Architect didn’t read Grenfell blaze risks

The lead architect on the Grenfell Tower refurbishment yesterday admitted he did not read key fire regulations during the project.

Bruce Sounes said he was unaware about concerns over using combustible cladding – despite accepting fire safety was ‘fundamental to the work of an architect’s practice’.

he told the public inquiry into the Grenfell tragedy no one at his firm did a compliance check on materials used in the refurbishment.

Asked whether he knew about the specific fire risks of the aluminium panels used on the block, he said: ‘No. I thought their melting temperature was quite high.’

The cladding has already been identified by the inquiry as one of the main reasons that the 2017 fire spread so quickly, claiming 72 lives.

Giving evidence yesterday, Mr Sounes said he did not know that the insulation used in the cladding system was required to be of limited combustibility to comply with tall building regulations.

he also said he had no knowledge of previous cladding fires on high rises in the UK or in Dubai.

Mr Sounes, an associate at Studio e Architects who was the initial project leader, admitted he had no professional experience in working on residential buildings.

And he said his only previous knowledge of the cladding products used on Grenfell was while studying to be an architect in South Africa.

It also emerged only one member of the Studio e team previously worked on high-rise residential buildings – and he was not a qualified architect.

Mr Sounes was shown a diagram of different building classifications relating to blocks over 18 metres. he was asked by Kate Grange QC, counsel to the inquiry: ‘Were you aware that there might be different rules that applied to buildings over 18 metres?’

he replied: ‘No. I was aware they may exist, but I did not refer to [the document] at the time.’

When asked whether he read Government guidelines on building and fire regulations, he said: ‘I referred to it on occasion but I certainly didn’t read it from start to finish.’

Mr Sounes was also shown a diagram of how fire can spread up the external cladding of a building.

When asked whether he saw a diagram like this during the Grenfell project, he said he had not.

he added: ‘We didn’t know there was any concerns regarding compliance [of the cladding].’

earlier Mr Sounes said he had expected another firm to be appointed to deal with cladding the tower because it was complex.

Once the refurbishment reached construction stage, he was replaced as day-to-day project leader by Neil Crawford – who was not a registered architect because he did not complete his final qualifications.

Mr Sounes said he and Andrzej Kuszell, the founder of the practice, decided to appoint Mr Crawford to the role because he had experience with high-rise buildings.

But the inquiry heard that this experience was limited to two previous projects.

Asked if he or colleagues considered hiring an architect with experience of cladding a high-rise block of flats for Grenfell, Mr Sounes replied he did not recall doing so.

Studio e was selected for the major overhaul without a competitive procurement process because it was already working on a new school and sports centre next door.

Mr Kuszell earlier conceded his team lacked experience in high-rise residential refurbishments.

The inquiry in Paddington, West London, continues.

‘Limited experience’