The Making of a Temple

My introduction to the Newchapel Temple site was in August, 1953, when I 
accompanied President David O. McKay and his family on their trip to
Switzerland, to begin the Temple there.  President McKay and his son, Dr. 
Llewellyn McKay, President A. Hamer Reiser and his counsellor James R. 
Cunningham and I were present on that occasion.  As former presidents of 
the Church have done, President McKay selected the exact location for the 
Temple, right where the old tennis court was.  As we stood there, he said, 
"This is the place where we will build the London Temple."  And turning to 
me, he said, "Brother Anderson, you are to design this Temple."

The First Presidency’s instructions to the architect stated that the Temple 
should be similar to the Swiss Temple in function, though not necessarily in 
design; these two Temples and the New Zealand Temple are the so-called 
new, two-ordinance-room Temples, as distinguished from the previous 
temples, which are the so-called five-ordinance-room type.

When President McKay told me that the Church was going to build this new 
type of Temple in Switzerland his description of it fixed a picture so firmly in 
my mind that I could draw it.  Indeed, when in the designing stages some 
changes in the original concept were proposed, President McKay said, 
"Brother Anderson, this is not the Temple that you and I saw together."  Of 
course the changes were dropped and the Prophet’s concept carried through 
to completion.

Then, in Newchapel, as he told me I was to design this Temple, I had the 
same fine feeling as on the occasion when he described the Swiss Temple.  I 
always feel good in the presence of President McKay: he inspires one to 
endeavour to do great things.

By experience, I’ve found that the design of a building does not come easily: 
like all the activities of life, it is an experience of faith.  Of course, this 
business of building is not operated on faith alone; it also takes good hard 
work.  The combination of faith and work is responsible for this Temple.

Designing a Temple to be used by members speaking several languages 
presented a complex problem.  Modern equipment like the motion picture 
machine and the public address system helped furnish a solution.  In fact, 
with these facilities, a two-ordinance-room Temple can be operated by far 
fewer workers than the five-ordinance-room type.  In the two-room temples 
three sessions can be conducted daily, each in a different language, with no 
increase in workers.

Originally a lily pool stood in the front of the tennis court - had it remained it 
would be in front of the Temple today.  Draining it, which disappointed many 
people, was necessary to avoid building the footings and foundations in 
water; now, the bottom of the footings are at least three feet above the water 
table, and setting on rock shale.  The ground exploring engineers said, 
"There is rock shale under the tennis court, and you could build the city of 
London on that site."  In place of the lily pool, we will have a reflecting pool at 
the Temple’s south side.

There are 58 finished and five unfinished rooms, from laundry, equipment, 
electrical and heating rooms to a complete dining room and kitchen and, of 
course, the ordinance rooms.

The Temple is 84 feet wide, 159 feet long and 56 feet high.  The tower rises 
156 feet 9.5 inches from the ground level, and the metal spire itself extends 
82 feet 11.5 inches above the stone tower base.  The structural skeleton is of 
reinforced concrete and structural steel, and the footings and foundations are 
of reinforced concrete.  All of the basement concrete floors and walls are 
damp-proofed with a layer of hard asphalt at least an inch thick.  In the floor, 
the asphalt is between two layers of concrete; in the wall, between concrete 
and the hollow tile lining.  Above the ground floor, the walls are brick 
masonry, faced with cut Portland lime stone, of which most of England’s 
stone-faced buildings are built.  The exterior steps are Sawn Mansfield 
Stone, the borders and spacers on walks and platforms are York Stone with a 
field of Pepple Finish Cast Stone.

Covering the reinforced Perlite concrete roof slab laid over structural steel 
roof trusses is first a two-inch layer of rigid insulation and then a standing 
seam copper roof.  All flashings (wall and coping coverings) and metal work 
on the tower is hard-rolled copper covered with lead; the lead covering will 
prevent the copper from staining the white stone walls.

Inside, the plaster has been applied on furring strips to keep it from touching 
the bricks - this prevents the walls from sweating.  In almost all of the rooms 
the plaster is covered with vinyl fabric, a strong, easily-cleaned wall surface 
finish.

Woodwork on the ground and second floors is teak and teak veneer.  Avodire 
doors and Agba wood jambs, architraves, skirtings (casings and baseboards) 
are in the basement toilets.  Not nails, but screws secure the wood trim to the 
wood grounds and backing.  They are installed in holes 1/4 to 3/8 of an inch 
deep, after which wooden plugs, called pellets, are glued in the holes and 
smoothly finished with the wood surface.  In many cases it is difficult to see 
the plug.  This method of blind finishing has almost become a lost art, even in 
Great Britain.

Some of the fine old methods of construction have been employed here, by 
superb craftsmen.  When a craftsman is good he delights in doing good work, 
and as a rule, the men who worked on the London Temple are satisfied with 
their accomplishment.  An indication that they like their work is this: most of 
the craftsmen who began the job were still there at the finish - this is 
exceptional in a time where there is a great turnover of labour on a building 
project.

The supervising architects were T.P. Bennett and Son, Chartered Architects - 
the firm’s principal, Sir Thomas Bennett, has taken a personal interest in the 
project.  Architect Morris L. Winslade directed the Bennett staff, assisted by 
Architects J.J.A. Cauhy and C.H. Mennie.  Gardiner and Theobald were 
commissioned as quantity surveyors, and were represented by H.R. Knight 
and R.A. Pink, who acted for the general contractors.  The contractors were 
Kirk and Kirk Ltd., under the direction of Mr. F.J. Edwards and Site Agent 
Frederick T. Rainbird.  The Church has been fortunate to procure the 
services of these concerns.  Mr. C.E. Kite has been a good Clerk of the 
Works for the Church.

The building of the London Temple recalls stories told about those two fine 
old temples, the Salt Lake and Manti Temples.  The great similarity between 
them is in workmanship, for they have been built by good craftsmen, who, 
though of different faiths in the case of the London Temple, have taken great 
interest in their work.  It has been my fortune to work on almost all of the 
temples in some way, and it is gratifying to say that the workmanship is as 
fine on the London Temple as on any other.