The Architectural Impact
of the proposed modifications to St George’s Church

"House on the Rock views itself as the steward of its premises, held in trust for the benefit not solely of its attendees but for the entire community....House on the Rock believes that humankind is made in the image of God and that our creativity is an expression of this."- quotations from Section 106 Policy agreement,.

Planning Permission for the architectural alterations at St George’s, and change of use from a Theatre to a Church has been granted. However, the irregularities in the planning meetings that led up to permission being granted have been well documented here and in the press. There are, indeed, sufficient grounds to call for a full Planning inquiry and independent judicial review in terms of:

1. the architectural damage to the building
2. the potential impact of the change of use
3. the disregard for local opinion which has typified the entire process

St George’s prime significance architecturally is as a building in the round. The dome and floor plan is unique both as a church and as a theatre. HOTR’s proposed gallery seating structure will permanently alter the unique acoustic and religious significance of the building, albeit under the direction of the good intentions quoted above
St George’s is painstakingly based on a Templar design, not, as HOTR asserts, a ‘Greek’ church. Neither is it built merely ‘in a gothic style with quasi-Byzantine influences’ as the House on the Rock planning application details. It is also contains an octagonal arcade of pillars, and not hexagonal as the HOTR application describes.

These are important differences. The whole outer circular structure manifests acoustic, mathematically demonstrable, resonant qualities which are comparable to the great domed churches of London such as St Paul’s Cathedral or St Sophia in Istanbul. As in many domed churches, we experience here an interaction between Eastern (Islamic) and Western sacred architecture. The building is inviting a particular gesture of inclusivity from its current owners.

HOTR's proposed alterations would essentially knock several holes in the outer shell of the original wall of the church for access at both the ground floor and first floor levels. The proposed external one-story structure is connected to the proposed interior gallery by several doors. They would also have to have fire exits at this level - nowhere detailed or even indicated on the Planning Application drawings. The fire exits would further compromise the existing round walls of the church. With a proposed congregation of up to 900, these fire escapes will also need to be large. The outer wall of the building is critical to the integrity of both the outer form and inner acoustic. The proposed GALLERY as a second layer of seating will damage both irrevocably.

If Islington Council supports the use of St Georges reverting to a church, they must also acknowledge its precise nature as a church building, both as to its structure and its intended occupants and current owners. It is clear to the undersigned that not sufficient attention has been given to the architectural impact this planning proposal will have on the building itself.

Although the change of use has been approved from a theatre back into a church, the proposed alterations will disfigure one of the most numinous church buildings in London. From the perspective of theatre the building has a different significance architecturally. Theatre is not merely a function of a building, it also determines its form. HOTR are to be praised in maintaining the entire stage area, and indeed supplementing the performative potential of the building by siting a bandstand behind the stage. The maintenance of the current stage arrangement in terms of siting and orientation reinforces the HOTR claim to responsible ownership, but their intention to sabotage the acoustic of the building by inserting the large (250 seat) and permanent gallery level seating is a disaster for the form and authenticity of the building. The Victorian Society and many other local groups and individuals have expressed concern about the plans for the gallery.

Although currently dilapidated, the original architecture of the building has been satisfactorily maintained throughout its use as a theatre and community centre for over 35 years. With its stage and possible seating variations, it is also a perfect theatre-in-the-round, which in terms of flexibility is unique in London. The combined architectural merit of the building as both church and theatre makes St George’s a valuable and irrevocable jewel in the crown not just of London’s sacramental Architecture, but also of working London Theatres. It is valuable because in architectural terms it is both a Church and a Theatre.

In terms of maintenance and establishing its Heritage significance, money must be allocated to protect this unique structure, and if House on the Rock were able to maintain the building in terms of what the architecture of the building demands, they could proceed to refurbish it with the community’s blessing. Thus in passing the initial planning consent on February 14th 2005, Islington Council might be said to have supported the refurbishment of what was at the time of purchase a derelict building. Its sale, however, was both protracted and, it has to be said, highly unusual from the perspective of normal disposal of charitable assets, although in this, the finger of blame must point not at HOTR but to the individual who made over a million pounds profit from a building owned by and funded as a registered Charity.

Despite concerns about the future of St George’s Theatre expressed by members of the local community over a period of many years, Islington Council has not seen fit to allocate funds for a public debate as to the best use of the building, nor its significance as a community centre. Nor were the local community adequately consulted by the Council or by HOTR, as their Planning documents assert. Islington Council may have obeyed the “letter of the law”, in that change of use notification and the tricky problem of removing Covenants established on a building need only be given to the immediate locality, perhaps a hundred houses at most. However, recent petitions in the area, in addition to the ones held years ago (by Save London’s Theatres) testify to extensive anxiety about the loss of an active Theatre/ Arts facility in the area. This is, a community and architectural as well as a planning issue. Like many churches the building holds a key position both geographically and demographically. It has served a function for over 30 years as a theatre and major community arts centre over a huge swathe of wards and parishes from Islington to Archway, Holloway, Highgate, Kentish Town, Tufnell Park, and Hornsey, but due to the neglect of recent years, has yet to reach its true potential, as a community arts centre made viable and sustainable by mixed use.

Both as an Ecumenical – rather than Evangelist church - and as a Community Centre, St George’s has tremendous potential if the two functions of the building – religion and art – can be held in some sensible relationship. This primary relationship to architecture, to the building itself, (ie what it has recently and historically been used for – a theatre and a church) must surely precede and inform discussion of its present use if a good result is to emerge from the current 106 discussions.

Furthermore, no mention is made in the section 106 agreement about the use of the building by other – community based – religious groups. This should also be included, under the Charitable laws governing this country. HOTR is a religious charity, and as such is bound by its dedication to the Christian faith. No-one is seriously expecting the HOTR to include Jewish, Muslim, Hindu or Pagan ceremonies and events at the Church, although that would be a spectacular gesture, but the building should also remain open to a community-based Ecumenical inquiry into the Christian faith that underpins the life of the Christian Church as a whole.

The wide range of architectural references in the building – the Templars did, after all, take their name from The Temple of the Rock in Jerusalem, which St George’s octagonal structure famously references – invites the participation of a broader congregation than HOTR are offering. We therefore also object to the use of the church by a restricted congregation.

Though no money has been spent on the building since House on the Rock purchased it, either by English Heritage, HOTR or the Council – in spite of invitations to all three to do so – St Georges Theatre is still basically in perfect condition, in terms of its original structure. Minor roof repairs are needed, as in most C of E churches throughout the UK. HOTR claim their proposal will revivify the building - which they wrongly describe as having been effectively vacant since the late 1980’s. In point of fact it was being used as a Shakespearean theatre as recently as 2000, when a startling and original Romeo and Juliet was produced there.

To conclude, most opponents on architectural grounds to the current development have little objection to the proposals as far as the external and cosmetic developments are concerned, as the existing temporary structures around the building clearly need replacing. However, the gallery development inside St George’s Church is unacceptable, both in terms of the holes being knocked in the wall and the permanence of the gallery seating. The House on the Rock must have scant understanding of the architectural significance of this building if they wish to impose permanent gallery seating in it. Its acoustic is currently perfect, with the dome a resonating chamber as effective as St Paul’s cathedral’s famous ‘whisper’ effect. Under the existing plans, this Grade 2 listed building would be architecturally nullified and its immense potential as an ecumenical and community building would be lost.

Collated by Dan Skinner
as at 24th October 2005