London SE1 community website

Tower Bridge Piazza / Courage Yard

Join in these discussions today! Log in or register.
Pages:  Previous1 2 3 4 5 Next
Current: 2 of 5
Sunday 31 January 2016 9.53pm
Kampung Boy wrote:
Not that it really matters when Lovage closed, there is a google review dated 2 years ago and others from Yelp dated 2012.

Definitely closed by 2011, but I think it may have been closed even by 2010. I seem to recall it was repossessed and then reopened a short time later before finally closing for good.
Wednesday 6 July 2016 11.08pm
Any more news on this development
Thursday 7 July 2016 10.26pm
Tower Bridge Piazza plans, found it from @LoveShadThames...
Thursday 4 August 2016 1.55pm
The Piazza / Yard in all truth has never reached its full potential and there are probably a number of things that have hindered it. The new images and plans all look good on the face of it but I can't help wonder if they are a little naïve or maybe just hoping for a quick profit before moving on? It seems odd that the new developers are putting all there eggs in one basket by basically aiming the whole scheme at a Café culture.

Ever since the square was developed a number of businesses have failed to make it long term. There are/were a couple of Cafe's, a couple of estate agents, a clothes/gift shop, the Barber's and latterly the dentist.

To some degree the businesses on the south side were always going to be at a disadvantage, given the lack of passing trade when compared to those that also fronted Shad Thames and therefore for much of the time those units seemed a little lost. With the establishing of the Barber shop and then the Dentist things have livened up significantly. al It is still blatantly apparent however that the owners have been unable to fill all the units. This doesn't appear to be based on size as it seems the larger / double / triple units have been no one marketable than the single units.

Having looked at both the images and plans it is clear that for some reason the Barber shop no longer features in the square, although fortunately the other smaller shops do. I was not aware of the Barbers relocating and hope this is not the case as I use them and feel they are an asset not just to the square but the community as a whole.

Although not totally convinced that the addition of the pavilion will be of any real benefit, I do not have a problem with it and clearly filling the empty units can only be a good thing but equally I don't want to lose useful facilities.

Am I not correct in thinking there is a restriction on alcohol sales within the Piazza? Will there be a market for so many dry cafe's with restricted food preparation and opening times?

Somehow it doesn't seem the best scheme for locals (living/working) or for gaining maximum rent potential.
Wednesday 19 October 2016 12.11pm
I suspect these people have little interest in the area and its future and clearly no idea of what will work long term or is good for the area. There seems to be lots to support the idea that they are looking to do a quick "ish" revamp, bump up the rents and move it on before it goes wrong!

Apparently they are demanding at least a doubling of rent to the shops, despite no improvements yet made and the prospect of the area being a building site over Christmas. On top of this they have failed (as far as I can see) to attract any new retail businesses to the square.
Wednesday 19 October 2016 1.01pm
I have heard the Starbucks is merging with the unit next door and is going to double in size!? But I do personally think the area is definitely underused and could be something way more interesting and welcome more nice cafes and restaurants, look at the new watch house that replaced tea pod! It's just fabulous and that's coming from some one who lives in shad Thames.
Friday 21 October 2016 7.49am
Lots of rumours about what Columbia Threadneedle are up to in the area.

Could there be any truth in the suggestion that they are pushing the local businesses out so that the likes of D&D can further expand / take over the area. Apparently D&D own many of the restaurants that can already be found in the area. It is suggested that far from working with the community to support local businesses they are helping to monopolise the area. If this proves to be the truth, there is little hope that the other assurances made to pass planning will be up held!

Maybe its a case of 2+2=5 but the more I hear this the more it seems to make sense?
Friday 21 October 2016 8.52am
LDM wrote:

Apparently D&D own many of the restaurants that can already be found in the area.

Yeah they do-

Chop House
La Cantina
Friday 21 October 2016 6.29pm
NickTheGreek wrote:
LDM wrote:

Apparently D&D own many of the restaurants that can already be found in the area.

Yeah they do-

Chop House
La Cantina

And don't forget the crepe/coffee shop and wine shop fronting onto Shad Thames. I think D&D already have a monopoly on the area, they don't need any more space! (Although I guess there is always the old Bengal Clipper...)
Monday 24 October 2016 5.21pm
Its pure speculation but given that the rent being asked for units in the piazza is £70 - £100k a year they are hardly looking to attract local or independant tenants despite what was claimed to pass planning.

There was much talk by residents about not wanting chains to take over the area yet that is exactly what is happening just in a less obvious way.
There may be different signs over the doors but the fact is most of the reastaurants are owned by 1 or 2 large companies.

The way it is unfortunately and little hope of changing things.
Pages:  Previous1 2 3 4 5 Next
Current: 2 of 5

To post a message, please log in or register..
Keep up with SE1 news

We have three email newsletters for you to choose from:

We are part of
Independent Community News Network
Email newsletter

For the latest local news and events direct to your inbox every Monday, you need our weekly email newsletter SE1 Direct.

7,000+ locals read it every week. Can you afford to miss out?

Read the latest issue before signing up

Also on the forum
Views expressed in this discussion forum are those of the contributors and may not reflect the editorial policy of this website. Please read our terms and conditions