Help

Written Statement

Location Map

Proposals Map

Inset Maps

Gazetteer

Contact Us

Chapter 11 - COMMUNITY FACILITIES

11.1 INTRODUCTION

11.1.1 This chapter concentrates on the issues concerned with the land-use requirements of community services, notably because of the high requirements of Brent's ethnically diverse communities. It also relates to needs arising from household and population growth and the changing structures of service providers. Community facilities include health, education and those relating to religious worship. They are significant local employers and contribute towards regeneration.

11.1.2 For the Purposes of the UDP 'Community Facilities' includes the uses falling within 'Use Class' D1 namely:

• For the provision of any medical or health service except for the use of premises attached to the residence of the consultant or practitioner;
• As a crèche, day nursery or day centre;
• For the provision of education;
• For the display of works of art;
• As a museum;
• As a public library or public reading room;
• As a public hall or exhibition hall;
• For, or in connection with, public worship or religious instruction.

11.1.3 And for the following sub-categories of Use Class C2:

• Use as a hospital;
• Use as a residential school, college or training centre.

11.1.4 Indoor sports facilities fall within the D2 "Assembly and Leisure" use class and are dealt with in the Open Space chapter. The Open Space chapter also now contains policies on the development of cemeteries and crematoria. Water and sewerage, energy and infrastructural issues in general are dealt with in the Environmental Protection chapter. Special needs housing, including nursing homes, and day care facilities for people with special needs are dealt with in the Housing chapter.

11.2 BACKGROUND

11.2.1 The 2001 Census indicated that Brent is one of the most ethnically diverse local authorities in Britain, with the majority of its residents from a wide range of ethnic and cultural minority communities (a proportion only exceeded in London by LB Newham). Brent also suffers substantially higher than the London average socio-economic deprivation and disadvantagement levels; five neighbourhoods fall within the country’s top 10% most deprived localities.

11.2.2 This diverse range of needs gives rise to a high demand for community facilities for general use, including statutory services provision, and also to meet the needs of a wide range of voluntary sector, particularly ethnic and religious, groups. Although some of these groups are able to compete in the market for land and buildings, other groups have high needs and low levels of resources. The growth in groups acquiring existing community facilities and other land uses for schools, places of worship and for wider community use has been considerable. The pressure from groups to re-use redundant community buildings and find sites for new buildings remains in the Borough. Planning policies must reflect this reality to accommodate the legitimate aspirations of its citizens for places for prayer, education and meetings of all kinds.

11.2.3 Failure to make proper land use strategy and planning policy provision to enable equality of opportunity and access to community services, could contribute to indirect discrimination : contrary to the anti discrimination legislation pertaining to ethnicity, gender and disability. In addition to this general requirement, the Council must ensure that its land use strategy and planning policies to enable education, health and social care provision and service delivery complies with their respective legislative and regulatory requirements.

11.2.4 The provision of community facilities has been a key aspect of certain recent regeneration schemes. With health and education 'action zones', the provision of such facilities are now seen by the Government as key to combating social exclusion - with priority being given to areas with a concentration of deprivation.

11.2.5 Population and household growth, particularly that caused by new housing development, is putting great pressure on a number of existing community facilities, for example school places. Also the changing make-up of the community creates needs for different types of facilities e.g. places of worship. Finally changing lifestyle & education patterns create new needs for facilities such as higher education and day nurseries. This chapter tackles the issues brought about by these changes.

11.3 STRATEGIC CONTEXT

National Policy Context

11.3.1 The Government’s overarching ‘social inclusion’ strategy, as exemplified in ‘Bringing Britain Together (ODPM, 1998) and the Neighbourhood Renewal Strategy, emphasises the role of community services and facilities provision in redressing historical exclusion, discrimination, deprivation and disadvantagement. Such services and facilities can also enable ‘community empowerment’. The Government’s National Health Service (NHS) Plan (2000) and its educational counterpart, The Learning Age : A Renaissance for A New Britain (2000), are of particular importance for the local delivery of the key health and educational services.

11.3.2 Planning Policy Guidance Note 12 Development Plans (PPG12, 2000) stresses that social considerations are one of the factors that plans are required to have regard to:

• Authorities should consider the relationship of planning policies to social needs - including their impact on groups such as ethnic minorities, religious groups, elderly and disabled people, women, single parent families, students and disadvantaged and deprived people living in deprived areas (para 4.13);
• Plans should make provision for land for schools and higher education, health facilities, places of worship and other community facilities (para 4.14).

11.3.3 As new housing development could potentially overstress an area’s existing community services and facilities, Planning Policy Guidance Note 3 Housing (PPG3, 2000) specifically advises that new housing proposals should be assessed in terms of the capacity of existing and potential “social infrastructure (such as schools and hospitals ) to absorb further development and the cost of adding further infrastructure” (para 31).

11.3.4 Circular 1/97 (Planning Obligations) stresses that the provision of, or funding contributions to, facilities (e.g. educational facilities), may be sought through development providing that such facilities are directly related to the development proposal and the need for them arises from its implementation, and they are reasonable and directly related in scale and kind (para B10). Such provision can be ensured through a Planning Obligation (Section 106) Agreement.

Regional Policy Context

11.3.5 Regional Planning Guidance for the South East (RPG9, 2001) emphasises that “health, education, and other social considerations and infrastructure requirements need to be taken into account fully in development planning”. Policy Q6 further specifically advises that local plans should facilitate the ‘modernisation strategy’ of local health service providers. RPG9 also stresses the need to ensure that community facilities are accessible by sustainable transport modes.

Metropolitan Policy Context

11.3.6 Strategic Guidance for London Planning Authorities (RPG3) advises that :

• Boroughs are best placed to frame detailed policies for London's diverse communities (para 1.12);
• Areas of deprivation require comprehensive programmes to improve their social infrastructure (para 2.14);
• Town centres are stressed as appropriate locations for primary health care, education and other uses which serve the community - as this reduces the need to travel (para 5.12);
• Residents should have access to community facilities such as primary health care, education, and places of worship (para 8.14).

11.3.7 The draft London Plan, which will replace RPG3, emphasises that addressing ‘social polarisation’ requires policies “sensitive to the needs of communities of interest and identity” (3A.90) . Policy 2A.6 notes that community infrastructure provision, such as schools and hospitals, is a key sustainable development criteria. Particular community infrastructural elements are specifically protected and promoted by:
• Policy 3A.16, resists the loss of social infrastructure, including libraries and community halls;
• Policies 3A.17, 18 & 19, supports health services improvement and modernisation;
• Policies 3A.21 & 22, educational facilities; and
• Policy 3A.23, facilities to address London’s diverse population needs.

11.4 BOROUGH POLICY OBJECTIVES

1. To ensure that community facilities are located where they reduce the need to travel, and where appropriate support town centres;
2. To ensure that community facilities are accessible to the whole community;
3. To ensure that regeneration projects include the significant upgrading of community facilities serving deprived communi ties;
4. To meet the projected shortfall in school places in parts of the Borough; and
5. To improve primary health care facilities through the develop ment of more purpose built group practice facilities.

11.5 BOROUGH STRATEGY

11.5.1 The strategy for community facilities in the Plan is based upon the key principle in the Part I 'Strategy' section of providing for mixed and balanced communities. This will require a full range of community facilities located where each part of Brent can access these whilst minimising the need to travel by the private car. Similarly it requires protection of those facilities that still meet a local need.

POLICIES AND PROPOSALS

11.6 GENERAL - LOCATION AND PROVISION

Community Facilities - Location

11.6.1 Where community uses such as colleges and hospitals attract large numbers of visitors then Government policy reflected in the "sequential approach" requires that in the first instance they be directed towards town centres (listed in the Town Centres & Shopping chapter), before smaller centres are considered, and that sites have moderate or better public transport accessibility (defined in Transport chapter para 6.7.2) for pedestrians and cyclists. Conversely, smaller facilities serving local catchments should be located in smaller local centres. The policy takes into account the extensive space requirements of some community facility uses.

11.6.2 Small scale community facilities may not have the same locational requirements as their larger scale counterparts. While town centres are a preferred location for smaller scale community facilities, it is recognised that some sites with moderate or better public transport accessibility may be suitable. Proposals for local facilities may be appropriately located in residential areas but residential amenity should be protected.

Protection of Existing Community Facilities

11.6.3 In order to protect the existing stock of community facilities, any development that involves loss of community facilities will normally be refused. The Council will, where practical, encourage the re-use of facilities for community purposes that are no longer required by an existing community or religious group, by another such group.

11.6.4 Several former local authority buildings are now used as educational establishments by different ethnic and religious groups. There is still an unmet demand from other groups for denominational grant maintained schools and this has put pressure on residential and office accommodation. Protection therefore of such community facilities is designed to retain buildings best suited and located for community facilities use to continue.

Community Facilities Capable Of Holding Functions

11.6.5 Proposals for community facilities capable of holding functions need to demonstrate an acceptable transport impact and, where appropriate should not lead to unacceptable increases in the level of noise and disturbance to any nearby residential areas. Conditions will be imposed on proposals where this would limit any unacceptable impact on residential amenity. Particular problems may also arise with extensions to existing facilities.

Community Facilities in New Development

11.6.6 Apart from protecting the existing stock of community buildings, there is still the need to make additional provision, particularly where new residential development adds to demand. This will ensure that residents of new communities have the opportunity to walk to facilities such as community centres, GP surgeries, day nurseries, etc. In some cases it may be possible to upgrade existing facilities but this will not be possible in every case.

11.7 Education School Places

11.7.1 Educational needs and provision reflects the wide diversity of Brent’s population - over 70% of pupils are from ethnic and cultural minorities, speaking some 120 languages - and high growth rate, has resulting in a much greater need for both school places and diversity of schools than most other boroughs. The Borough has recently been identified by the Government (DfES) as one of the two London education authorities projected to face major school place provision difficulties by 2008.

11.7.2 The majority of the Local Education Authority’s (LEA) maintained schools are currently operating at near, and in some cases at well over, their capacity levels as illustrated in the Brent School Organisation Plan 2003-2008. Only two of the LEA’s fourteen secondary schools and seventeen of its sixty primary schools have any substantial under-utilised capacity (over the 10% level regarded as necessary to ensure the requisite flexibility to cope with short term roll fluctuations).

11.7.3 These current enrollment figures significantly inflate this apparent limited capacity to accommodate the projected overall pupil increase; as much of the higher concentrations of vacant school places are located in ‘faith’ (denominational/religious) schools, particularly secondary schools with a Christian ethos, which may not be attractive to pupils of other and no religious beliefs, or those preferring gender separate (single sex) schools. Other concentrations of vacancies, particularly in the primary sector, reflect short term roll decreases as a result of extensive housing estate regeneration programmes.

11.7.4 Faith schools, offering culturally sensitive education to meet specific needs, account for a third of the LEA’s primary schools (11 Roman Catholic, 5 Church of England, 3 Jewish and 1 Islamic) and four of its secondary schools (3 Roman Catholic and 1 Jewish). A further existing Jewish girls secondary and an Islamic primary school are currently seeking LEA voluntary assisted status. The number of such LEA maintained faith schools is likely to further increase during the lifetime of this Plan, particularly to meet specific Islamic, and possibly Hindu, educational needs. Some of which is currently provided by non LEA schools, such as the Swaminaryan school in Neasden.

11.7.5 In addition to specific ethno-cultural factors generating a demand for more specialised educational provision, the Borough is likely to generally experience increased diffused demand as a result of the Government’s strategy to increase provision at both the nursery age and the post-16 ends of the educational spectrum, together with class size reductions. The Government’s encouragement of curriculum specialisation (such as technology, languages and sports) is also likely to further significantly reduce the historic ‘pre-parental choice’ propensity to attend the nearest school. 20% of Brent’s pupils’ nearest or preferred school is currently outside the Borough. However, this level is being steadily reduced due to the combination of the Borough’s increasing rate of improved school performance and the adjacent boroughs strategy to prioritise their own residents for their available school places.

11.7.6 New housing developments in recent years has generated considerable further stress on school capacity, initially in the North of the Borough, but increasingly in other parts, with the result that a at least one new secondary school and several primary schools, in addition to substantial expansion of existing schools, are likely to be required during the life time of this Plan. Both PPG3 and Circular 1/97 advise that contributions towards providing the projected additional school places from housing developers may be sought and secured through the Planning Obligation Agreement process (Section 106).

11.7.7 The contributions secured by planning obligations would be required to part fund the one-off capital costs of provision of new permanent and temporary classroom space in order to meet rising school rolls. Funds will not be used to revenue fund the running of teaching and other costs in schools which is reflected in the Government's funding formula for schools. Nor are funds required to make up any existing deficiency, rather the deficiency that will solely arise from the planned new housing.

11.7.8 The Council will consider all relevant schools within the catchment area of a proposed development (catchment areas vary according to pupil age). Where shortages of places exist, by nursery, primary or secondary sector the Council will apply the relevant parts of the formula (see below). The issue is not whether pupils are schooled within a particular borough but whether additional housing would introduce children to within the catchment area of a school with a shortage of spaces. Having said this, Brent has an obligation to offer choice for Brent pupils to be taught at Brent schools irrespective of whether there are schools in adjoining boroughs with spare places.

11.7.9 Central Government issues Supplementary Credit Approvals to local authorities (to borrow funds) in order to meet rising school rolls. However these approvals are contingent on local authorities using their best endeavours to secure planning obligations as enabling funding.

11.7.10 The formula for calculating the payment is as follows:
Number of School Age Children per house type
X Number of units of each house type
= Number of Children Generated.
Number of children generated for each school category (i.e. Primary) X Cost of new school place for that school category
= Cost of providing extra school places.

11.7.11 From London Research Centre (now Greater London Authority) data, the Borough is able to estimate the number of children likely to occupy housing of different sizes. These are set out below:


11.7.12 The table is based on London Research Centre 'Child Yield' estimates; based on the typical proportion of children attending each school type (i.e. 13% nursery, 73% primary, 14% secondary). It assumes that a third of all children will be within the catchment of the existing school. New dwellings with two, three, or four bedrooms tend to be occupied, in the earlier years at least, by young couples with young children. They are not therefore wholly typical of the wider population in the Borough. This difference, although it may reduce and finally disappear after several years, becomes of particular importance in the case of large new housing developments.

11.7.13 Cost estimates will be based on the actual individual costs of extending the schools affected and will be calculated on a case-by-case basis. The payments will apply where a development is within the catchment area of a school with no capacity or where a development within the catchment of a school would generate sufficient children to use up all spare capacity in that school. All payments will be maintained within a ringfenced fund for expanding places in schools which have, or would have, as a result of the development, no spare capacity. This will ensure that funding from planning obligations can be targeted at the nearest relevant school.

11.7.14 Because of the administrative overhead of administering payments on small schemes the policy only applies to schemes of over 0.3 Ha+/sites capable of 10+ units. It will also apply to changes of use to family residential uses that generate school children.

11.7.15 The LRC's calculations already allow for a proportion of school-age children that would not need to move school following a move into a new housing development. However, the Council accepts that in the case of affordable housing, a much higher proportion of children than that already accounted for by the LRC figures, will already be in the catchment area for local schools (which research suggests is around 40% as opposed to around 15%). This is because the Council will have significant nomination rights to new housing association development and these will be existing Borough residents, many of whom will already attend local schools at capacity or will not move from existing schools. The Council will therefore accept a discount in payments of 25% from affordable housing providers.

School Extensions/New Schools

11.7.16 In recent years substantial educational development has taken place throughout schools in Brent with the construction of the Jewish Free School (a secondary school relocated from Camden), the transformation of the former Willesden High School into the City Capital Academy and the expansion of Wembley High and Kingsbury Green Primary. The Government’s recent Building Schools for the Future strategy envisages major school building refurbishment and improvement which could have significant land use implications in Brent, including possible compulsory purchase of land, as only a few schools have sufficient land to accommodate additional space to DfES standards.

11.7.17 In most cases expansion of existing schools and the development of new schools will require sites which could be developed for alternative land-uses. In these cases the benefits of school expansion or new school provision need to be balanced against the potential loss of a large site from other priority land uses (such as housing, particularly affordable housing).

11.7.18 The difficulty of identifying suitable sites is also likely to affect the development of non LEA schools, particularly the evolution of voluntary schools to a point where they could qualify for LEA funding status. For example, the Islamia School in Salusbury Rd which originally commenced in a former LEA redundant school evolved to become the first Muslim denominational grant maintained school in the country.

11.7.19 It is estimated that approximately 10% of morning peak traffic is accounted for by the 'school run'. There is evidence that where schools take measures to reduce car use this has been successful. Therefore, there is a requirement that, where both new and expanded schools are proposed, measures are taken to reduce car use.

Temporary Classrooms

11.7.20 On occasion, schools have had to resort to the use of temporary classroom buildings as an expedient to accommodate rising school rolls. The standard of accommodation is lower than a new permanent structure and they are often visually intrusive. As a general principle temporary classroom buildings will be acceptable but will be time limited.

Development Within School Grounds

11.7.21 With increased funding pressures on schools, and devolved management of their budgets, there has been increasing pressure to site commercial facilities (e.g. sports halls/theatres) within school premises, to be shared between school and public use. These can provide both a welcome source of funding and new community facilities but some caution must be shown when proposals come forward. It is important that facilities are related to the school and do not prejudice any future expansion of the school that may be needed. Development of school playing fields is dealt with in Policy OS8. The Council would also expect that the provision of non-educational uses on school sites would give opportunities to increase dual use of school facilities. Normal development control criteria regarding traffic, access and residential amenity would also need to be satisfied.

11.8 DAY NURSERIES

11.8.1 Nurseries, crèches and other forms of child care for young children provide important social and skill development opportunities. Their provision may also beneficially enable parents and other child carers to undertake employment or other activities.The Borough, in line with Government strategy, offers universal nursery and other child care opportunities for all three year olds and also the four year olds not yet eligible for entry to primary school reception class.

11.8.2 Most of this provision is directly provided by the LEA in the specialist nursery classes attached to virtually all of the Boroughs’ primary schools or its four larger nursery schools. As this LEA provision could be overstretched in particular localities by new housing development, a contribution to enabling the required additional provision will normally be required in accordance with Policy CF6.

11.8.3 Other pre- school education and child care facilities are provided, for varying time periods, by a wide range of voluntary sector and private play groups, crèches, nurseries and independent schools. Under the Children’s Act 1989 as amended by the Care Standards Act 2000, nurseries, playgroups and crèches for children under 8 are normally subject to registration with the Office for Standards in Education (Ofsted).

11.8.4 Planning permission is likely to be required where the above are proposed through new development or created by a change of use (use of existing public halls will not require permission). Registered childminders may look after up to three children under 5 years without requiring planning permission. SPG 14 Childcare Facilities provides guidance as to the planning requirements for premises providing child care.

11.8.5 Problems can occur when large numbers of children are proposed to be accommodated within small premises - especially where large extensions are proposed to increase the number of children. Large numbers of parents (10+) driving to pick-up/drop-off children at the same time can cause a nuisance and this is exacerbated if there is more than one session.

11.8.6 Policy CF11 allows for a loss of residential accommodation recognising the need for quality day nurseries. However for very large premises - such as those on three or more floors - the degree of residential loss may be unacceptable.

11.9 HOSPITALS AND HIGHER & FURTHER EDUCATION (HFE)

11.9.1 Central Middlesex and Northwick Park are defined as 'HFE zones' where a concentration of hospitals and further / higher education uses (and their supporting uses) are permitted (as identified on the proposals map). The advantage of this approach is that it provides certainty over where such uses will be and will not be permitted and provides a concentration of supporting facilities which reduces the need to travel (RPG3 para 4.26 notes that student / nurses etc. hostels should be accessible by foot or public transport from the institutions they serve).

11.9.2 This raises a number of issues. There has been pressure to site retail facilities within these campus areas. Whilst some small scale facilities can reduce the need to travel there has also been pressure to locate facilities with wider catchments (i.e. 'drive-through' restaurants). Facilities are therefore required to primarily serve visitors and staff and should thus be restricted in scale (under 200m2). There may be a conflict between the desirability of locating accommodation on site - to prevent previous housing land being lost elsewhere - and providing space for commercial developments such as 'technoparks' and commercial special needs housing. To a degree these problems can be resolved by long-term masterplanning.

11.9.3 Finally high-levels of car-use are still prevalent in these areas. The Council's 'restraint-based' parking standards for institutional uses, whilst recognising essential operational requirements, will require lower car parking provision in new facilities within these campuses. The introduction of 'green transport plans' (see section 6.6.11) are particularly suited to such institutional uses.

11.9.4 The Northwick Park Hospital and Higher and Further Education Zone (including the University of Westminster campus) is dealt with below, the Central Middlesex Hospital Zone is considered in the Park Royal Inset Plan Policy PR7.

11.9.5 The Borough is also served by a number of other Further Education facilities, notably the College of North West London whose campuses in Wembley, Willesden and Kilburn provide a wide variety of vocational and academic courses for 15,000 students, many of whom are Brent residents.

11.10 PRIMARY HEALTH CARE

11.10.1 Brent’s particular combination of high levels of socio-economic deprivation concentrations and very diverse population is reflected in its residents disproportionately high chronic diseases levels, higher infant mortality and lower life expectancy rates than the London average, particularly in South Brent, (as illustrated in the Brent Primary Care Trust Public Health Report 2002/3). This has led to the Government designating a large part of the Borough as a Health Action Zone, one of only four in London.

11.10.2 Primary health care provision, i.e. National Health Service facilities other than hospitals (see Policy CF12), is the statutory responsibility of the Brent Primary Care Trust (PCT). The PCT is required to publish a Local Delivery Plan outlining its strategy for health service delivery, improvements and health promotion, whose implementation is detailed in Locality Plans for the five PCT organisational areas . Most of the PCT’s health services are delivered through the Borough’s 79 General Practitioners surgeries (GPs) and larger health clinics, which employ 163 doctors and 263 nurses. The PCT also arranges NHS dental and optical treatments and pharmacy services.

11.10.3 The PCT’s general strategy is to reorganise the smaller GP practices, often accommodated in inadequate premises, into larger multi- practice groupings in purpose built primary care centre/ clinics which are capable of providing a wider range of health and social care services in accessible locations. Much of the proposed new capital investment will be delivered through the Local Improvement Finance Trust (LIFT) initiative.

11.10.4 The Council encourages purpose built modern group practice clinics (such as those proposed/provided within the redeveloped Willesden and Kingbury hospitals). Whilst more central facilities might be further away from the residential areas they serve, they might be more accessible by public transport. Such facilities are also promoted in major new housing/mixed-use developments (see Policy CF5).

11.10.5 In the shorter term, the need to attract doctors to areas less well serviced may require the conversion of residential premises to GP surgeries or the extension of surgeries in residential premises (see SPG15 Medical Practice Accommodation). Health service requirements may make it difficult to maintain residential accommodation as part of conversions. For this reason loss of residential use may be permitted where there are no reasonable opportunities for shared group practice facilities. It should be noted that this loss only applies to primary health care facilities meeting a local need (e.g. doctors, dentists etc.) not to the generality of other facilities which are better located in town and district centres.

11.11 PLACES OF WORSHIP

11.11.1 Brent’s population diversity is reflected in its residents religious affiliations : 48 % Christian, 17% Hindu, 12% Muslim (Census 2001). Although there are many general community buildings, meeting rooms and religious buildings in Brent, the great diversity of cultural, ethnic and religious groups within the Borough means there is a shortage of adequate premises, particularly for the newer religious congregations. New purpose built places of worship, notably the Swaminaryan Temple in Brentfield Road, have been created in recent years. Development should not result in the loss of protected land uses such as residential property, other than in exceptional circumstances.

11.11.2 The major problem experienced concerns large congregations, especially at times of major religious festivals and attendant noise/traffic problems. Applicants should address how these problems will be managed as part of the application.

11.12 LIBRARIES

11.12.1 The Council provides 12 libraries in the Borough. There is no central Borough library but Willesden Green is the main reference library and offers modern facilities including a wide range of community, artistic and other activities.

11.12.2 The North of the Borough has no equivalent facility. The largest facility is the Town Hall library which is classified as a "strategic" library like Willesden Green. The problem is that it does not have the space to expand its range of services . The Council is considering the provision of a new central library within the Wembley area (see Policy WEM22 in the Wembley Regeneration Area chapter).

11.12.3 Of the remaining libraries, Barham Park, Ealing Road, Harlesden, Kilburn, Kingsbury and Preston Road are classified as "district libraries" whilst Cricklewood, Kensal Rise, Neasden and Tokyngton are classified as "neighbourhood" libraries. A number of smaller libraries, both in the north and south of the Borough, offer a more limited range of services than the larger ones and have limited space for expansion. These libraries generally fulfil a different function than the larger ones, serving a localised community.

11.12.4 The potential exists to relocate some library facilities into more multi-use facilities with other education and community functions such as that typified by the Willesden Green complex. An appropriate balance needs to be struck between smaller libraries and the development of a smaller number of "centres of excellence". The Council’s Library Service Position Statement 2003 sets out proposals for the future of the Borough’s libraries, including new developments and refurbishments. Major new libraries should be located in town centres or in areas of good public transport accessibility (Policy CF1). Smaller scale new libraries, amongst other things, relate more to local community needs and should be located close to the communities that use them (Policy CF2). However the most accessible locations are still town or district centres.

Foreword

Introduction

Strategy

Built Environment

Environmental Protection

Housing

Transport

Employment

Town Centres & Shopping

Tourism, Entertainment & the Arts

Open Space & Recreation

Community Facilities

Waste

INSET PLANS

Park Royal

Wembley Regeneration Area

Site Specific Proposals

Glossary

Borough-wide maps