AT talks to… Becca Thomas from New Practice about joining forces with multidisciplinary studio, Civic, and working at the intersection of architecture, sustainability and community engagement.
Photograph by Christina Kernohan.
Tell us about the origins of New Practice.
Marc (Cairns) and I started New Practice in 2011, straight out of university. At the time, there were limited job opportunities due to the recession. We began by experimenting, trying things out, and gradually realised that we had something sustainable. Much of the process was learned on the go, figuring things out by trial and error. After about eight years, we realized that we had reached a point where self-teaching was no longer enough. We needed professional development and more structured business practices. Through conversations with experienced professionals, we explored different growth strategies. Eventually, we entered discussions with Civic, an engineering firm that shared our values and vision, leading to them acquiring a majority share in our company, New Practice.
What does the acquisition by Civic mean for New Practice?
New Practice remains an autonomous company within the Civic team structure. While Civic is the parent company, we still operate independently, focusing on urban-scale projects, social value, community engagement, and strategic thinking. This interdisciplinary collaboration allows us to merge our expertise in architecture and community planning with Civic’s engineering and sustainability work.
What does this “interdisciplinary collaboration” look like?
We’ve been discussing what true interdisciplinary work means. Many claim to be interdisciplinary, but real collaboration requires structured communication across disciplines. We aim to think systematically – considering urban planning as a holistic system rather than isolated parts. We believe in ‘systems thinking,’ where all elements of urban design – transportation, green spaces, water management, and social infrastructure – are interconnected.
Kinning Park, Glasgow. Retrofitting the building was not just about maintaining its physical structure but about preserving the narratives and connections that make it meaningful to the communities it serves. Photograph by Will Scott.
How does social sustainability fit into your approach to urban design?
Social sustainability is often overlooked in urban planning. It’s easy to quantify environmental impact or economic benefits, but measuring social and cultural capital is much harder. For instance, a well-designed space must be more than just sustainable in terms of materials – it must serve the people who use it. If a building doesn’t meet the needs of its community, no amount of green design can make it successful. Retrofitting, rather than demolition and rebuilding, is one way we ensure continuity in communities, preserving structures that hold historical and emotional significance.
Can you give an example of a project where social sustainability was a key focus?
Kinning Park in Glasgow is a great example. It’s more than just a building – it’s a space full of stories. From serving as a refuge for immigrants to being the site of community activism, it holds deep social and cultural value. Retrofitting the building was not just about maintaining its physical structure but about preserving the narratives and connections that make it meaningful to people. These human aspects of sustainability are just as vital as material sustainability.
What challenges arise when balancing different community needs in urban projects?
Urban projects often involve conflicting interests. For example, there is a significant tension between cycling infrastructure and accessibility for visually impaired pedestrians. Cyclists want safe, dedicated lanes, while visually impaired individuals rely on consistent curb placements for navigation. It’s our responsibility as designers to mitigate these conflicts while ensuring transparency about trade-offs. True public space planning is about compromise and ensuring the best possible outcome for the majority.
Designers have a responsibility to navigate the conflicting interests that often beset urban projects, such as the tension between cycling infrastructure and accessibility for visually impaired pedestrians.
So what’s your take on consensus-building in urban planning?
True consensus is almost impossible in a city. Every individual has their own perspective, shaped by personal experiences. Even within specific communities – such as heritage preservation experts – opinions vary widely. The best we can do is engage in open dialogue, ensuring that as many voices as possible are heard and clearly communicated. Cities thrive on diversity, and disagreement is a natural part of that.
How do you approach post-occupancy evaluation when assessing the social sustainability of a project?
Traditional architectural narratives focus on the design process, but the true success of a project can only be judged after people start using it. We engage in long-term evaluations by revisiting projects and observing how they function in real life. Often, even the best designed elements don’t work as planned, and that’s okay – it’s about learning and adapting. Humility is essential in architecture; no design is perfect, and understanding that allows for continuous improvement.
How does Glasgow compare to other places in terms of openness to change?
Scotland and Wales, in general, are more open to innovation, partly due to their smaller size and closer connections to policymakers. In Scotland, we have better access to government decision-makers, which makes it easier to drive policy changes. This has led to more proactive discussions on sustainability, urban planning, and interdisciplinary collaboration.
What’s next for you and New Practice?
We’re continuing our work at the intersection of architecture, community engagement, and sustainability. Our integration with Civic allows us to work on larger projects while maintaining our core values. We want to keep exploring how urban spaces can be designed to reflect and serve the people who use them. Ultimately, our goal is to create cities that are not only environmentally sustainable but also socially and culturally resilient.
Every individual has their own perspective, shaped by personal experiences. The best we can do is engage in open dialogue, ensuring that as many voices as possible are heard and clearly communicated. Cities thrive on diversity, and disagreement is a natural part of that. Photograph by Will Scott.
