The Planning Committee B meeting on 12 February 2026 discussed a range of planning applications, including a retrospective application for alterations at 83 Arbuthnot Road and three applications for replacement windows, doors, roofs, and balcony panels at Pagoda Gardens. Decisions were made on all agenda items.

83 Arbuthnot Road, London, SE14 5NP

The committee granted retrospective planning permission for a single-storey rear and side infill extension, a raised patio with steps and railings, a rear dormer, conservation rooflights, replacement windows, and the deconversion of the property back into a single-family dwellinghouse. The decision was made subject to conditions, including those relating to the materials and architectural features of the raised patio, steps, railings, and boundary treatments. The committee also agreed to an additional condition requiring further details on the revised width and conservation style of the rooflights, ensuring they fit flush within the roof slope. This decision followed extensive discussion regarding the patio's height and its impact on neighbouring amenity, with objectors raising concerns about its scale, depth, and the visual presence of the proposed fencing. The applicant's representative, David Whitehead of Shape Urban Planning Consultants, addressed these concerns, noting that the applicants had sought to regularise planning matters and were willing to support a condition for the front roof lights.

Pagoda Gardens (1-20, 41-60, and 61-80)

Permission was granted for the installation of replacement windows, curtain wall glazing, doors, roofs, and replacement balustrades/balcony panels across three blocks at Pagoda Gardens. The committee approved the applications for 1-20, 41-60, and 61-80 Pagoda Gardens, subject to conditions. These conditions included ensuring the development adheres to approved plans and specified materials, and that any works to trees during construction follow British Standard BS 5837. The decision to approve these applications was made despite numerous objections from local residents and the Blackheath Society, who raised concerns about the design of the balcony panels, the impact on the Blackheath Conservation Area, and the perceived lack of detail in the submitted plans. The applicant, Lewisham Council, highlighted the necessity of these works for improving the building's weather tightness, thermal performance, and overall condition, aligning with the council's decarbonisation agenda. The committee also discussed the importance of resident engagement in the detailed design process, with an informative added to the decision to encourage further communication between the council, the applicant team, and residents.