The Licensing Sub-Committee of Tower Hamlets Council met on Tuesday, 11 October 2022, to consider two licensing applications. The committee reviewed an application to revoke the premises licence for Tower Hamlets Pizza and an application for a licence for the Limehouse Library Hotel.

Tower Hamlets Pizza Licence Review

The committee considered an application to review the premises licence for Tower Hamlets Pizza, located at 479 Cambridge Heath Road, London E2 9BU. The review was triggered by the licensing authority due to concerns over crime and disorder, and the prevention of public nuisance. Evidence presented indicated that the premises had been operating beyond its licensed hours, with complaints from local residents dating back to June 2021. Test purchases conducted by officers confirmed sales of food after 2 am, with some advertisements suggesting operations as late as 4:30 am.

Kathy Driver, representing the licensing authority, highlighted that despite numerous warnings and attempts to contact the licence holder, Mr. Kell, and individuals associated with the business, there had been no satisfactory response or provision of CCTV footage. She stated that the premises had failed to comply with licence conditions, including the operational status of CCTV, and had repeatedly operated outside of permitted hours. PC Mark Perry of the Metropolitan Police concurred with these concerns, adding that the premises had shown an inability to uphold its responsibilities under the Licensing Act 2003, leading to noise nuisance and crime and disorder in the area. He argued that no conditions could be added to the licence as the premises had demonstrated a disregard for existing ones, and restricting hours would be ineffective as they would likely be ignored.

The committee also heard from Mr. Nihal Manjirio, who initially stated he represented Hamlet Pizza Limited, the current business owner, but was later advised he was an interested member of the public as he did not represent the licence holder, Mr. Kell. The committee noted the absence of Mr. Kell, the current licence holder, and expressed disappointment that he did not attend to present his side of the case, deeming it a matter of natural justice.

The committee was informed that the Home Office had issued guidance regarding reviews and that immigration authorities had also commented on the premises, which was considered unusual. The evidence suggested a pattern of changing company directors and ownership to avoid responsibility. The licensing authority requested the revocation of the licence.

Following the presentations, the committee engaged in questioning. Councillor Sabina Akhtar asked why the authority had not intervened earlier, to which Ms. Driver explained the process of warnings, test purchases, and the need to gather sufficient evidence, especially given the frequent changes in management. Councillor Leelu Ahmed inquired about whether new owners were aware of licensing obligations, and Ms. Driver confirmed that attempts had been made to contact various individuals and addresses.

The committee also discussed evidence suggesting that the same individuals were involved despite changes in ownership, with a Hamidi family member identified as a seller during a test purchase. The licensing authority indicated that legal proceedings were also being pursued for unauthorised licensable activities and breaches of licence conditions.

Both the licensing authority and the police concluded by requesting the revocation of the licence, citing a complete disregard for the law and a failure to comply with licence conditions.

Limehouse Library Hotel Licensing Application

The committee then considered a licensing application for the Limehouse Library Hotel, located at 638 Commercial Road. The application sought to allow the consumption of alcohol on the premises, with a particular focus on the terrace area.

Representing the applicant, Ms. Özlem Darjan and Mr. Jha explained that the building, a Grade II listed former library, had been vacant and derelict for years before their acquisition in 2012. They highlighted the extensive renovation efforts to transform it into a boutique hotel and culinary arts education centre, preserving its historical aspects. They addressed concerns raised by residents of the neighbouring Earl Atley Court, particularly regarding noise from the terrace. Ms. Darjan clarified that the terrace would not be a bar in itself but a seating area, with bars located inside the building. She stated that sound and heat insulation, as well as glass partitions around the terrace, had been installed to mitigate noise. The ballroom, intended for entertainment, is located in the basement and is fully soundproofed. They confirmed that no live music would be permitted on the terrace, which is intended for guests to relax and enjoy fresh air. They also noted that Mr. Chris Brown, a resident who had submitted objections, had visited the premises and was impressed.

Mr. Attila Sass, a resident of Earl Atley Court, expressed his primary concern regarding noise from the terrace bar, particularly during summer evenings when windows might be open. He suggested limiting the hours for alcohol consumption on the terrace to 10 pm. He stated he had no objections to the indoor activities.

During questioning, the committee clarified that the terrace was not a bar but a seating area. The applicants agreed to a condition prohibiting vertical drinking (people standing to drink) on the terrace, which would limit the number of people and reduce potential noise. They also confirmed that soft background music from inside the hotel might be audible on the terrace but would not be played specifically on the terrace. The applicants stated that the terrace area was small, with a maximum capacity of around 40 people, and that the hotel had a duty manager present 24 hours a day to manage any behaviour. They also pointed out other licensed premises on their road that operated with late-time alcohol licences.

The committee discussed the size and location of the terrace, referring to floor plans. It was confirmed that the terrace bordered Earl Atley Court. The applicants reiterated their commitment to ensuring a peaceful environment for both hotel guests and residents.

In their concluding remarks, the applicants emphasised their commitment to managing the premises responsibly and highlighted their extensive experience in the hospitality sector. Mr. Sass reiterated his concerns about noise from the terrace, especially during summer nights, and suggested that guests be invited inside after a certain time.

The committee indicated that a decision would be communicated within five working days. They also advised residents that if concerns persisted after a decision was made, a further review could be initiated. The committee encouraged open communication between the hotel owners and residents to resolve issues before they escalated to formal licensing proceedings.

Finally, the committee agreed to extend the licensing periods for several other establishments: Click here cafe bar, Noodle and Beer, Marius, and Jack the Chipper, all until 31st December 2022. The meeting was then formally closed.