MS: Roger, firstly I'd like to ask you about why you decided to invite James and Tom to join Kerr Parker. What would you say the practice has gained from bringing them in?
RP: I’ve been operating Kerr Parker for over 40 years and have gained a great deal of working experience on listed buildings both within the Regent’s Park Estate and elsewhere. I was concerned that my practical knowledge and experience gained should be passed onto a younger generation of talented and meticulous architects.
I met James and Tom on a project where they were the architects and I provided heritage consultancy services. It was whilst working with these guys that it seemed an opportunity to combine forces – and so I invited them to join Kerr Parker. This would ensure that Kerr Parker thrived and continued in the future. It was evident that we shared the enthusiasm for architecture, listed buildings and quality design, and that we would complement each other in combining our talents.
MS: James and Tom, it’s clear that you both align with Roger’s founding ideas concerning a considerate approach to building – and ‘sensitivity’ has been a key part of the Kerr Parker philosophy since the beginning. Does this thinking manifest itself in your own approach as architects, would you say?
JD: Absolutely. Firstly, one must be sensitive to the clients’ vision and recognise what they would like to achieve out of the project. They’ve committed their time and finance to the scheme and one must always be conscious of their involvement and ideas. I see our role as listening carefully to clients and trying to guide them towards a solution that best meets their needs and yet retains the architectural integrity of a well thought through scheme.
TF: I think the sensitive approach that Francis and Roger have taken to their projects is a result of their curious mind set. At Kerr Parker we’re naturally curious, we’re desperate to know more and learn about the layers of history within our projects. As we deepen our understanding of the buildings we’re working on, we’re slowly able to discover the various levels of significance, the reasons those elements are there, or why they are configured in such a way.
JD: Francis and Roger built up the studio over many years of hard work, determination and exceptional knowledge around the Regent’s Park Estate. Having worked closely with Roger over the past five years, we’ve taken on significant understanding, but still have plenty more to absorb. Roger will remain chairman and will be at the helm of all our heritage-related projects. This duality, alongside our forward thinking and fresh approach to software, technical ability, design, process and materiality, should put us in
a unique position to offer a bespoke service like no other.
TF: We see ourselves more as custodians of both the great buildings Kerr Parker has worked on over the years, but also of the vast archive of work and knowledge held within the organisation. We want to help find a future for the wisdom, expertise and craft that is held within the business and would hope to pass the baton of the studio onto the next generation to continue the narrative indefinitely – these buildings will long out last both of us.
MS: Tom, you mentioned acknowledging the ‘layers
of history’ in your projects. What does the process of understanding a building in this way enable you to do?
TF: It helps us to discover later layers which are often masquerading as original historical elements, but that might not have been original to the period of the building. The interplay between what is original, what is principally part of the original fabric and what might be added on later – or covering up something which was originally intended to be open, for example – are some of the clues we use to take a sensitive approach and find a solution befitting the buildings we’re working within and shape the briefs we develop with our clients. Fortunately, we have the experience of Roger to draw on and guide us in this process.
RP: Tom has raised a very interesting and a fundamental point about layering and making valued judgements about what to reveal and what historic element should be exposed, repaired or left covered. It’s about making judgements based on experience and respecting the original intent and detailing.
I remember that once I worked on a Commonwealth-period farmhouse that was historically well documented. It dated from 1653 and was an example of the transition from timber frame to brick construction. The ground floor was constructed of soft red bricks, but the first floor was timber frame. However, all of this had been hidden by later generations who had layered and covered over the historic fabric of the building.
As soon as we started to strip off the pebble dash render, we discovered the underlying earlier historic fabric which lead to us stopping work and rethinking the proposals. Fortunately, we had a very good working relationship with the local authority and the conservation team at Essex County Council who were understanding and encouraging in our proposal to replan and rethink the scheme as more of the historic fabric was uncovered.
It was then all about further investigations, detective work and valued judgement about what should be revealed and what should remain covered by later work. We discovered angled mortice slots to a first floor wall plate on another elevation that occurred at set intervals of around 12 feet. From this we deduced that the property originally had three gables on what was the original display elevation and we were able to reform these as part of the replanning exercise.
At first floor level we discovered a central corridor that had been overlayed with Victorian lath and plaster. We uncovered wattle and daub panels hidden by the later plaster. Of great interest was the fact that we found a child’s footprints and finger marks that could only have been made at during original construction of 1653 when a mother was presumably carrying her child along the corridor and the child placed a foot and ran their fingers through the wet lime plaster.
MS: I’d like to ask you about ‘collaboration’ – and how important you feel this in your work?
JD: It’s paramount. These projects involve a collection of experts that understand this niche market. Over the years we thrive on the network of consultants that we’ve built up. Within the studio itself, the whole design team gets stuck into the ideation phase of a project. This friction of ideas being thrown around often creates the most interesting response.
TF: At Kerr Parker we don’t see design as the outcome of one person sitting alone in a dark room waiting for a moment of inspiration. Design of these projects is a collective process between the design team, the client, the makers/builders, the engineers and specialist consultants.[...]
RP: Yes, I agree with Tom and James – building up a team of consultants that one can trust for their knowledge and expertise is an essential part of the design process. Having, say, a structural engineer who is sympathetic to the historic fabric of a building and who, at the same time, is innovative in designing a support structure is essential.
MS: And sustainability is now a key factor within this?
TF: One of the biggest challenges in working on heritage architecture is the conflict between the desire as architects to refurbish buildings with sustainability at the forefront of our process. The natural reaction is often that sustainable refurbishment means improving the thermal efficiency of the
built fabric, using renewable energy sources and increasing air tightness, to name a few. These elements can often be at odds with a built fabric which is listed or of historic importance both externally and internally.
Therefore, we have to take a balanced approach, incorporating environmentally conscious design into our refurbishments, being sensitive to the carbon footprint of the materials and construction approach we’re using without jeopardising the heritage fabric.
MS: What are some of the challenges that come with working on listed buildings? What has proven to be the best way to navigate the process?
JD: Trying to design out the unknowns is always challenging, and inevitable on most of these complicated buildings. We have found the best way to minimise these risks is to get an experienced team communicating early on from a variety of specialisms, often bringing on contractors/suppliers early in the design process.
TF: Yes, there are many challenges that I’ve found working on historic buildings. Probably one of the first is helping a client to understand what they can and can’t do on these properties. As a home or building owner, it can be hard to hear that you can’t have your home exactly as you might have envisioned – that a statutory body is dictating how you can live in your home, for example.
However, this aspect is often short lived and how we like to approach our schemes at Kerr Parker is that we are embarking
on a journey of discovery together. This expedition, however, should be seen as it is – exciting. As we peel back the layers of history of these properties, there is so much to be discovered and experienced.
RP: Yes, one should always be adventurous in one’s thinking,
but never forget the aspirations of clients and the importance of their input and involvement as part of the design and decision-making process.
