The Council says the review will align licensing more closely with its 2025–2040 After Dark strategy and the 2026 City Plan, while keeping planning and licensing within their separate legal roles. Sensible. Two rulebooks influencing the same street should at least acknowledge that the other exists.
The review considers After Dark Opportunity Areas in Oxford Street, the Strand and Victoria—not Soho—where later cultural and family-friendly activity may be encouraged because impacts are considered easier to manage. That raises a fair Soho question: if new late-night growth is strategically directed elsewhere, does Soho receive better support for its existing night-time economy, or mainly a fresh vocabulary for saying no?
The policy direction also covers security duties, enforcement and a more unified approach. The useful test is not whether the final document contains the words “vibrant”, “inclusive” and “proportionate”—they travel in packs—but whether applicants and objectors can see consistent evidence standards, clear reasons and comparable treatment.
What people should watch
- How cumulative-impact rules are applied to genuinely different business models.
- Whether “alignment” with planning becomes clarity or simply two reasons to refuse.
- How the policy supports existing cultural and independent venues, not only new opportunity zones.
- Whether enforcement data and outcomes become publicly comparable.