Home > Neighbourhood plan > Social Infrastructure/Culture
  • Key issues
    • A number of organisations work to provide services to local people but such organisations aren’t always resourced to work together or publicise these services widely.  However, rather than centralising all activity, the emphasis should be on supporting groups to liaise effectively and improve/deepen partnership working, perhaps supported by a small paid staff who could help to coordinate community-wide benefits, seek funding, and publicise activity
    • Education providers and employers need to be more closely linked to increase local access to employment. Further work needs to be done to ensure young people are ‘job-ready’ using local providers.  Smaller businesses need compliance assistance to be able to employ apprentices
    • Establishing a new Library is a key priority and the group endorses the Oasis Johanna Primary School and Waterloo Action Centre sites. Revenue funding must be identified to ensure the project is sustainable however
    • Opportunities to both widen access to culture and strengthen cultural links in the neighbourhood should be exploited

POLICIES: Social Infrastructure and Culture

No Policy
P13 The Neighbourhood Forum has identified a number of sites or buildings buildings which should be protected for specified uses or their community significance. Proposals that will result in either the loss of, or in significant harm to, those community assets will not be supported.
P14 The Neighbourhood Plan recognises the contribution to the artistic and cultural distinctiveness of the area made by Leake Street and the Waterloo undercrofts and seeks to maintain and develop this important feature of the neighbourhood.  Applications which contribute to and promote the use of these areas for D2 uses will therefore be supported.

Other guidance

  • CIL funding raised from development within the SoWN area and used for social infrastructure projects should only be allocated to non-profit distributing organisations with an area of benefit that covers the SoWN area, have appropriate charitable or social purpose objects and an asset lock (i.e. protections for the uses of the asset), ensuring that the majority of beneficiaries from the project (capital or otherwise) come from within the SoWN area of benefit. All funds should be restricted in use to the purposes applied for.
  • A proportion of CIL generated annually from development within the SoWN area should be defrayed as revenue by a group representing the local community. This could include supporting existing projects, hiring fundraisers to support groups or setting up new projects.
  • Initiatives which create jobs for local people are to be supported and could include provision of space to improve practical or vocational skills (particularly for older people and school leavers). The community will support schemes which create sustainable ties between education providers and employers to strengthen local pathways into work.
  • SoWN welcomes and encourages culture and tourism as a valuable part of South Bank life. Consideration should be given to the balance between the economic benefits of tourism – and particularly how these benefits can be shared among a greater geographical and socio-economic spread – and the impacts on the resident and business community of increased footfall, noise and disruption to quality of life / business as usual.
  • On culture, planning regulation is not always conducive to the delivery of an animated South Bank and temporary installations should be delivered without unnecessary impediment where they are in appropriate places.  SoWN will consider promoting a Neighbourhood Development Order to support the temporary development of cultural or public art installations, incorporating strict guidelines developed in conjunction with neighbours to ensure noise levels, the duration and nature of the installation, and its location are acceptable.
  • There is a perceived gap between an ‘affluent’ South Bank and a ‘deprived’ Waterloo. Projects which strengthen ties between communities of different social economic status are to be encouraged.
  • The South Bank is home to a wide range of cultural organisations and artists. Developers should consider supporting local artists and cultural organisations when developing their cultural strategy, implementing public or internal art and procuring creative services.
  • Local people should be consulted on public art and culture planned as part of development.
  • Temporary outdoor cultural activity which generates revenue should contribute to the maintenance of the public realm in the area immediately around the site.


7 Comments, RSS

  • Patricia Rogers

    says on:
    October 13, 2014 at 2:24 pm

    I’m not sure if my last comment has gone. Compared with other boroughs such as Islington, in and around the South Bank we are very short of playgrounds (big and small) for young and for older children. Let’s get them included in some of the new developments There is also a lot of space – such as in the circular lawn next to Gabriel’s Wharf and between Coin Street houses south of Upper Ground – as well as having them linked to some of the new developments.

  • Patricia Rogers

    says on:
    October 13, 2014 at 2:25 pm

    Is it possible for me to join this group? If so, how do I find out when and where the group is meeting?

    • Ben Stephenson

      says on:
      October 13, 2014 at 2:33 pm

      Dear Patricia

      The groups are open to all – I will make sure you have notification of the next meeting. And many thanks for your contributions.

      All best,


  • Charlotte Axelson

    says on:
    December 11, 2014 at 12:07 pm

    It sometimes seems as though the people who live in Waterloo and the cultural/entertainment organisations are quite isolated from each other. Maybe something like a ‘time credit’ organisation could encourage local residents and workers to volunteer time for a community project and earn credit to spend in the area. The City of London foes does something similar: https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/services/community-and-living/Pages/time-credits.aspx.

    i thought that when working groups need volunteers for projects, this would help recruitment – it might attract people who can’t give lots of time or give time regularly, and credits such as discounts in local shops and restaurants and entertainment venues would have a positive effect on local trade and help build a local clientele as well as passing trade. Maybe the planned new library could be a hub for this and, like the city, give free dvd/music loans for time credit as well?

  • Jack G

    says on:
    January 6, 2015 at 11:10 pm

    Would it be worth asking large institutions such as the BFI to help contribute towards the new library collection?

    They have a wonderful archive of footage which they create retail DVDs of – perhaps they could donate a copy or two of each release?

    I think having a ‘bookshop cafe’ within the library would be a good way of bringing revenue in although this would need to be carefully designed so as not to disturb other quiet areas.


    says on:
    April 20, 2015 at 10:33 am

    I don’t understand why SOWN appears to be supporting the idea of a ‘new’ Library. We already have a great library in Lower Marsh (though of course the building could be nicer) and it should be strongly supported, including the staff. It’s vital that ‘social infrastructure’ is not hived-off in to suppoedly less expensive areas / streets. The extreme pressures to ‘gentrify’ Lower Marsh are, to me, the same as having separate entrances to blocks of flats with ‘1st class’ and ‘2nd class’ (meaning social housing) dwellings. If, however, there has to be a new library – we need look no further than the purpose built, late 19th / early 20th century building at St. George’s Circus which was, last time I checked, being guarded 24 hours a day and unused!!

  • Ben Stephenson

    says on:
    April 20, 2015 at 11:57 am

    Dear Ruth
    Many thanks for your comments, it’s very useful to get your feedback on this issue. SoWNs Social Infrastructure Working Group has discussed the library provision for the area and formed its policy objectives before Lambeth’s cultural strategy was published. No doubt they will look at the policy again in the light of the strategy, but they were of the view that the library in Lower Marsh is not fit for purpose and that new provision was certainly needed. I think the group felt that Waterloo deserved a library that was bigger, open longer and had improved facilities to encourage a variety of visitors. All of this could of course be delivered on site, in a new building.

    The building on St George’s Circus is in Southwark. Not sure about what the boroughs can do to work together on that issue.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *