MacLauchlan reported that "Remains of two roads down to the mouth of this western valley were found, not very continuous, but nearly parallel to each other, the smaller one of gravel; the larger, and more easterly one, was paved". Bidwell et al. show this running north north-east towards the south corner of the fort from a point north-east of the Ship Inn.

MacLauchlan and Bruce both recorded a road running north from near the north-east angle of the fort to beyond the Newcastle-North Shields railway. Because of its alignment Bidwell et al. thought it was unlikely to be Roman. Bruce wrote: "The only trace of the northern division of the station that remains, consists of the road which has apparently led from SEGEDUNUM to the outposts at Blake-Chesters and Tynemouth. This causeway extends from the station to the north of the Shields railway; it is formed of a mass of rubble about two feet deep, and is eleven yards wide. It cannot be ploughed, and nothing that requires any depth of earth will grow upon it". MacLauchlan notes that Reay "remembers a stony way, like the remains of a road, running for about 50 yards in the direction of the north-east angle of the station, in a garden immediately north of the railway, and which, had it been continuous, must have crossed the railroad a few yards to the east of the archway under the railway...".

In 1851 Bruce recorded and illustrated an altar found a few years earlier south of the south-west corner of the fort. "When discovered it was lying on the ground surrounded by a ring of twelve stones. Each stone was about one foot high and eight or ten inches broad; all twelve stones were roughly dressed. Coins were found under the altar and under several of the stones...". It is thought to denote the existence of a temple. The altar is uninscribed, 2 feet 8 inches x 1 foot 4 inches. It "is pierced by a circular hole, 6 inches in diameter, through the centre of the die...The opening is surrounded by twelve incised lines radiating from this central hole, and the design is perhaps meant for a rayed sun. The hole would allow a ray of light to pass through if inclined at not more than 45 degrees to the axis of the hole, and the altar could have been used in connection with sunrise and sunset".

It is suggested that there may have been a temple or shrine near the south-west corner of the fort. This statement is based on the discovery of an altar (HER no. 814), published and illustrated by Bruce, and located by Bruce and MacLauchlan. The altar was found "lying on the ground surrounded by a ring of twelve stones. Each stone was about one foot high and eight or ten inches broad: all twelve stones were roughly dressed. Coins were found under the altar and under several of the stones...". This account is more detailed than MacLauchlan's, but no original source is given.

Writing in 1789, Brand recorded that, "In sinking the shaft of a pit...a conduit (was) discovered... The viewer crept a good way along it and described it as built of great stones of coarse workmanship". There is no evidence for the date of this structure, or its function, or its precise location. Bidwell et al. suggest it was west of the fort.

A well was reported to J.C. Bruce by Mr Reay, and the former located it outside the south-west corner of the fort "very close to the fort wall, encroaching on the presumed position of the defensive ditches. However since the recent excavations by N. Holbrook have indicated that the ditches were filled in during the Roman period there could still have been a late Roman well in that location. However it could have been a medieval feature".

There are two 19th century references to human bones having been found at Wallsend. In 1807 Dr. John Lingard recorded Mrs Buddle as saying that many human bones had been found during the trenching of the garden east of their house, which was situated just within the west wall of the fort. In 1863 MacLauchlan reported that a Mr Reay had seen two skeletons dug up near the supposed bathhouse in the area of the vicus south of the fort. There is no dating evidence for either though it is unlikely that the first were Roman.

In 1840 John Hodgson published his account of the uncovering of "a very curious cauldron for heating water in... On the outside it was square, and consisted from the foundation to the top of a broad wall, of common ashlar work. Within it was oval", measured 5 ft x 6 ft, and 3 ft deep, and was lined with smooth hard cement, 1 in thick and mixed with brick. Close to the cauldron was a flue. It is possible to read his account to mean that he saw this feature in 1814, during the forming of the gears of Fawdon Staith, a little above the high water mark, and that it was the last fragment of a building most of which had already been removed. It seems unlikely, on grounds of date, appearance and improbable survival, after his observation, that this was the same structure described from second hand information by MacLauchlan, and sited near the Ship Inn at the above grid ref. In 2014 the bathhouse was found again through Wallquest, a Heritage Lottery Fund community archaeology project by Tyne and Wear Archives and Museums. The bathhouse was found 130m south of the fort on the site of The Ship Inn, which was demolished in 2011. Evaluation on the site found Roman building materials, cement and opus signinum (tiles broken up into small pieces, mixed with mortar then beaten down with a rammer), typical of bath buildings. Open excavation found that the wall foundations and structures survived. All the typical rooms were present - the frigidarium (cold room), tepidarium (warm room) and caldarium (hot room). There were two plunge baths and one semi circular bath, which was a later addition. One of the rectangular plunge baths still had its pink waterproof lining and steps down into it. The hot room had pilae to support the raised floor. There were three semi-circular apses, which typically contained a fountain or bath. The western apse featured a stoke hole. The Wallsend bathhouse does not resemble others on Hadrian's Wall (such as Benwell, Bewcastle, Chesters, Carrawburgh and Netherby), which have one narrow and a number of square rooms. In fact the Wallsend example is not paralleled anywhere. It has buttresses on the exterior wall. The projecting apses do not feature in Hadrianic plans. Earlier walls continue to the south. The apses were built on a concrete surface - the basement of a heated room. The bathhouse was once bigger but the Hadrianic plan was reduced in size. An earlier wall was found under the later pilae of the heated room. The reason for the reduction in size was landslip. The land falls steeply into a stream which fed into the River Tyne. The whole building is skewed. There is a huge crack in the cold room wall. The building slipped down the slope and so was rebuilt. In 1998 a reused inscription was found in a building built over the western fort wall. It dates to the late 2nd or early 3rd century. 'BALI[NEUM] ASOL[UM]' (rebuilt from the ground up). It may have have been rebuilt smaller because the military unit based at the fort was smaller by the 3rd century. There have been next to no modern archaeological excavations of baths on Hadrian's Wall. Great Chesters was excavated in the 1890s. There was small scale work at Bewcastle by John Gillam in the 1950s. Small scale unpublished work at Chesters. There was a similar reduction in size at Carrawburgh, which has two apses added and one room becomes a yard. Were extra mural baths given up before Hadrian's Wall was abandoned? Possibly when the vicus was abandoned? Was the bathhouse at Wallsend demolished by the Romans or was it intact until 1814. Nick Hodgson says probably the latter. The demolition fill was mostly cement and flag stones from the floor above. There were no finds to date the smashing in of the walls. At Binchester the baths went out of use before the end of the Roman period and were used for rubbish dumping. Baths closer to the forts, like Chesters, invited re-use. At Chesters and Binchester there were late Roman baths inside the fort walls. Finds from the excavation include pottery up to the 4th century, quite a few coins, brooches and other metal objects. The small hot bath described and measured by John Hodgson was not visible in the 2014 excavation. This must lie beyond its extent. The remains at Wallsend are to be permanently displayed and interpreted (planning application submitted December 2015).

In 1769 Wallis wrote, "I have frequently after high tides observed large, well-wrought, ashler (sic) stones lying on the shore of the river at the foot of this field, (on which the station stood) - the scattered ruins probably of a key". Hodgson may have been referring to something similar when he wrote, "When the workmen, in 1814, were forming the gears of Fawden staith, they met with much Roman masonry, and coins, a little above high-water mark:..." - perhaps a quay or, as is now more generally accepted, a bathhouse. The evidence for this will not have survived the later alterations to the river bank for staiths and shipyards.

In 1807 Dr. John Lingard wrote, "A little to the west of the Station was opened 25 years ago an arched cavity, (arch of brick), in which were found many broken urns...". This has been interpreted as a pottery kiln. Its precise location is unknown.