Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Sure Nutty, I know it - it's probably just joining the list of vacant lots on LL. Currently Hindwoods Hunter Payne are listing one of the Walsh units, the Unwins shop, the old mobile phone shop and even Anterior Trading on North Cross Road as up for grabs. Eliz's is smaller and less flexible than most of those.


Some of the proposed rents would require big balls from a local trader to take on - several thousand pounds a month. These can be easy to cover in the medium term as a loss leader for national chains, but that's not economic for nick-nacks unless we've have a massive increase in transient visitors.


I don't think Eliz's is big enough for a chain unless it's a pizza delivery place or equivalent.

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/115-elizs-bakery/#findComment-1067
Share on other sites

I asked the outfitters today, and although they wouldn't tell me who it was, they told me they were outfitting it as a clothes store. It's all opened up inside, with pine-effect double doors leading out to the back yard. Here's a candid shot...


http://farm1.static.flickr.com/135/360674194_deb7660804_m.jpg


There doesn't seem to be much sign of a bar or counter and those all-white walls and spotlights would suggest that a trendy shop was the most likely occupier...


Batdog, mebbe they'll do a Kaftan and some mystic stones for you on special???

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/115-elizs-bakery/#findComment-1258
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Arguably, as regards local needs for free(er) flowing traffic and some acknowledgement of expressed wishes he hasn't been. The 'active travel' and particularly the cycling lobby seems to have got far more of his attention than others. In that aspect, at least he would seem to be far more likely to be happy amongst the avowedly private-car hating Greens. A perfectly reasonable stance, of course, but one which certainly doesn't qualify as 'arguing for local needs'. He hasn't, equally, been very obviously supportive of those, his direct constituents I believe, who have been less than enthusiastic about Gala.
    • The problem with the first Southwark leadership election is that two proxy votes were cast, which is against Southwark's own party rules. So that is why the election was re-run. The controversy is in switching to an online as opposed to in person second election. James has causes he vehemently stands for, and it's fair enough if he thinks the local Labour Party is no longer for him. Government is not easy, and there are hard decisions to be made always. London councils have always had a better deal when it comes to central funding, and anyone who travels to the North frequently can see the stark difference. It's that failure to see the bigger picture that I find most surprising about his comments. Sure, as a local councillor he should be always arguing for local needs, but reform of central government funding to give more help to poorer regions has been a long held aim by this Labour Party, and especially since Brexit, where poorer regions benefitting from EU grants lost out.  As always, it will be the public that decides at the ballot box. 
    • I'd be interested to know how else you award points when deciding what party to vote for!
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...