Wembley Matters has covered the long struggle by the Stonebridge and Harlesden community over Bridge Park and it is not over yet. (Type in 'Bridge Park' in the search box). Many locals were sceptical of the plans revealed recently at the public exhibition LINK on Brent Council's proposals, and in conversation stressed the contribution Bridge Park had made to local black history. At the very least a panel about its history was suggested for the new building.
Harlesden People's Community Council has gone further and launched a campaign for the original building to be listed and have won the backing of Lord Boateng, former MP for Brent East.
HPPC explain:
Bridge Park was the brainchild of the Harlesden People’s Community Council, a cooperative formed in 1981 against the backdrop of the Brixton uprising by a group of young Black residents of Stonebridge Estate. Between 1982 and 1988, the group spearheaded the transformation of Stonebridge Bus Garage into a dynamic community complex that championed Black excellence and self-empowerment.
Alongside state-of-the-art sports and entertainment facilities, Bridge Park housed Brent's first Information Technology Centre, a creche for working mothers, start-up units for local businesses, and a 24-track recording studio. The centre played an integral role in preventing a race uprising in Harlesden throughout the turbulent 1980s and remains an outstanding, early example of community-led adaptive reuse in England.
“Bridge Park is one of the most important developments I have seen in this country for a long time. [...] It is the most remarkable example of a community getting together and being determined with an inspired leadership to work against what must have been impossible odds to create this kind of centre for the community.”
King Charles III
“The Bridge Park Complex is a profoundly significant building because of its provenance in local government transportation and community use. There could be no finer tribute to Leonard Johnson and Brent community activism than it being granted listed status.”
The Rt Hon Lord Boateng
In 2017, Bridge Park was sold by Brent Council to a developer. Local campaigners fought back, but in 2020 they lost their High Court challenge against the sale of the site, leaving Bridge Park and its cultural legacy at risk of erasure. Listed status would help safeguard the centre for future generations and mark its importance as site of national architectural and historic interest.
HPCC's aims:
-
To honour the remarkable achievements of Leonard Johnson and the Harlesden People's Community Council.
-
To recognise a more representative and diverse heritage through the National Heritage List for England.
-
To open up the possibility of an alternative redevelopment proposal that focuses on reactivating Bridge Park's existing fabric and re-establishing a community-led approach to its governance.
-
To foster a deeper understanding and appreciation of Stonebridge/Harlesden'scultural identity and in doing so, act as a catalyst for inclusive, sustainable, and culture-led regeneration in the area.
HPPC held a public meeting on Sunday 24th November 2024 at Brent Hub Community Enterprise Centre to discuss their campaign to get Bridge Park Community Centre added to the National Heritage List for England (NHLE). The meeting was attended by local residents and a number of Brent councillors, including Kathleen Fraser, Tony Ethapemi, Abdi Aden, and council leader Muhammed Butt.
During the meeting, HPCC members Mike Wilson and Lawrence Fearon presented an overview of Bridge Park’s history, highlighting the site's cultural significance and impact. The presentation was followed by a video message (extract below) from award-winning British actor Ray Fearon, who shared how Bridge Park had played a pivotal role in his journey to stardom and voiced his strong support for the listing campaign.
.
Rebecca Markus, a recent graduate of the Bartlett School of Architecture (BSA) at University College London, who helped initiate the campaign, then provided insight into the listing process. She was joined by Edward Denison, Professor of Architecture and Global Modernities at the BSA, who shared his expertise and told local residents that if they decide to move forward with listing they have the BSA’s full support.
The meeting concluded with a Q&A session giving attendees the opportunity to voice their opinions and provide feedback. A verbal vote was then taken to determine whether residents wanted to proceed with the listing application.
“We're thrilled to hear a resounding ‘yes’ from the local community to move forward with the campaign,” said Mike Wilson. “The public meeting was a key moment to introduce residents to the idea of listing Bridge Park, assess community interest, and engage in meaningful discussion with local councillors about how listing could be integrated with current redevelopment plans. The strong community support voiced here today underscores the importance of safeguarding a place that holds deep social, cultural, and historical significance for the Black community.”
A number of questions were directed to Brent Council’s leader, Muhammed Butt, challenging the rationale behind the proposed demolition of Bridge Park. Attendees questioned the argument that the building is no longer fit for purpose, suggesting instead that retrofitting Bridge Park would not only preserve the structure but also accelerate the delivery of essential community facilities while being more environmentally sustainable.
Several residents also voiced concerns about not being properly consulted on the council's new plans, emphasizing that this was not in line with the recommendations of Judge Michael Green QC in London Borough of Brent v Johnson [2020], where he stated in his concluding remarks: “Now that the legal issues have been resolved in my judgment, I would again urge the parties to move on and seek to achieve, by mutual co-operation and agreement, the best outcome for Bridge Park and the local community.”
The Harlesden People’s Community Council invites local residents and interested members of the public to join them for a national launch hosted by the BSA on Thursday 23rd January 2025 from 6 to 8pm at the Harrie Massey Lecture Theatre, 25 Gordon Street, London, WC1H 0AY.
31 comments:
Just what we need. Yet another building condemned to the cold hard hand of the conservationists so we can't change anything about it without permission. Are the electrical sockets and the windows authentically original?
Whilst unlikely the council would allow for the launch at the centre, would have thought that the launch would be at a local venue rather than asking local people to travel into London for it!
Would rather have the building as it is than another soulless row of tower blocks made from concrete, plywood, insulation and cladding!!!
There is no way in this world that the building will be listed. The application will be rejected very quickly.
Why won't it get listed?
It says here "Special historic interest is about the connection between the building and the people who use or have used it, the things that happen or have happened there, the ideas that were developed there or the role that the building played in the nation’s history."
https://historicengland.org.uk/listing/what-is-designation/listed-buildings/
Whilst the history of the building is a factor, the overriding criteria is the architectural importance and quality of the building. Bridge Park has none.
Have you actually checked out what other buildings have been listed???
I’m painfully aware of the stranglehold involved in listed buildings, and live in a conservation area in BarnHill, which consists of 1500 Metroland Mock Tudor houses, treated as if they were consummate jewels of British architecture, despite there being vast swathes of such properties from here to Uxbridge, with restrictions such as officially being unable to upgrade the windows to environmentally efficient ones without them looking identical to the 1930s ones: in practice that is virtually impossible so the great majority break the rules and the council which puts us through hoops if we try to comply doing nothing to enforce the absurd standards..
Let's see who's right in a few months time.
The Beatles anywhere suburban houses are preserved in Liverpool. Such houses in Brent would be for towering on.
There’s a big difference between preserving the houses of 4 famous individuals and considering that 1500 of the hundreds of thousands of houses built between the wars have some huge significance because of their architectural merit.
Bridge park, local significance of.
Government has a consultation on a new planning policy called 'brown passports' and that talks about re-development growth on inter war suburbias.
Brownfield passports. Inter war suburbia, not just social housing estates as brownfield land now. A deep need to infrastructure this brownfield first policy rather than let the market decide. We all also need that legal definition from lawmakers of what brownfield land is?
But the PM and none of the government ministers will be living in these awful high rise tower blocks built of concrete, plasterboard, insultation and cladding.
Re Andrew Daws, I think Barn Hill CA is strategic as a community to protect Freyent Country Park from developer greed. The Queens Park CA large extension of this year is again buildings of no great merit to be seen in any town, this is a strategic protection response to the brownfield passport proposal for suburb re-developments. Conservation Areas are safe zones/ bunkers legal protected from the Global Britain Growths building around them.
If BP was in a conservation area it would be re-purposed as the heart of the community. That it is not says all that needs to be said about Stonebridge Growth.
Notice in recent times how 'fast' build these imported panel new blocks are. Like Airfix kits in technique and in spirit. I observed a tower in Croydon where workers were re-glueing small fallen brick 'look' panels back onto it.
Go to China to see how such global quick assemble 'houses' product has aged and preserved or not. No wonder there are conservation areas for decision makers to live safe protected from this new population growth as industry.
How does it help the integrity of the country park to force me to get UPVC windows built incorrectly with a dummy drip rail to make them look like 1930s single glazed wooden windows? How does it help if a single storey extension on the back of the house can't have a glass roof because at one end the slope would start 18" higher than the other end, meaning that the glass roof 'blocks the light' of the neighbour? How does it help if I am not allowed to remove a dead tree without permission? It has become a vehicle for bullying neighbours.
I don't know how to reply to the reply from anonymous railing against soulless tower blocks. I'm surprised you wish to remain anonymous, as surely your intention is to show us what high standards you have, better than the many thousands of people living in tower blocks in Wembley Park, Wembley Central, Harrow, Queensbury, Canons Park etc. Perhaps you also like bossy conservation area rules.
The main hall is just a huge warehouse, hardly up for a RIBA design award.
A for brownfield land re-use neglect suburb next to FCP intead of a CA would repeat the threat that developers pose to Brent Riverside Park for one example. True enough for houses with front and back gardens, parks are not so important when compared to new packed-in towers of houses (vertical suburbs) no garden, no car.... The risk to FCP would be in the brownfield everything goes/ let the market decide policy phase.
You knew the regulations when you moved there so why complain now?
I remember going round Warwick University in Coventry 50 years ago, and all the buildings had fences around them. They were all clad in white ceramic tiles, and they had used the wrong adhesive, so they had to srick them all back on again
Some of these posts do not make sense and read like (a poorly developed) AI software programme has written them (or the author just has very bad grammar).
"Some of these posts do not make sense..." says Anonymous.
Agree!
https://harrowonline.org/2024/12/21/campaign-to-save-historic-brent-community-centre-tied-to-black-british-history/
There’s no pictures? Is it because it is ugly and needs demolition? You don’t need to keep ugly buildings just because of nice community memories. They can build a new community centre
If everyone had your opinion we would have no historic buildings in London at all representing any past industries or cultures.
What you think is 'ugly' may be very beautiful to others especially if it has an important history.
We'll never forget a day out in London with a young family in the 1980s - they'd seen all the wonderful sights of the city when their daughter suddenly said 'oh what a stunning building' but what was she looking at? It was Battersea power station which we'd never really taken much notice of - but look at it now!
What nonsense. I'm not against all listings. This community hall was a disused bus garage until a group of locals took it over 40 years ago. Do you really think a new building can't be just as effective a community centre, just because the Unisys buildings, of no intrinsic merit, are knocked down as well to make a new site with a mix of community facilities and much needed housing?
Post a Comment