultant supply chain and the major engineering companies in the sector, allowing us to rapidly compile and deliver a bespoke multi-disciplinary service to transport infrastructure projects. We are currently rolling out several transport projects as design team leaders and coordinators in the emerging world of Building Information Management, having been at the forefront of computing in design since our inception. tony meadows associates www.tma.uk.com tma Services Design Services Delivery Services Scope Development and Peer Reviews Design Team
    [Show full text]