| Topic: | Re:Reply | |
| Posted by: | Mark Evans | |
| Date/Time: | 30/04/24 12:33:00 |
| That's a fair point but maybe not designating the building to retained as office space was a quid pro quo for the submission of designs which the council thought had value. |
| Topic | Date Posted | Posted By |
| Good news/bad news on Chiswick Tower | 19/04/24 14:54:00 | Jeremy Parkinson |
| Re:Good news/bad news on Chiswick Tower | 19/04/24 16:17:00 | Jim Lawes |
| Re:Re:Good news/bad news on Chiswick Tower | 19/04/24 17:35:00 | Peter Evans |
| Re:Re:Re:Good news/bad news on Chiswick Tower | 19/04/24 17:42:00 | Michael Robinson |
| Re:Re:Re:Re:Good news/bad news on Chiswick Tower | 19/04/24 18:49:00 | Justin Stephenson |
| Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Good news/bad news on Chiswick Tower | 20/04/24 14:19:00 | Peter Evans |
| Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Good news/bad news on Chiswick Tower | 21/04/24 09:41:00 | Jeremy Parkinson |
| Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Good news/bad news on Chiswick Tower | 21/04/24 12:46:00 | Richard Greenhough |
| Reply | 21/04/24 13:36:00 | Michael Robinson |
| Re:Reply | 23/04/24 08:08:00 | Mark Evans |
| Reply | 26/04/24 11:54:00 | Andrew OSullivan |
| Re:Reply | 30/04/24 12:33:00 | Mark Evans |