Wandsworth Council is considering new alcohol restrictions for Tooting Broadway, Clapham Junction, and Putney High Street following a meeting of the Licensing Committee on 8 July 2025.
The committee voted to approve a new cumulative impact assessment (CIA) for the three areas, which could lead to stricter licensing regulations.
A CIA allows the council to restrict the number of new licences in areas where there is evidence that the number of licensed premises is negatively impacting the four licensing objectives: the prevention of crime and disorder; public safety; the prevention of public nuisance; and the protection of children from harm.
To inform the decision-making process, the council gathered data from various sources, including crime and anti-social behaviour (ASB) mapping, London Ambulance Service callouts and hospital admissions, noise complaints related to licensed premises, street drinking information, and licensed premises data. Pre-consultation with Ward Members and Responsible Authorities, along with overnight observation fieldwork, also contributed to a comprehensive understanding of the issues. These sources were chosen to provide a comprehensive understanding of the cumulative impact of licensed premises on the licensing objectives.
Caroline Sharkey, Licensing Manager, presented a report recommending the approval of the proposed CIA for Tooting Broadway, Clapham Junction, and Putney High Street. The report noted that the Licensing Committee had previously agreed that consultation should revolve around the proposal that there was sufficient evidence to support introducing a cumulative impact policy in Tooting Broadway and Clapham Junction for off-licences only, and in Putney High Street for late night refreshment premises only.
The consultation, which ran from 10 March to 8 June, included statutory interested parties, responsible authorities, solicitors, trade associations, ward councillors, local MPs, residents' associations and other key stakeholders. The council received 50 responses online and one via email. The consultation results showed:
- Tooting Broadway: 24% agreed with a special policy for off-licences, 14% disagreed, and 52% had no view.
- Clapham Junction: 32% agreed with a special policy for off-licences, 10% disagreed, and 38% had no view.
- Putney High Street: 74% agreed with a special policy for late night refreshment premises, 14% disagreed, and 12% had no view.
Ms Sharkey noted that the Metropolitan Police were in full support of the proposed policies for Tooting Broadway and Clapham Junction, stating that these areas are busy and can become flashpoints.
Some councillors raised concerns about the low response rate to the consultation. Councillor Will Sweet said:
I think the response numbers are rather disappointing. I think as a matter of principle, I don't support the council making changes on the basis of 50 responses which are really going to have an impact on the way licensed premises operate in the borough.
Ms Sharkey responded that, in her experience, these were good numbers, and that the council had used every possible platform to engage with the public. She also clarified that a CIA does not stop anyone from applying for a licence, but it does make it more difficult to get a licence approved.
Councillor Sweet remained concerned that the low response rate suggested that the evidence for the policy was not as strong as the committee had previously thought. Councillor Mark Justin echoed Councillor Sweet's concerns, stating that quoting the responses back as percentages gave them undue weight.
Other councillors, including Councillor Katrina Ffrench, Chair of the Licensing Committee, noted that the representations from the police were significant and that the committee had a responsibility to respond to the issues highlighted.
Councillor Tom Pridham raised concerns about the threshold for refusing applications, stating that it would be very difficult for an applicant to prove that there would be no negative impact. Guy Bishop, legal advisor to the subcommittee, clarified that the licensing subcommittee would have the ability to overreach the special policy and that it was not a guillotine.
Councillor Sweet raised concerns about the response from the Positively Putney BID. The BID expressed disappointment at not being consulted earlier in the process and disagreed with the narrative presented in the report, feeling that the evidence did not match the narrative. They also raised concerns that the heat maps did not show Putney should be of concern, and expressed a general concern that the CIA would be bad for business. As Councillor Sweet stated, quoting the BID's response, We do not agree with the narrative that's presented in this report and do not feel that the evidence presented matches the narrative. And then I believe that we therefore do not see how a cumulative impact assessment will fulfill any objective that Wandsworth Council may have.
Ms Sharkey responded that the initial data gathering was done through various data sources, and that the BID was consulted as part of the consultation process. She also reiterated that the CIA would not affect existing licence holders.
Councillor Guy Humphries suggested that the council had a hard job of explaining to the public what the CIA actually means and what it doesn't mean. He said that it was important to make it clear that the CIA is a tool and that it does not automatically mean anything.1
Councillor Rosemary Birchall agreed with the points made and said that it was depressing that there weren't more people responding to the consultation. She said that she understood that the CIA was just another tool in the council's armoury to make sure that they can make the right decisions in the area.
Councillor Justin asked what protection a premises would have to carry on from its previous licence if it changed hands or went dark and then reopened. Ms Sharkey clarified that transfers of licences are not affected, but that new applications would come within the threshold.
Mr Bishop added that landlords have 42 days to apply to transfer a licence to another party and that one of the options for refusing an application under the CIA would be where there has been a licence there before.
Councillor Ffrench suggested that it would be useful to review how the council involves business stakeholders in future consultations.
Mr Bishop noted that a CIA can be considered at any time and that the council can ask to come back and review it and do a new policy and put it in place, even within the three years.
Councillor Ffrench then moved to a vote, and the recommendations were approved and passed.
- Councillor Humphries suggested that the council had a hard job of explaining to the public what the CIA actually means and what it doesn't mean. He said that it was important to make it clear that the CIA is a tool and that it does not automatically mean anything.
