Survey raises hopes of saving Highbury Roundhouse

Published: 4th February, 2011
by PETER GRUNER

AN independent surveyor who has worked for Westminster Abbey has been granted Town Hall permission to test the foundations of Highbury Roundhouse in an effort to halt planned demolition of the building.

Brian Morton will carry out a survey of the community centre, which has been given a dangerous structure notice, before presenting a report to the council.

As revealed in the Tribune before Christmas, the Morton Partnership, which did a building survey of Westminster Abbey, has suggested that Highbury Roundhouse can be saved by careful structural work.

Islington Council wants to demolish the historic building in Ronalds Road and replace it with housing which could pay for a new community centre on the site.

The council maintains it would be too expensive to refurbish the existing building.

The centre, which has provided community services for 40 years, has been operating from six other Islington venues since it was served with a dangerous structure notice in August last year.

Chairman of Highbury Roundhouse, William Ellington, said the new study presented a “glimmer of hope” that the community centre can be saved.

“The District Surveyor needs to be satisfied the building is safe before he can remove the dangerous structure notice,” he added. “We hope the new survey will show the building can be fixed.

“So we have won a reprieve but the battle isn’t over yet. We still have to persuade the council to do those repairs. We still have to secure a binding commitment for the future of the centre on the site.”

Labour regeneration chief Councillor Paul Convery said the council’s surveyors believe the building is not worth saving. “It’s a dangerous building slipping down the railway embankment and the truth is that the cost of underpinning and repairing the building would be extraordinary – pushing £750,000,” he added.

Lib Dem councillor John Gilbert said: “If the council doesn’t agree with the new survey then they should put the matter to arbitration rather than unilaterally imposing their view and knocking the building down.”