Grow Places

GP 50: How to Turn Big Ideas into Better Places: Architecture and Impact with Kai-Uwe Bergmann of BIG

• Grow Places

Share episode

In this milestone 50th episode of the Grow Places Podcast, host Tom Larsson sits down with renowned architect Kai-Uwe Bergmann, Partner at BIG, to explore the interplay between design, place-making, and global urban transformation.

Recorded at BIG’s London studio, this episode dives into:

  • The evolution of BIG’s London office and its roots in the Google King’s Cross and Serpentine Pavilion projects
  • BIG’s philosophy of context-driven design, balancing global thinking with local relevance
  • Powerful case studies like CopenHill (a power plant-turned-urban ski slope in Copenhagen) and The BIG U (a visionary climate resilience project for Manhattan)
  • Insights on the architect's role as storyteller, collaborator, and midwife to ideas
  • How diverse, inclusive engagement shapes better built environments—from Bhutan to New York

Whether you're in architecture, development, or just fascinated by how cities evolve, this episode offers compelling insights on how bold ideas and thoughtful design can shape the future of our urban world.

SPEAKER_00:

Hello and welcome to the Grow Places Podcast, where we explore the virtuous circle of people, growth, and place. Brought to you by Grow Places and hosted by our founder, Tom Larson.

SPEAKER_01:

Kai, thank you very much for joining me today on the Grow Places Podcast, episode 50. Um, so I'm really um honoured to have you on for this special episode.

SPEAKER_02:

Uh thank you, Tom, and uh congratulations on reaching five zero.

SPEAKER_01:

Thank you. Yeah, no, I think the average is one to two episodes for most podcasts last before they um uh they give up. But so yeah, we've really stuck at it. But we're really enjoying it and getting a huge amount from it, and I'm sure everyone will get a huge amount from this conversation as well. Um, so let you introduce yourself in a second, but just in order to frame that, you know, that we're sat here in Biggs London studio, um, fascinating array of projects surrounding us, and um it'd be great uh to also hear about kind of what you think maybe ties those projects together um from your personal perspective and and also from from the businesses when you introduce yourself.

SPEAKER_02:

Sure. So um, I mean, we have been physically, or let's say, have the office since 2000 and uh around 14, I think is when we so 11 years old. Uh, and it of course is and gave it was given birth by actually working on the Google King's Cross project. Um, and so it was uh maybe, you know, never considered or to be thought of as an office. We were actually located next to the project in a in a project office where BDP, Heatherwick, and ourselves were all uh working. And um, and then though over the course of like the next two years where the project took shape uh in King's Cross, um we ended up getting the Serpentine Pavilion. And that was 2016. So now almost a decade ago. Um, and that was the I would say the seed in many ways. And it should be said that um that when you get the serpentine as a a foreign architect, you are not to have a built project in all of the UK. So um, you know, I don't I don't know if that was the the decision making that happened in order for us to to pick it up. But it certainly was this um moment for big to reflect on being here. Um and um by that time we did uh pick up a couple of other projects. And now, you know, all that this time later, um, we have about 200 people working here in the London office. So it's it it really is, I think, a very firm footing of uh Björker Ingalls group globally. And um, it enriches uh our other practices because the types of projects are very, very different that we have here.

SPEAKER_01:

Yeah, no, it's fascinating. And then I remember going to the certain time well, and and to that point of kind of your overarching design sort of thesis, I've always thought that was quite a pure example in some senses of of the kind of the the initial big kind of principle of of modularity and and um form and other things. So would you would you say that that's fair in terms of your yes?

SPEAKER_02:

I think um it's both simple, diagrammatic, but also complex. And I think that that is very much at the core of many projects. So Björka said at the time it's a wall that turns into a hall. And that way of sort of unzipping those pre-fab elements. Um, and then again, it's like a prefab element fiber line that had not yet really found its full kind of like potential. And so we used the project as well to kind of show its structural capabilities uh by creating a brick that was not the brick, it was the frame, and then pulling that frame apart. So it's investigative about a material, it's uh trying to do something structurally that's quite uh kind of ambitious, and uh and then it's like still making a reference to sort of all the beautiful brick architecture that is around with the old serpentine hall there as well. So I I I do think it actually encapsulates a lot of different different things.

SPEAKER_01:

Yeah, yeah, amazing. And and you've you've touched on there the um the approach to whether that's serpent time brick or other things about sort of local sort of references as well as um as well as the kind of core concepts to to that project, um, which I think are fascinating. Um and you know, us as a thoughtful regeneration company at Grow Places, we we try to promote this idea of place growth and this idea that places can change, develop, and they they should. And that should be um both aspirational and and optimistic, but it should be done in a way that is local and is contextual and is rooted in the place and and so that that places and and developments have that sort of authenticity to the to the neighborhood and the people who are there. And so so there's something I've always admired actually about the work that you guys do. Clearly, you are an international business, but with with projects in in different places all over the world, but but um there does feel like a consistency of hand, but also there feels like a kind of rooting of those projects. And um I don't know if you wanted to kind of add anything to that or or do you agree with with that?

SPEAKER_02:

Well, I think um Bjarke, when he set off from OMA, um, he was working on a library in Seattle, Washington. And uh Seattle is a place that I was living when OMA, when Rem came in and started uh or wanted to create a kind of central library, uh, which would have become and is uh one of the biggest public amenities in the city. And what what what is hugely unique about Seattle was just that it's the place that has the highest book readership in the United States. It has uh you know, Amazon, it started as a bookstore, and it it is because of the population there. Um and so you took something that was so local to and and very qualitative to the to the to the people. And when Bjarchus started, you know, setting up his own idea of what you know he wanted to do, I think the built the the way that we start a project is by immersing ourselves into that location to really understand that culture. And in the same way that I feel um OMA is is highly pragmatic and highly, you know, um academic in certain aspects of its research, and that they become drivers within the concept, that translated over to our process. And so we really do dig in. And um, maybe a project of today that emulates this is Bhutan, where you know, we've now worked for close to three years. Very, very immersive. Um, there are so many trips that the teams are taking and um and living there. Um, we've even committed to opening an office there, working with the local community. Um and I think it's that commitment that then translates into the concepts that we produce.

SPEAKER_01:

Yeah, it's interesting you mentioned the Bhutan example because um Christian Reese was uh previous guest of Mine on the Podcast and you know, Christian um volcano. Yes, exactly. Yeah, yeah. And and and his whole kind of um ethos and business really is around that, isn't it? Is kind of sort of how do you use means that aren't architectural? In his case, it's kind of music and culture as a way to kind of understand people and networks and how can that enrich um briefs and projects. And so yeah, he he on this podcast talked a little bit about that.

SPEAKER_02:

I see a lot of parallels actually with career places. Yeah. I don't know if you would.

SPEAKER_01:

Yeah, yeah. Well, we know yeah, we've known each other well for I wasn't a rock star by background. That's my only difference between myself and him. But um, but yeah, for us, we're really like interested in that kind of brief aspect, like kind of say the awesome wrong questions, then no, but it all starts with the brief.

SPEAKER_02:

Yeah, and you can when you think back on your best projects, right? It goes back to the best briefs, which again goes back to maybe the best clients that are preparing those briefs. Um for clarity's sake, for like uh minutiae's sake, but um I I do think that that's a like a major kind of piece of success in a project.

SPEAKER_01:

And then how how how do you see that? Because uh because uh sometimes a a brief will have a lot of kind of uh vision in it, it'll be quite aspirational. But other times you may look at a brief and and think, okay, well, there's a kind of um there there's more we can do here. And and and I think the role of the architect is to to kind of to do that and to to to to positively test the brief and other things. And I think about you know, the work that you've done at obviously the the obvious examples may be Copenhill, or it's like you know, the work that you've done in in New York with the the dry line or other things where you're where you're really probably, I would imagine, uh sort of testing that brief and working with that to see, okay, well, how can we sort of make more of this project for for people of a place than the the kind of the the the nature of the brief may suggest?

SPEAKER_02:

Yeah, Björkit has in the past often likened the architect and what we do, the role that we play as a midwife. Right. Uh and that we're helping uh basically the process of birthing the idea or birthing the the very uh essence of a project. And so actually Copenhill is a really great example of that because in that the brief stated that um there are energy plants. Energy plants are typically ugly and utilitarian. Uh, they're also shielded and off limits. And the brief stated, let us create the most beautiful power plant that is an amenity to the city. And that that can be interpreted in many, many different ways. But what we understood that to mean is how can you take something that is typically, you know, billions of pounds or, you know, hundreds of millions of pounds of investment to get built everywhere. We use them every single day. We're dependent on them and um allow them to reveal themselves and provide more service. So that that same investment could also become an educational tool for kids, you know, in schools to go and tour and learn about waste to energy and perhaps to make less waste. Because ideally, where we should go as a society is to put that waste to energy plan out of business. If we can create a circular kind of uh future, then there is no waste to incinerate, right? We would rather have recycling plants. Um, and that's also the future, I think, that we saw. This was like a stepping stone to reach that future. But this this plant, the the Copenhill that you're referring to, is allowing Copenhagen to actually become one of the first net zero cities on the planet because again, it's finding ways to uh create energy through renewable resources, not fossil fuels. And um, so what we how we interpreted that brief was how can we not only wrap the um the the innards and the inner workings of a power plant with a beautiful facade? It was how can that facade help facilitate and give something back, a gift to the community? And that became the ski slope and the climbing wall and the a pre ski bar that's up on top. So no matter if you ski or you climb or you just love drinking, this is a place for you to go. And um, and I think that's opened Copenhageners' minds as to what else could be uh an amenity for the city.

SPEAKER_01:

Yeah, no, absolutely. And um I listened to uh Bianca talk about it once before, and he it was almost in in one sense, was a very kind of simple idea was that that Danes love to ski and there's nowhere to ski in Copenhagen. Yeah. So so so you I again another thing I observed from your work is that there are often quite big ideas, quite kind of easy to understand um human ideas that aren't you don't have to be a developer or a built environment professional to kind of learn the nuances of, and then there's the kind of layers within that, isn't there, about like some of the stuff you just described there. So um maybe I'd be really curious in terms of your process, like how how do you how do you see that kind of um on a project when it comes forward like that sort of that big idea with kind of um you know the layers to that?

SPEAKER_02:

Yeah. So it is maybe an iterative process. It's not it doesn't just come clearly onto your desk and this is it. I think you have to really um work through, and that's where the hours are spent. But in the case of Copenhill, uh what's interesting is that Danes do love to ski, and because of that, they have a ski federation. And the ski federation is always organizing uh trips to either northern Sweden or to the Swiss Alps. Now imagine that you're sort of filling busloads of skiers in Copenhagen, driving eight to 12 hours, uh, going skiing for a couple of days and then driving that same way back. And if you would do the energy calculation, right, the CO2 calculation of just taking those folks who love to ski into uh into these like faraway places, it it really doesn't make sense. And um and if you could actually provide a place of recreation and of you know, providing a place where you can get that out of your system and you enjoy uh doing it, you've just cut that entire sort of travel distance. You've you've actually raised the quality of life for you know a group of people. And I think that is a driver. And so when you start looking at what can a project give, how could it actually raise the quality of life uh for its inhabitants, users, for neighbors? Um that is what drives, I think, a lot of the decision making. And I'll use one other example, uh, the VIA project in New York, which is this pyramid-shaped uh building where um the client was building in front of one of their other towers that they had built previously. And every concept that they had seen was taking the views away from the previous tower. They had not yet come up with a scheme that would preserve the views. So if we then looked at that scheme and we were looking at and considering two or three towers, and it was very hard to position them in any sort of way, but when we came up with the uh with the shape and we pushed the development over to the side and it grew from a base, the court scraper, to a point, um, we managed to get the same density in FAR, uh, but we preserved like 75-80% of the views from the from the building behind. That raises the quality of life for those folks, and it maintains the value of that development from five years before. So um that again is the the generation of that concept did not happen the first week. It happened several weeks later, and we had to go through that process to get to get there.

SPEAKER_01:

Yeah, no, and I think um that kind of notion of value in its broadest sense, um, and how you um how you can tell stories really for different audiences, whether that's a story to a financier or to a local government or to um a local community. Um and so how how do you see that that um that the way that you can tell stories to to engage people across the process and and the kind of importance of that with some of these these projects where you are trying to do something new or something that feels a little bit outside the box?

SPEAKER_02:

Yeah, I like to actually that question has come up uh before, and I like to use the example of uh Björka's uh first office was named Plot before Big. With Dan from uh with uh Dan was uh from Kobe was there, uh Julian DeSmidt. Yeah and um what's interesting about the choice of name is that uh a plot can be a plot of land. Uh at the time, you have to go back, you we used to plot drawings, yeah, and so you plot a drawing, but I think Björke and Julian also thought about the plot, the narrative. And if you start to like pull all those three things together, you have a site, you make some drawings and visions, and you tell the story and the narrative, that that's what actually creates architecture. And um, and I think that that that narrative and also emphasis on um allowing people to come along for the ride, um, helping communities and municipalities envision the future, um, that's been something at the core of our process.

SPEAKER_01:

Yeah, because it's because it's super important, isn't it? Not just to making projects happen, but I think as a as societies around the world, you know, we've got some really big challenges, whether it's environmental challenges or um housing or affordability or some of these other big themes at the moment. And we people people really um respond well to good stories, don't they, that are a motive that kind of um tap into something that is is maybe felt within a population. And and so I think the role that as an architect or as a developer, frankly, for that matter, is is is hugely around that. You know, that's part of the reason why we have this platform is to kind of allow people to tell stories and to to share ideas in a way that that isn't always um easily captured or understood. So so so the day to day maybe on your big projects, whether it's a process or whether it's uh different to each project, but but yeah, how how how do you really go about bringing people on that journey, telling those stories, um and engaging in people to to rialize things that really are quite um unique?

SPEAKER_02:

Yeah, I mean, I think initially you can begin with the story and the vision. Um over time though, it does become important that you can execute upon those visions and that you actually realize the full story or portions of the story. Um and so I think it's a combination of crafting those, uh, but then also how do you actually execute? And um I I think that that's always um the hardest part about what we do is, you know, and this is where it's sort of NIMDYism comes in, uh, there's so much resistance, there's so much friction, you know, whether it's uh communities' perceptions about things um, or whether it's the financial turmoils of ups and downs of the markets, uh, whether a pandemic suddenly comes out of nowhere, there's a lot of friction in realizing the the very sort of projects that we are a part of and how to navigate that. Um, how to um I always speak about sort of uh political time that you know you create something like the big U. There was Mayor Bloomberg, and uh we started under his administration. We've now moved through two further administrations, and then we probably will have two to three, you know, future administrations to actually provide a vision for that then is executed. And how does how do those four, five, six administrations actually um, how can they buy into uh that vision of a 10 mile long kind of um flood management system? Um so I think uh you need different skill sets and you need people who are very concerned and and lovingly looking at the detail and the and the construction, and then others that can really navigate that um that planning um kind of uh environment and and how to move with the different flows. Um so the Big U is a project I'm personally involved in. It's one that I've been there since its inception. I even was working in our office building when it flooded and uh everything went black in uh in lower Manhattan. So uh I was personally affected and therefore personally engaged and interested in trying to solve the issues that global warming and sea level rise uh are going to have, which affects every single coastline.

SPEAKER_01:

Yeah, no, I think it's an incredible project that and and the way that you've managed to take something that is is really pragmatic and infrastructural and critical. You know, how how do we stop Manhattan from flooding? You know, it couldn't get more critical than that, but you've you've managed to do it in a way that is is very human and is is very much about kind of reframing everyday life to improve quality of life, you could say, you know, through the spaces that you're creating and that that um that experience of daily life along the new the new um infrastructure. So so was that something very much intentional from the start? Or was and and and and did you have to did you have to take people on that journey? Because I I can imagine it would have been maybe you know, maybe sort of cheaper and easier to just say, well, we'll just build a wall, but it wouldn't have had any of the the joy and the kind of longevity that comes from that. So did you did you find you had to kind of bring people along on that journey with you?

SPEAKER_02:

Well, the the wall actually got built not in New York, but in uh New Orleans, which had had uh Hurricane Katrina that flooded uh the fourth ward, um the seventh ward, I think. And uh so the Corps of Engineers came into New Orleans and uh just uh built a wall and uh the ninth ward and uh and built a wall. And you know, you spent again billions of dollars. And now every single day, if you have a house, you're looking at that dumb gray wall. And it's only gonna really perform its function, you know, 0.0001% of the time that it's actually there. Um and we couldn't imagine that New York would allow that or would want that. So, how could we build a wall that would prevent the city to flood? Because again, 200,000 people were homeless for extended periods of time after Sandy and make that investment something that the people would enjoy and have use of every single day. And so this idea of the park and creating kind of a playful berm uh is what allowed us to navigate. Now, what the the complexity of New York is that you have a lot of different landowners, um, both public and private, uh, some with little snippets of uh coastline, others with uh, you know, hundreds of yards of coastline. And so you have to bring everybody along. It's a it's a collective decision. Um and and that is uh in in some ways a very un-American kind of approach where individualism and you know, I can do this uh is stronger. Um so I I do think that it was a kind of European uh collaboration. So we had some Dutch uh water engineers, we have Dutch architects and planners ourselves from Denmark. You know, we have a hundreds and hundreds of islands and and therefore a lot of uh coastline that that we've worked with. And that together was able to help the New Yorkers find a way to navigate the NIMBYism against doing something collective. And now with the first parks actually opening up after a very long construction period, um, we're just seeing how the communities are engaging with a waterfront that for for you know decades was just like cut off.

SPEAKER_01:

Yeah, yeah. And I think it's amazing. And and obviously like what it will have done to the to the real estate and to the to the values and other things along that waterfront is is compared to building a wall, is you know, is obviously transformational. And um and and so so how do you see obviously your privileged to work in amazing places around the world and places like London, where I know working with Andy and the team here, you know, you are working very much embedded in cities, in cultures, um, the planning system, you know, the the the zoning system of that place. And then I imagine going to work in um other parts of the world that maybe maybe the Middle East or maybe parts of Asia or or other places that have a real sort of drive and dynamism and and and are growing really fast. And and so so how do you see the kind of culturally working in those different places? Um, some of those things we've we've talked about today. Um and I'm sure there's kind of pros and cons of of of each environment, really.

SPEAKER_02:

Yeah, yeah. And actually it it's wonderful uh that you you also name Andy Young. Um, and and in some ways, the the the the true leadership here in London, personified by Andreas, uh Andy, Henrietta, Alexandru, Lorenzo, Bodhi, they in so many ways reflect the kind of cultural dynamism because Lorenzo is working on one of the largest uh and most complex projects in Milano called City Wave. Um you have Alexandru, who's designing these master plans in the Middle East uh on some projects that we have going in um in Saudi Arabia and elsewhere. And then, you know, Andreas is almost flying back and forth between uh the Emirates and London, uh, working at a speed that is hardly uh possible in any other sort of jurisdiction. Uh and then Andy is sort of entrenched in the planning processes uh along the Thames and uh on Fleet Street and you know uh through other sort of areas of sort of historic London. So they do move at different speeds, um, and you have to sort of adapt. Um but the actual process and what is required is very similar. And so you the adaption is is is just in how quickly do you research, how quickly do you uh conceptualize. And what I often use is this idea of sort of measuring twice, cutting once, or measuring once, cutting twice. So even though things move faster in other locations, it actually means that some of the design decisions actually move into construction. And you're you're you're just making decisions later. And they may be more costly, right? Or they they would be. Uh and where you have actually a uh culture of more planning and making certain approvals earlier, uh, you are measuring twice and cutting once. And and so it it it it really is just finding that balance in whatever environment and municipal kind of uh under what guidelines you're working in.

SPEAKER_01:

Yeah, no, that's a really good, really good analogy. And um, you know, we were talking off mic, weren't we, about um previous episode we've done with Pip Simpson from The Barbican. Yeah, and how that as a in the London context is this kind of exemplar of utopian planning from the the 60s and how um it that that period in in UK terms was just full of uh energy, full of optimism and and full of ambition and and scale. Um and and then you know you move a few generations on and and um you see those projects in in in light for good and for maybe some of the the the failings of those projects well, like anything. So so how do you how do you as a business kind of see that kind of um framing that optimism and and the learnings from other places? And how does that then affect your work in when you really are sort of designing cities or pieces of cities um on the larger scale?

SPEAKER_02:

I think you used a really important word right there, framing. Um if one thinks of Barbican as a framework and that sort of adapts to the times, um, then any generation that comes through the Barbican can kind of remap, you know, reprogram. Um it it is that sort of uh you know flexible sort of uh space. And it's just very well proportioned. It has this lovely inside-outside kind of quality. Um and any and every time I've gone there, I've just come away with um that that I've had a great time, whether visiting a flat or uh going for a movie or or a program. Um and I think when one thinks about uh designing, then the idea that you can create sort of a flexible framework is also interesting. And the reasons that you know warehouses, old warehouses or old industrial buildings do so well is that they're sized for anything. And so you can, you know, use a warehouse building with very large windows, uh, you get ample daylight, and you can put in a mezzanine or some floors, um, and it creates really, really interesting sort of lifestyles. Um, that's kind of, I think, um when we uh go into something, we we uh design something that is let's say a portrait of the client and the brief. And we also consider what that you know brief might be like in 50 years or 100 years, and uh and what the futures are of that. So I like to think of it as um as just uh creating frameworks.

SPEAKER_01:

Yeah, and then and then with those those frameworks, you know, you as as a as a business, I'm sure you work you work with so many different varied client types from uh you know, lights ourselves who are kind of you know professional um developers and regeneration companies through to uh big corporates like Google and and I'm sure sort of um and everything in between, yeah, affordable housing. Yeah, yeah, exactly. And the full spectrum, you're probably um very fortunate to work with probably one of the broader spectrums of client types I would have thought um out there. And and um so so so how do you how do you see that, the role of the client or the kind of the the relationship between the architect and the client? And um and do you think um yeah, are there any things that we can we can we can learn from from how people client? Do any examples come to mind?

SPEAKER_02:

Um well I've now used portraiture portraiture as a means of describing the relationship, and I've also used midwife. Those are two very different kind of uh ends of the spectrum. I I think uh that it's it's it's a little bit in part listening to what the client wants, and it's then uh using your experience, uh your skills to uh craft versions of that vision. Um and they there are also clients who don't necessarily know what they want, and they come to you very honestly, sort of saying, the reason I'm here is because I need you to kind of help me uh visualize or formalize what it is. And um so that's a little bit of detective work as well. Um but by by working at many different ends of the spectrum, um, whether for profit, non-profit, um, you know, whether a single person or a corporation, uh you are still you need to bring it in a way down to a human level. And you know, even though there's Google, let's say, Google is still a relationship in a way between Larry, uh Paige, Bjarke, and Thomas. And the three of them met, I would say, you know, a couple times a month, like face to face. And they would like discuss what it is that Google was to be. And when you you asked the question of like why two architects wasn't one enough, um they went through a process of architectural selection where they had actually chosen three sort of individual architects before we were appointed with Thomas. And um, and the way that uh I think uh Larry tells it is that when the when they were talking to the individual architects previously, the the ego of the architect of here's what I would do for you, uh came out too strongly because the engineering side of Google is that when there is a challenge, you literally throw 10 engineers into a room and collectively they come up with a solution. And so in their world, they saw the power of the many versus the power of the one. And so they realized after three false starts that they wanted to try out the uh ability for two architects to work together. And that's, I think, again, we learned so much about ourselves in that process. And I think it's also benefited both Hedderwick and ourselves and just how we work uh both internally and and collaborate with one another and others. Um and and I don't want to miss out on BDP also working on the King's Cross or Adamson also working on uh Mountain View. So there's a lot of voices, and I think that is uh a lesson too for us, because so often we're just talking about one vision, right, uh being created. But uh it's uh so often a kind of collective um that you have to uh navigate.

SPEAKER_01:

Yeah, no, no, absolutely. And um that that sort of uh range of voices involved in the projects, uh something that we're really passionate about and keen on is trying to continually broaden that out um more and more from as you mentioned, whether it's different design voices or whether it's the broader design team or whether it's um sociologists, anthropologists, uh and then out to to members of the community, members of the business community. Um and we think over time, you know, with um with that as a kind of um mission, we think, you know, through the use of technology and use of um communication and in-person as well as as digital, we can hopefully get more and more voices into the process of development and make it um more and more interesting as a result. Um so I don't know if you've got any any good examples, other examples from from where those voices have kind of come in and maybe maybe um influenced what you've done or the project in a positive way, um, from from maybe outside the traditional built environment voices.

SPEAKER_02:

Yeah, it I mean I would maybe answer that in that coming to London and opening up uh the office here um is of course you are entering also a um a a whole sort of society of designers, architects that are contributing, both those who have contributed historically, and you're looking at the buildings and and interacting with them, but also contemporaries like uh I'm thinking of uh Joe Morris, uh Phil Kofi, Allison Brooks. Um I think that it's it's a continual kind of informing of uh one another. Uh and um the work that you see happening also inspires and starts to affect your own. Um, and again, that's why I think that there's this incredible adapting adaptation of um that that the big here in London um is in some ways different than big in New York or big in Copenhagen. There are elements and kind of a DNA that is the same, but it is also adaptive. And I and that's where I think the local community of of designers, the the regulatory kind of environment has a big influence on on the work.

SPEAKER_01:

Yeah. And are you are you doing any projects that are kind of co-designed with um local groups or with uh I guess maybe like the big U would be a good example of that. I'm sure there was a huge amount of kind of stakeholder engagement that went into that with local, local people, local groups.

SPEAKER_02:

Absolutely. So, you know, it is a uh it takes a village type of project. So in the case of the big U, we're talking about probably 20 plus collaborators from a hydrologist uh engineer to uh ecologist that's looking at the uh kind of uh the ecosystem that that is just under the water or up on the wetlands. It had to be translated into about five languages while the meeting was happening in real time. Plus, there were people on radios and television sets that were tuning in to the to the meeting as well. So to be, and then this is a of course New York. So you have this as the project moves through, like the Lower East Side and Chinatown and into financial district, um, you're touching a lot of different perspectives. And um, you know, they they have different needs and wants. So by engaging linguistically and generationally, um, you're you're feeding that back into the project. So there's so much engagement. Um another project that is of that uh that that grew out of public engagement is the Super Keelan project in Copenhagen, where um I would say we're we were less architects and designers and more like curators of public um participation. And the public presented objects, uh like furniture, landscape, um, and bus stops and and so forth. So by them coming up with all of these different suggestions, we were more like just placing them within the site and finding the right way of using all of the all of the suggestions that were coming up. And and I think being able to adapt to that those different ways of being an architect. Sometimes you're just a a meeting facilitator, you know, and you're just listening, uh, and then you're prioritizing maybe the brief for the city um of of all those different needs. Other times you are that curator, and at other times you are the voice of a specific uh vision.

SPEAKER_01:

Yeah, amazing. And Kyla, maybe sort of stepping back from from this then, for you for you personally kind of, you know, committing your time to to this work, um, what what kind of gets you out of bed in the morning? Why do you enjoy doing what you do so much?

SPEAKER_02:

Uh that no two days are the same. And uh it's you know, been with Big now close to 20 years. Um and I I have never had a day that started or ended the same. And it's uh it's a real privilege um to be sort of uh, you know, it it's a it's a lot of hard work, and then the outcome of that is something that's quite tangible, which is that um people want to engage, uh people also seek out that engagement or seek you out, and then it's uh finding ways to uh to use design thinking uh in the most productive way. Um and and architecture encapsulates uh you know archaeology, history, um sociology, and uh the arts. And that that ability to to sort of really cross uh a large part of human thinking is uh what makes I think architecture such a such an incredible uh choice.

SPEAKER_01:

Awesome. Kai, thank you so much for joining me today. It's been a fascinating conversation, and um sure everyone's really enjoyed it. Thank you for being our number 50. Thanks, Tom.

SPEAKER_00:

Thank you for listening to the Grow Places podcast. For more information, visit growplaces.com and follow us at We Grow Places across all social channels. See you next time.