Subscribe to updates
You'll receive weekly summaries about Tower Hamlets Council every week.
If you have any requests or comments please let us know at community@opencouncil.network. We can also provide custom updates on particular topics across councils.
Licensing Sub Committee - Monday, 27 July 2026 - 6.30 p.m.
July 27, 2026 Licensing Sub Committee View on council websiteSummary
Open Council Network is an independent organisation. We report on Tower Hamlets and are not the council. About us
The Licensing Sub Committee of Tower Hamlets Council met on Monday 27 July 2026 to consider three applications for new premises licences. The committee granted a licence for Sainsbury's at the New Festival Quarter, but deferred a decision on Chicken Cottage at 90 Whitechapel High Street due to ongoing discussions about operating hours and conditions. The application for Fresco La Cucina at 96 Brick Lane was deemed invalid due to a failure to properly advertise the application.
Sainsbury's, New Festival Quarter
The committee granted a new premises licence for Sainsbury's at Units 1 and 2, New Festival Quarter, Upper North Street, E14 6FY. The application sought off-sales of alcohol from 7am to 11pm, with the premises open 24 hours a day. A single objection was received from a resident, Sanam Sajjad, who raised concerns about noise, anti-social behaviour, litter, and public safety.
Mr Robert Botkay, representing Sainsbury's, argued that the proposed hours were consistent with the council's policy and that the store would operate with appropriate staffing and CCTV. He noted that the police had agreed conditions relating to staff training, refusal logs, and incident reporting. The committee considered the objection but ultimately decided to grant the licence as applied for, with the agreed conditions.
Chicken Cottage, 90 Whitechapel High Street
The committee considered an application for a new premises licence for Chicken Cottage at 90 Whitechapel High Street, E1 7RA, for late-night refreshment. The application sought to operate until 2am on Sundays and 1am on Mondays to Wednesdays, and until 3am on Thursdays to Saturdays. This fell outside the council's framework hours for the Brick Lane Cumulative Impact Zone (CIZ).
Representations were received from the Licensing Authority (Corinne Holland), Environmental Health (Onuoha Olere), and a resident (Mark Davyd-Whitrick). The objectors raised concerns about noise, public nuisance, crime and disorder, and the cumulative impact of late-night operations within the CIZ. The applicant, represented by Nidhi Chadha, argued that their proposed hours were necessary for business survival and that they had implemented measures to mitigate potential issues, including SIA security and a no-seating policy after 10pm.
The committee discussed the CIZ policy extensively, with Councillor Martin Parker questioning the applicant's justification for operating outside the framework hours. The applicant argued that their business model relied on late-night trade and that their presence could help deter anti-social behaviour by keeping the area lit and monitored. However, the committee remained concerned about the potential impact on residents and the cumulative effect within the CIZ. The decision on this application was deferred to allow for further discussion and potential agreement on operating hours and conditions.
Fresco La Cucina, 96 Brick Lane
The committee considered an application for a new premises licence for Fresco La Cucina at 96 Brick Lane, London E1 6RL, for the sale of alcohol and late-night refreshment until 3am daily. The application had attracted representations from Environmental Health, the Licensing Authority, a resident, and the resident's association SPIRE.
A significant issue raised was the applicant's failure to provide evidence of advertising the application in a local newspaper, as required by regulations. Mr Jonathan Melnick, the legal advisor, explained that this was a legal point regarding the validity of the application. Despite being given multiple opportunities to provide this evidence, the applicant had not done so and was not present at the meeting.
The committee, in agreement with Mr Melnick's advice, deemed the application invalid due to the lack of proper advertisement. The application was therefore not considered on its merits and was sent back to the applicant to fulfil their duties for a proper application. The committee also noted that two other applications, for Control, Alt and Delete at 116 Jubilee Street and Wicked Fish at Queen's Yard, had their decision deadlines extended to 31 October 2026.
Attendees
Topics
Meeting Documents
Additional Documents