The Licensing Sub-Committee (3) of Westminster City Council met on Thursday 30 May 2024 to determine two licensing applications. The committee refused an application to vary the premises licence for Bantof & Co, located at 31 Great Windmill Street, W1D 7LP. However, they granted a new premises licence for Simmons, at 11 Woodstock Street, W1C 2AE.

Bantof & Co, 31 Great Windmill Street, W1D 7LP

The Sub-Committee refused an application to vary the premises licence for Bantof & Co, a restaurant located at 31 Great Windmill Street, London W1D 7LP. The application sought to extend the opening hours and licensable activities on Thursdays, Fridays, and Saturdays until 1:30 AM.

Numerous representations were received from the Licensing Authority, Environmental Health Service, the Soho Society, Soho Housing Association, and local residents. Concerns were raised about the potential for increased public nuisance, crime and disorder, and public safety, particularly due to the premises' location within the West End Cumulative Impact Zone (CIZ). Objectors argued that the extended hours would exacerbate existing issues in the area, impacting residents in nearby social housing and contributing to a general increase in noise and disturbance.

The applicant, represented by Mr. Marcus Lavell, argued that as a food-led establishment, Bantof & Co posed a lower risk than drink-led venues. They proposed several conditions, including last entry at 11:30 PM on Thursdays and midnight on Fridays and Saturdays, pre-booked patrons only during extended hours, and no use of the external terrace after 10:00 PM. An independent licensing consultant, Mr. Adrian Studd, stated that patrons left quietly and that the extended hours would not significantly change this.

However, the Sub-Committee was not persuaded that the application would not add to the cumulative impact in the West End CIZ. They noted that even with proposed conditions, an additional 75 people in the locality during these later hours would undermine the public nuisance licensing objective. The committee also highlighted that while the Metropolitan Police Service did not object, the Licensing Authority's evidence pointed to crime hotspots in the area, and the applicant had not demonstrated sufficient preventative measures to ensure patron safety. The decision to refuse was based on the potential negative impact on the West End CIZ and the undermining of the licensing objectives, particularly the prevention of public nuisance.

Simmons, 11 Woodstock Street, W1C 2AE

The Sub-Committee granted a new premises licence for Simmons, a pub located at 11 Woodstock Street, London W1C 2AE. This application was for a shadow licence, intended to protect the landlord's investment in the event the existing licence lapsed, was surrendered, or revoked. The applicant, Thamesworth Limited, sought to mirror the existing licence's hours and conditions.

Representations were received from four residents, who cited issues with noise nuisance and anti-social behaviour from the previous licence holder, Simmons Bar. They expressed concerns that the proposed shadow licence, particularly with extended Sunday hours and the removal of certain conditions, could lead to a repeat of these problems.

The applicant's solicitor, Ms. Lisa Gilligan, clarified that the intention was to mirror the existing licence and that any confusion regarding hours or conditions was unintentional. She stated that the applicant had a good track record as a landlord and was committed to ensuring future tenants operated responsibly. The applicant offered additional wording to a condition to prevent the licence from being transferred to previous problematic tenants.

The Sub-Committee noted that the premises were outside the West End Cumulative Impact Zone and that the Metropolitan Police and Licensing Authority had not made representations against the application. While acknowledging the residents' concerns stemming from the previous tenant's conduct, the committee found that the application sought to replicate the existing licence and did not propose any changes to hours or conditions that would negatively impact the licensing objectives. The decision to grant the licence was based on the applicant's commitment to safeguarding their investment and the existing licence's operational framework, with the added assurance that the shadow licence would not be transferable to previous problematic operators. The committee requested that the Licensing Authority be informed of who eventually takes over the shadow licence.