Why this theatre is my dream

I was working in America when the package arrived. Inside were a bundle of plans, an illustrated brochure and a letter from an old friend, the radio DJ David Jacobs. Would I help with the new Kingston Theatre, details attached? My heart sank. Did we really need another theatre in Greater London? It would doubtless be a compromise, unsure whether it was to be a contemporary stage or an old-fashioned proscenium convenient for pre-London tours. Then I opened the brochure and was flabbergasted.

This was no ordinary theatre: it was a blindingly original design. Yet it reminded me of something very old. I realised that it had taken the ground plan of England's first known theatre - The Rose, where Shakespeare's plays were performed - and built on it an elegant, modern building with roof and foyers. I couldn't believe the audacity of the vision.

It appeared that Kingston Theatre had been dreamt of for many years and that the first phase was nearly complete - the shell of the building was roofed, but unfinished inside. The design had been agreed by a group of local trustees and executed by a planning-gain agreement (worth some £5 million) between the developers of a neighbouring block of luxury flats, St George plc, and the Royal Borough of Kingston.

The local authority had seen the theatre as something central to the future of Kingston. "It ranks alongside the creation of the university," they wrote, "and the development of the flagship shopping centres in the early Nineties, both of which have made the borough a major destination and an attractive location."

As soon as I was home, I went to Kingston. What I saw stunned me. It has had exactly the same effect on the grand parade of theatre people that I have led through it in the past few months. Trevor Nunn stood centre stage and took a very, very long pause. "This is the acting space I have been waiting for all my life," he announced. So did many others.

So what is so special about our new theatre? What does it bring to the London scene? Well, it holds 1,000 people in unbelievable intimacy - the actor feels in complete contact with his audience. Four Kingston theatres could fit easily inside the huge Olivier. Yet the Olivier holds only about 150 more people.

Rose of Kingston (the theatre's name) is intimate, yet epic; a place for private scenes or surging battles. It has the mandatory requirement for Shakespeare: it is large enough for the actor to open his lungs fully, yet small enough to allow him to whisper. Above all, it is a place for the audience's imagination.

THE future of the theatre is not about naturalism - putting real things in huge spaces - the cinema can do that much better. Theatre demands imagining. A good actor with a good text on this stage can make the audience believe they are anywhere. Any play - modern, Ancient Greek, Shakespeare or Pinter - will be at home at Kingston. I couldn't wait to work there.

But it is not finished. The shell of the building is there and it is possible to play in the half-completed auditorium. Indeed, in December, my company is performing As You Like It for three weeks before taking the production to New York. It will be Shakespeare in the raw and in a building site (though well-heated).

But we still need to find £6 million to complete and decorate the auditorium. Rose of Kingston, when finished, will be incredible value for money - a 1,000-seat building for a total cost of £11 million. Each seat will have cost approximately £9,000. Compare this with £48,000 per seat at the new Hampstead Theatre or £26,000 at Manchester's Royal Exchange. The Kingstonians have been very economical.