Wembley Park: Out go the skips - in come 759 students in 7 accommodation blocks

 

Proposed student buildings

 

The light industry that surrounded Wembley Stadium is fast disappearing as developers buy up land and two storey premises are replaced by tower blocks.

The latest is an unpromising elongated site,  presently used by Glynns Skip Hire as a waste management facility with storage containers, off Fifth Way. It has very limited access.

Architects have managed to wedge in proposals for seven student accommodation blocks along with a cafe and student facilities. The developer has called it Wembley Edge rather than Wembley Wedge!

The elongated site is explained that the site was part of the 'Never-Stop' railway at the British Empire Exhibition and included a railway station.

The proposed buildings would range in height from 5 to 15 storeys, with building G the furthest north representing the tallest at c.53m. Building A is 11 storeys, building B 14 storeys, building C 11 storeys, building D 13 storeys, building E 14 storeys, building F 11 storeys and building G 15 storeys. Five storey shoulder elements link A and B as well as D and E together. Togather they prvide 759 student units some studio and some in a cluster with shared facilities.

 

Brent Council has established that the waste management business could be transferred to an Alperton site. Nearer sites were discounted as they too could be targets for development.

 

Opposition has come from nearby light industrial businesses fearing a possible negative impact on their own development potential and has resulted in Savills who submitted a Town Planning Statement  on  behalf of the developer, using the Brent Planning Portal to submit a 'Neutral Statement' responding to criticism.  This is very unusual and something I have not seen before:

 We write to respond to the comments made by Dandi Living (dated 20 August 2024) in respect to the above planning application. Dandi Living's comments suggest that the Wembley Edge proposals are being progressed prematurely and without enough consideration of the potential impact on, and relationship with, the adjacent site at Latif House, a site which Dandi Living has a legal interest in. 

The current Wembley Edge proposals are the culmination of extensive pre-application consultation with the local planning authority, GLA, local community and key stakeholders and other consultees between 2020 and submission of the planning application in March 2023.

 A public consultation website, webinar and two public exhibition events were held in 2022, to which Dandi Living provided no feedback. Since submission of the planning application, further detailed discussions have been held with officers, including regarding opportunities for the wider development area with Brent's urban design officers. Again, we note that Dandi Living provided no detailed comments on the application proposals until August 2024. 

Due consideration has been given to the potential for development to come forward on surrounding sites, including the Latif House site noting it's inclusion within the Growth Area, and the First Way site allocation. The proposed layout responds to the urban grain and is set back from the western boundary. The layout ensures that the primary windows serving the proposed student accommodation are over 9m from the site boundary with the Latif House site, and that direct outlook from windows to this site boundary is over 10m. Other secondary windows are high-level obscured windows so as to preserve the amenity of any future development on the Latif House site. 

Any constraints created by the Wembley Edge proposals on Latif House would be typical of development in a built-up urban environment and would not hinder or prohibit the site from being developed in the future. The public realm created as part of the proposals adjacent to Latif House is for service and emergency access only, but this could potentially form part of a larger public realm once neighbouring developments come forward in a cohesive way. 

Turning to Dandi Living's comments relating to daylight, it is not accepted that the Wembley Edge proposals significantly constrain the Latif House site. Any areas of reduced daylight availability to Latif House would likely be limited to a small area of the lower floors directly facing Wembley Edge (as it can be typically expected in a high density urban environment). London Plan Policy D6 requires development to 'provide sufficient daylight and sunlight to new and surrounding housing that is appropriate for its context' and the NPPF requires local planning authorities to 'take a flexible approach in applying policies or guidance relating to daylight and sunlight'. BRE Guidance is also clear on this matter, seeking for daylight availability to be maximised as far as possible, but noting that it is only one of many policy considerations which must be finely balanced. In this policy / guidance context, providing that any future proposals at Latif House are designed to maximise daylight within those lower rooms which front Wembley Edge, both developments could successfully co-exist from a daylight perspective. 

We consider that the Wembley Edge proposals are suitably designed so as not to prejudice the future development potential of the Latif House site.

 

Brent Planning Officers report on the light issues and appear to agree with Savills:

 

Under the BRE guidance the proposed development will have an adverse impact on Arch View House, Kelaty House and the Waterside. That said, the BRE guidance represents best practice guidance, it is not mandatory, and it is a well established approach that the guidelines should be interpreted flexibly, taking into account the need to make efficient use of land to meeting housing needs and site context characteristics.

 

A further important point to note is that given the open and low scale nature of the existing site, it provides higher levels of light to surrounding receptors than would be expected in this urban location and higher density redevelopment of the site, which the site allocation policy supports, would naturally result in some adverse impacts to neighbouring receptors.

 

The identified impact to the properties should therefore be balanced against the benefits of the scheme overall, and Members should therefore consider whether those benefits do outweigh the harm.

As in previous planning applications Brent Planners insist (along with the GLA) that there is a demand for student accommodation and that it will contribution to Brent's housing targets:

Whilst the site allocation policy does not refer specifically to PBSA [Purpose Built Student Accommodation], this type of housing is acknowledged to relieve some of the demand for conventional housing, and this provision would contribute towards Brent's housing supply (at a ratio of 2.5 bedrooms to one conventional housing unit), at the same time contributing towards London Plan housing targets. The proposed provision of 759 student bedrooms would therefore equate to 306 new homes in Brent (on the basis of 2.5: 1 ratio), which would positively contribute towards the boroughs wider housing targets, and to achieving the indicative dwellings capacity of 1, 312 dwellings within the whole of site allocation BCSA9. To date within the wider site allocation planning permission has either been implemented, or granted (but not implemented) for 600 C3 dwellings on the Access Storage site on First Way (ref; 18/4767) and 678 student bedrooms (equivalent to 271 new homes on the basis of the 2.5 : 1 ratio) at the former Cannon Trading Estate site (ref; 17/3799). Combined, each of these schemes if consented and subsequently implemented, including the proposed development would deliver the equivalent of 1, 177 new dwellings across the site allocation, contributing positively towards the indicative site capacity for number of dwellings.

Brent Planning Officers, councillors (including Muhammed Butt, Council Leader) have been involved in meetings with the developers:

 

                          The future view of part of the development from Second Way

A submission to the Planning Committee by local historian Philip Grant provides a heritage footnote:

The site, as indicated in the Heritage, Townscape and Visual Impact Assessment, owes its origin to the transport infrastructure put in place for the BEE in 1924. 

It was the site of the Exhibition Station, on the loop line specially installed by the London & North Eastern Railway to bring special trains for exhibition visitors into the heart of the BEE site. Running alongside the loop line on the site was the Never-Stop Railway, with its own station. This was a unique form of rail transport, operated by a continuous screw system, installed at the BEE and bringing visitors to and from a station near the north entrance, close to Wembley Park Metropolitan Railway station, to the south of the BEE site near Adams Bridge.

The private "access road", the possible use of which for construction traffic has led to a number of objections, was the BEE's Chittagong Road, running between the Indian and Burma Pavilions. This lead to the King's Gate Bridge, commonly called "Old London Bridge" during the exhibition, which spanned both the L&NER and Never-Stop Railway lines, which carried visitors to the eastern end of the Exhibition Grounds.

If The Edge site is to be developed, its heritage needs to be remembered as part of that development, particularly both railway parts of the BEE heritage and "Old London Bridge", which was at the southern end of that site.

I would request that a condition along these lines be included in any consent given to this application:

'The developer shall liaise with Brent Museum and Archives and Wembley History Society, to prepare and pay for an illustrated local history panel commemorating the British Empire Exhibition history of the development site, including the Exhibition Station, Never-Stop Railway and King's Gate Bridge. This local history panel shall be suitably installed in an open space area within the site, where it can easily be viewed by members of the general public, prior to the occupation of the new buildings on the site.'

Here is a silent film from British Pathe of the Never-Stop Railway:

 

The Planning Committee considering this application is on Wednesday 13th November 6pm at the Conference Hall, Brent Civic Centre or view on-line HERE

Brent Schools update. Islamia Primary'a future remains uncertain. New SEND provision is planned but overall mainstream primary pupil numbers decline presaging budget problems

 I know it is annoying when issues are in the news and then everything goes quiet, so in a Public Question to the next Full Council on November 18th, I requested an update on some of the school stories covered previously in Wembley Matters.

Currently many of our primary schools are experiencing reduced demand following Brexit, and as young families are forced out of the borough in the search for affordable accommodation. This has led to pupil  numbers in schools falling and as funding is per pupil developing budgetary problems. However, there is an increasing need for Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND) provision.  There are a number of former education sites that are vacant or due to become vacant and may be more if some schools are forced to close or amalgamate if they are no longer financially and educationally viable.

Particularly quiet has been the situation surrounding the state-funded Islamia Primary School. The school was given an eviction notice by Yusuf Islam (AKA Cat Stevens) some years ago but in a consultation parents opposed the closure and were particularly opposed to a move from Queens Park to the vacant Strathcona site in South Kenton.

Here are the questions and answers. I will have a chance for a follow up question arising from the answer I received, so if you have something you would like me to ask please write it as a comment or  below or send it to wembleymatters@virginmedia.com I will only be able to choose one.

Remember, you too can ask a question at Full Council but it has to be sent well in advance of the meeting.

 

Question from Martin Francis to Councillor Gwen Grahl (Cabinet Member for Children, Young People & Schools)

 

This question regards educational sites in the borough. Can the Cabinet Member for Children, Young People and Schools please advise on:

 

(1) any progress in finding a new school site for Islamia Primary School, along with the timetable for any move, if applicable.

 

(2) future plans for:

(a) the Strathcona Site in South Kenton; and

(b) the Gwenneth Rickus Building (Leopold Primary) in Brentfield Road.

 

(3) progress on delivery of the following with timetable for completion and full

opening:

(a) North Brent School, Neasden Lane;

(b) SEND School, London Road, Wembley Central

(c) Post 16 Skills Centre, Welsh Harp

 

(4) Recognising that it is not part of the Council’s Estate but is restricted to educational use, whether you also have any information or have been engaged on the future of the Swaminarayan School (formerly Sladebrook) site in Brentfield Road.

 

Response:

 

The Yusuf Islam Foundation is still considering whether it wishes to proceed with the relocation to the Strathcona site following consultation in autumn 2022. No timescale for the relocation has been agreed. Should this proposed use of the Strathcona site not proceed, the site will be used to develop additional provision for children with SEND. In this event, the local authority would continue to work with the Yusuf Islam Foundation to identify a suitable alternative site for the school.

 

As set out in the refreshed School Place Planning Strategy 2024-2028, agreed by Cabinet on 12 November 2024, consideration will be given to opportunities to use any spare capacity within the primary school sector to expand provision for children with Special Educational Needs and Disabilities, given the increasing need across the borough.

 

The Gwenneth Rickus site of Leopold Primary School will continue to be used for mainstream primary provision until September 2027 and the Council has not determined the future use of the site, that could also include provision for SEND.

 

With regards to the other questions:

 

 The North Brent School moved into its new buildings in Neasden in September 2024.

 Wembley Manor, the new secondary SEND school, opened in temporary accommodation this September and the building work is on target for the school to move to its permanent home on London Road in September 2025.

 The design work of the Post-16 Skills Resource Centre based in Welsh Harp is near completion, with a view to building work being completed in 2027.

 

The local authority does not have any information on the future use of the former

site of the Swaminarayan School on Brentfield Road.

Should the Order of the British Empire be history?

 Guest post by local historian Philip Grant in a personal capacity

 

Medal of an Officer of the Order of the British Empire (OBE). (Image from the internet)

 

I had been hoping to write this article earlier in the centenary year of the British Empire Exhibition, but the excellent recent guest post “An Afternoon with George the Poet: Refreshingly honest conversation about Empire”, reminded me that I had still not done so. I read that George the Poet had turned down the chance to be made a Member of the Order of the British Empire (MBE) in 2019. Like others before him, including Benjamin Zephaniah* and Professor Gus John, George did not want letters after his name that spoke of British imperialism. 

 

The Most Excellent Order of the British Empire, to give its full name, is one of a number of “orders of chivalry” under which titles and medals are awarded as part of the UK’s “honours” system. Some of them go back centuries, such as the Order of the Garter and the Order of the Bath. “Chivalry” goes back even further, signifying courtesy and valour – just think of the legends of King Arthur and his Knights of the Round Table, or Saint George and the dragon (and those who wave the flag of England’s patron saint in protest against immigrants should remember that if he actually existed, he would have been Turkish now!).

 

15^th century painting of St George, rescuing a princess from a dragon. (Image from the internet)

 

Just as the British Empire is now history, although its legacy is still with us, and the focus for the “Becoming Brent” project, I believe that the Order of the British Empire, or at least that name for it, should also become history. But what is its history? I first started looking into that about 15 years ago, when I was researching the history of the Cox family of Sudbury, and their part in Wembley’s volunteer fire brigade.

 

Wembley’s volunteer fire brigade, with their fire engine, in 1920. (Courtesy of Carol Snape)

 

Edward Cox (standing on the right) was the brigade’s Chief Officer from 1920 until it was replaced by a full-time professional Wembley Fire Brigade in 1936. I found that he, and his brother Ernest (sitting on the running board next to him), had the letters O.B.E. after their names, and wondered how they had come to be awarded that honour.

 

A report from the “Middlesex County Times”, 10 February 1917. (Ealing Local History Library)

 

Research in local newspapers (on microfilm) took me back to a night in February 1917, when the Wembley Brigade were called out to a fire in Greenford, with Edward as the fire crew’s Captain and Ernest as the engine’s driver. [Luckily, this was during a three-month postponement to his army call-up, so that a new driver could be trained!] The Wembley firemen organised the effort to bring water from the canal, which stopped the fire at the Purex lead paint factory from spreading to the adjacent National Filling Station No.28. 

 

That “filling station” was not a petrol station, but a large complex of wooden huts used for filling 6-inch diameter artillery shells with high explosive charges and poison gas, for use against the German forces on the Western Front. If the fire had spread, it could have been disastrous for people and property over a very wide area! 

 

It was for honouring actions such as these that King George V established the Order of the British Empire in June 1917. The new Order was principally intended to recognise courageous acts by civilians during the First World War, as distinct from the medals which could already be awarded for distinguished military service. As I wrote in my first BEE centenary year article last January, the King had visited many parts of the British Empire, and considered it to be a family of nations (although not all of equal status), so the name of the Order did reflect that the honours could go to anyone within the Empire, not just to his British subjects.

 

The London Gazette list of OBE medals awarded, July 1920. (Image from the internet)

 

The Cox brothers’ awards of the Medal of the Order of the British Empire were made in July 1920 (‘For conspicuous courage and devotion to duty on the occasion of a fire at a munitions factory’). They were among the names listed alphabetically in the London Gazette, and as you can see from the image above, one of the first names was Ali Akbar Khan of the Indian Police, for his wartime work in the Straits Settlements (now Singapore and parts of Malaysia).

 

Thousands of these medals were awarded, and their holders were allowed to use the letters O.B.E. after their names. But the Order of the British Empire was expanded, to reward contributions to the arts and sciences, and for public service and charitable work. Although these were at first awarded in much smaller numbers, there were other classes of honours within the Order, from bottom to top being Member, Officer, Commander, Knight or Dame, and at the very top, Knight or Dame Grand Cross.

 

I don’t know whether it was because of class snobbery by Officers of the Order, but from 1922 the Medal of the Order of the British Empire was renamed the British Empire Medal. It is now awarded to anyone in Britain or the Commonwealth whose meritorious service ‘is considered worthy of the honour by the Crown’. Those, like the Cox brothers, who had already been awarded the medal could continue to use the letters O.B.E. after their names, but from then on BEM has been the lowest class of honour under the Order, still with “British Empire” in its name.

 

Why hasn’t that name changed, given that the former British Empire had been redefined as a Commonwealth of Nations as far back as 1949? I’m not the first person to ask that question. In fact, a cross-party House of Commons committee, the Public Administration Select Committee, considered it twenty years ago, and published a report “A Matter of Honour: Reforming the Honours System”, including this recommendation:

 

An important recommendation from the Select Committee Report in July 2004.

 

It wasn’t just politicians on the Left who thought this was a good idea. The report includes the views of a former Conservative Prime Minister on removing the word “Empire” and replacing it with “Excellence”, given as part of his evidence to the Committee:

 

‘Mr Major also backed the idea of an Order of British Excellence. This view was a direct reversal of his opinion of 1993, when he told the House that he could “see no advantage or purpose in changing the Order of the British Empire”. Today, he told us:

 

“Although that argument still has force, I believe it is now out of date. In order to remove one of the persistent criticisms of the system, I would now be inclined to propose an “Order of British Excellence” with Awards at the level of Companion (i.e. CBE), Officer (OBE) and Member (MBE). This is minimum change for maximum effect. It retains the familiar abbreviations whilst removing reference to an Empire that no longer exists. It does have an awkwardness with Northern Ireland, but no more so than now”.’ 

 

I don’t know why Tony Blair’s Labour Government did not follow this sensible advice from Parliament. The Order of the British Empire was already “past its sell buy date” then, and is even more so now. I hope that the current Government will look again at this suggestion, but the people with the greatest power to make that change are the “Sovereign” of the Order and its “Grand Master”. They are, respectively, King Charles III and Queen Camilla.

 

Do you agree that change is needed? Please feel free to add your comments below.

Philip Grant.

* Benjamin Zephaniah wrote this in 2003 about his reaction to the offer of an OBE: ‘“Me? I thought, OBE me? Up yours, I thought. I get angry when I hear that word ‘empire’; it reminds me of slavery, it reminds of thousands of years of brutality.”

Northwick Park's development into a small town begins

 

 The development with Proyers Path at foot of image

 

The plan with  Proyers Path on the right and hospital on the left

 

The development taking shape beyond the Proyers Path hedgerow and tree belt in the park. A seasonal ditch/stream runs along the tree line.

 

The first phase of the Northwick Park development is taking shape and greeting visitors to Northwick Park Hospital using the Northwick Park Metropolitan Line station.

The development by Countryside Homes and Sovereign Network Group  housing association lies between Proyers Path in the park (line of trees at the bottom of the image) and the hospital ring road.

It is part of a much bigger one public estate project that is a collaboration between the Sovereign Network, Brent Council, NHS and Westminster University that will see the area transformed into a small town.

This post provides a photographic update for local residents on what is being marketed as Northwick Parkside.

Site entrance

There is not a lot of information on the Countryside website:

COMING SPRING 2025!

Northwick Parkside is a brand new development coming to Northwick Park!

A Joint Venture with Countryside Homes & SNG , consisting of 654 new homes and commercial facilities. This is the first stage of a major regeneration project for Brent Council.

The development will deliver a collection of 1,2 & 3 bedroom apartments and 3 bedroom houses & maisonettes.

To be kept up to date or to register your interest please email northwickparkside@countrysidehomes.com

 Construction News LINK reported at the end of October 2024:

Countryside Partnerships, a division of Vistry Group, in collaboration with Sovereign Network Group (SNG), has launched the first phase of a major regeneration project in Northwick Park, Brent.

This initial phase, part of a broader scheme, will bring 654 new homes to the area, with over half of them designated as affordable housing.

Named Northwick Parkside, the development marks the start of an extensive Northwick Park regeneration initiative, which will ultimately include 1,600 homes alongside a variety of community facilities aimed at enhancing local services and amenities.

The first phase will provide 323 affordable homes, funded in part by the Mayor of London through the Greater London Authority's (GLA) Affordable Homes Programme. These homes will be available across a range of tenures, including Social Rent, London Affordable Rent, London Living Rent, Intermediate Rent for key workers, and Shared Ownership, ensuring a broad spectrum of affordable options for Brent residents. The remaining homes in this phase will be available for private sale or rent, with revenue reinvested to support further affordable housing initiatives.

Prospective buyers can register interest in the private sale and Shared Ownership properties, which are expected to launch in Spring 2025, with construction completion anticipated between 2026 and 2028.

 There appears to be a discrepancy, in terms of the number of affordable homes, between the above and the Officers' Report at the December 2020 Planning Committee:

Affordable housing and housing mix:  The proposal would provide 245 new affordable homes (comprising 70 units for London Affordable Rent, 38 intermediate rent units, 26 units at London Living Rent and 111 shared ownership units). This represents 39% affordable housing by habitable room, and the London Affordable Rent units in particular would be weighted towards family-sized homes.

The applicant's Financial Viability Appraisal has been robustly reviewed on behalf of the Council and is considered to demonstrate that the proposal delivers beyond the maximum reasonable amount of affordable housing that the scheme can support.

While the overall proportion of London Affordable Rented homes is not in line with the percentage specified in DMP15, it has been demonstrated that the scheme would deliver the maximum reasonable number of London Affordable Homes, but with additional Affordable Homes delivered, lowering the levels of profit associated with the scheme. These would be delivered as intermediate rented homes, London Living Rent homes and shared ownership homes.

Whilst the overall proportion of family-sized homes do not comply with Brent's adopted or emerging policies in this respect, officers acknowledge that these requirements would further undermine the viability of the scheme and compromise its deliverability in this particular instance.

 

Willesden Green: From Bank to Bingo Hall. Planning application submitted for ex-Lloyds Bank

 

Lloyds Bank, 1 Walm Lane, NW2

Following closure both Lloyds Bank and Nat West branches in Willesden Green are on the development market. Barclays opposite the Lloyd's building is due to close shortly leaving the area without a bank.

The Lloyds building is the first to come to Brent Planning with a proposal to turn into a Bingo Hall from Luton based Star Commercial Property Limited. LINK.

Apart from changes in the internal layout  and an additional window replacing the cashpoints there is little change.

 

Plans were lodged yesterday and the deadline for responses is November 25th 2024. LINK to website or email planning.comments@brent.gov.uk The Reference number is 24/2877

The application envisages 8 fulltime equivalent employees with the operating hours 8am to 12.30am  Monday to Friday, 9am to 1am Saturday and 9am to 12.30am Sunday.

Hope for London's public toilet deserts as TfL announces toilet expansion and improvement plan following Green Party pressure

 

Green Assembly member Caroline Russell is able to make fun at herself over a seeming obsession with toilets but in truth it is her campaigning  success that will have an impact on the lives of many Londoners and visitors to London. 

She deserves congratulations because her persistence has paid off with  the London Mayor announcing plans to expand and improve toilet provision. We know that many people are put off using public transport for longer journeys because they fear that they will not find a toilet when needed.  As an ex-teacher who has taken hundreds of primary age children on trips into London I also know how important it is to be able to find a toilet at short notice for a desperate child!

In it Press Release announcing a programme of expansion and improve TfL said:

Transport for London (TfL) has announced its ambitious programme to increase and improve toilet provision on London's transport network, in support of TfL's Equity in Motion plan to make London's transport network more accessible, fair and inclusive. The plan will see new accessible toilets delivered across the network, and improvements made to many existing facilities.

Earlier this year, the Mayor announced the biggest dedicated investment in toilet provision that London's transport network has seen, totalling £3million per year over five years. This will be invested in improving and increasing the number of accessible toilets on the network.

TfL is committed to making toilets more accessible for everyone and closing the gap in existing toilet provision so that Tube, Overground and Elizabeth line customers are always within 20 minutes of a toilet without having to change train. Following engagement with customers, campaigners and staff, a new programme has been developed to ensure new toilets benefit customers who need them most. Stations were then chosen according to a number of factors, including whether the location is a terminus station, operates night services, has step-free access, high passenger footfall, proximity to other toilets on the network, and onward connections. 

TfL is committed to creating new facilities and enhancing existing facilities, including reopening closed facilities, and improving the cleaning of facilities. Following the study, TfL has shortlisted a number of locations for new toilet provision in the first round of works:

• Camden Road Overground station
• Clapton Overground station
• New Cross Gate London Overground station
• South Tottenham London Overground station
• White Hart Lane Overground station
• Morden Underground station
• Hammersmith Underground station

TfL and the Mayor recognise that the provision of toilets is critical to many customers, sometimes determining whether a customer can travel by public transport at all. This is why TfL is also looking to convert a further four existing non-accessible toilets to accessible facilities within this first phase of the project at Amersham, Green Park and Sudbury Hill Underground stations and Seven Sisters Overground station, improving availability at other busy toilets that are currently misused or vandalised. TfL has also made improvements to more than one-third of London Underground stations with toilet provision in recent years, including repairing faults and re-painting areas.

Construction work to deliver new and accessible toilets at these stations is expected to start at several locations within the next year, following detailed assessments to determine viability.

TfL have a map of existing toilet facilities HERE although I would treat with caution as they may not be available due to vandalism or  misuse, particularly in the evening. This is an extract for our area. The Bakerloo/Overground is particularly poorly served:

 

There is also a searchable site for the whole of the UK which is very much a work in progress with users able to add toilets in their area. LINK

The Brent Council website has a short list of public toilets in the borough LINK:

Public toilet - Brent Civic Centre

Address: Brent Civic Centre, Engineers Way, Wembley, HA9 0FJ  

Public toilet - Bridge Park Community Leisure Centre

Address: Bridge Park Community Leisure Centre, Brentfield, Harrow Road, London NW10 0RG  

Public toilet - Douglas Avenue

Address: Douglas Avenue junction with Ealing Road, Alperton, Middlesex, HA0 4PY HA0 4PY  

Public toilet - Empire Way

Address: Empire Way Toilets, Empire Way, Wembley  

Public toilet - Oakington Manor Drive / Harrow Road

Address: Junction of Harrow Road and Oakington Manor Drive, Wembley, Middlesex, HA9 6QU HA9 6QU  

Public toilet - Roundwood Park

Address: Roundwood Park, Harlesden Road, London, NW10 3SH  

Public toilet - St John's Road

Address: St John's Road (junction with Elm Road), Wembley, HA9 7HU  

Public toilet - Sudbury and Harrow Road Station

Address: Outside Sudbury and Harrow Road Station, Harrow Road, Wembley  

Public toilet - Tavistock Road

Address: Car park, Tavistock Road, Harlesden, London, NW10 4ND  

Public toilet - Vale Farm Sports Centre

Address: Vale Farm Sports Centre, Watford Road, North Wembley, Middlesex, HA0 3HG  

Queens Park and  Roundwood Park have toilets connected with their cafes and Barham Park has limited access via the Community Library. King Edward VII toilets near the Park Lane entrance were demolished years ago due to drug misuse  but publicly accessible toilets are planned for the Stonebridge Boxing Club facility if it gets off the ground.

Brent Green Party has previously argued for a Brent Toilet Scheme that would incentivise cafes and retail premises to allow public access to toilets, perhaps through a reduction in business rates.

Camden are advertising for more businesses to join their Community Toilet Scheme:

Join our Community Toilet Scheme

We are looking to expand our Community Toilet Scheme, and work with more local businesses that would allow the public to use their facilities during normal opening hours (without the need to buy goods or services).

We’d welcome interest from anywhere in the borough, but especially from businesses in Kilburn, Camden Town and Bloomsbury.

We would pay an annual fee to members of up to £750 (including VAT).

Email street.environment@camden.gov.uk to find our more and apply.