Search

Search

ACTIU Berbegal y Formas, S.A.
Blog / Inspiration / A Conversation with Hugo Berenguer About Architecture
A Conversation with Hugo Berenguer About Architecture

A Conversation with Hugo Berenguer About Architecture

SEPTEMBER 2026
·
11 minutes
·

Hugo Berenguer is CEO and a partner at Rafael de La-Hoz Arquitectos, one of the leading firms in contemporary Spanish architecture. Drawing on a practice deeply rooted in Spanish architectural culture, he has championed a vision that integrates tradition, innovation, sustainability, and strategy, viewing architecture as an exercise in cultural responsibility and forward-thinking.

Actiu’s connection with Rafael de La-Hoz’s architecture firm is long-standing and extensive. It began with Vicent Berbegal’s admiration for the architect, his work, and his talent. The new Actiu RED space in Madrid shares a building with the firm—a long-held dream of Actiu’s founder, who is a great admirer of the architect. As both brands have evolved, the firm and the company have come to share many values—from the importance of deep roots and the history of places to respect for materials and care for people—whether through architecture or furniture design. With Hugo, we reflected on respecting the memory of places, the importance of their identity, and the ability to envision new ways of living, working, and interacting.

Actiu Red Project, Madrid
Actiu Red Project, Madrid
Projects such as Lagasca 99 in Madrid, which houses ACTIU RED, and the renovation of the Betis stadium in Seville exemplify this approach, which explores the city’s history and material culture to translate them into contemporary architecture.

What does it mean to you for an architectural project to have a sense of history?

Memory implies a conscious awareness of the context in which the project is situated. And therefore, once we have that awareness, it is inevitable that—for better or worse—it will influence the architecture. Sometimes we engage with that context, with that memory, in a positive way to reinforce the project’s concept.

But history also teaches us that there have been many moments in architecture when its ideals arose precisely from a rejection of previous ideas—of tradition. This, in and of itself, cannot happen without memory, without knowledge of history, because one cannot reject what one does not know.

Do you think architecture is, above all, a cultural practice? How can a building express the identity of a place?

Architecture is inevitably a cultural practice. How can you design a project without context?

When we architects design, we never face that “blank page” that people fear so much, because we always work with specific elements: the climate, the topography, the building’s use, the dimensions of the human body, regulations, history… Before we even begin, our paper is already filled with data that helps us shape the building.

And the key lies in the balance with which you blend these elements to solve the architectural problem, which will be different in every case. There will be projects where the key element is fitting into a historical context; in others, it will be functionality or topography. That is the architect’s job: to correctly prioritize each project’s needs in every situation so that the building is the right solution.

I often think of architecture as an equation in which you’re given a lot of data—those ingredients I mentioned earlier—and in which the unknown is the geometric solution in the form of a building that solves all the problems.
Hugo Berenguer, CEO and partner at Rafael de La-Hoz Arquitectos at MDF 2026
Hugo Berenguer, CEO and partner at Rafael de La-Hoz Arquitectos at MDF 2026

How is scale managed in large-scale projects to ensure they maintain a human connection with the urban environment?

I think the issue of scale is one of the most difficult to control, because it’s very hard for the human brain to make that leap from paper to reality. Some things work very well at one scale but not at others. Biology and biomechanics understand this very well; they’ve known for a long time that certain organisms have limits on their size or shape depending on whether they are vertebrates or not. This also applies to architecture, and therefore we cannot apply the same design strategies to a small house as we would to a large stadium.

What role do materials play in creating an atmosphere and in the way people experience a space?

Materials are probably one of the most powerful tools architecture has for creating atmospheres. Ultimately, people don’t experience a building through blueprints, but through light, textures, sounds, temperature, or the way materials age over time.

The same space can convey completely different sensations depending on whether it is built of concrete, wood, stone, or steel. Each material has its own physical properties, but also cultural connotations that inevitably influence how we perceive the space. For this reason, the choice of materials should never be an exclusively aesthetic decision. It has to do with sustainability, maintenance, durability, comfort, and also the identity of the project.

A very clear example of the prominence of materials is Lagasca 99, where Actiu’s showroom is located. The building’s façade is the first thing that catches the eye, showcasing three distinct materials that respond to a compositional strategy rooted in the interior’s functionality, so that each space—living room, bedroom, or kitchen—is identified with a different material: glass, stone, and wood, respectively.

Lagasca 99 Project, Madrid
Lagasca 99 Project, Madrid

To what extent should context (climatic, historical, social) influence the formal and technical decisions of a project?

I think they must influence them greatly, because that is precisely where architecture originates. As architects, we’re used to working with constraints. In fact, we’re often better the more constraints we have. The climate, history, regulations, client needs, technological capabilities, or social characteristics of a place aren’t obstacles to the project—they’re the ingredients that help us shape it.

That said, this doesn’t mean that the context dictates a single possible solution. Two architects can face exactly the same conditions and arrive at completely different proposals. The important thing is to understand that formal and technical decisions should not be made arbitrarily. They must result from a proper understanding of all these circumstances and the ability to synthesize them into a coherent proposal.

In some projects, the historical context will carry more weight; in others, the climate, topography, or specific functional constraints will be more important. The architect’s task is precisely to prioritize these factors and find the right balance in each case.

In some projects, the historical context will carry more weight; in others, the climate, topography, or certain functional constraints will be more important.

The architect's job is precisely to prioritize these considerations and find the right balance in each case.

I find it hard to imagine good architecture that is indifferent to its context. In fact, when a building is truly well-designed, something very interesting usually happens: it gives the impression that it could not have been built anywhere else.

Inside the Lagasca 99 building
Inside the Lagasca 99 building

How does the dimension of time influence your approach to design? Should architecture aim for permanence or constant adaptation?

I think it's both at the same time.

On the one hand, buildings are designed to last many years. In fact, building structures are engineered to last 50 years under normal use; in the case of hospitals, this can extend to 100 years. The reality is that, if well maintained, they last much longer.

Therefore, it is an activity that, by its very nature, is meant to endure.

That said—and I’ll tie this into the other part of the question—only those buildings that are particularly outstanding from an architectural standpoint and are protected, or those whose design allows them to adapt to new uses or new ways of inhabiting them, will endure .

How do you balance respect for architectural heritage with the incorporation of new technologies and methodologies?

I think these are different issues. Respecting the legacy does not mean imitating it or restricting the use of new technologies. This is a very interesting debate that has to do with the integration of new architectural styles into historic or already established environments.

Sometimes, we get the impression that respect is based on providing architectural solutions that are a continuation of the past, on imitating what came before, and I think that’s very misguided.

Look at the great historic cities you admire—they’re a mix of different architectural styles that, in some cases, span 2,000 years. The thing is, our minds have already identified them as historical styles, and that plays tricks on us. How many examples do we have in Europe or Spain of Roman architecture fused with Islamic, Romanesque, Gothic, Renaissance, or Baroque buildings—styles that have little or nothing in common with one another?

What does a Roman building have in common with a Gothic one? Nothing—neither stylistically, nor conceptually, nor in terms of the technological methods used in their construction.

In fact, I believe that the blending of architectural styles—each of which is a faithful reflection of the ideas of its respective historical moment—is what makes European cities so attractive and interesting: that blend, that coexistence of styles.

We cannot create architecture that does not reflect the times we live in. Consider this: Mies defined architecture as “the will of an era translated into space,” and I believe he could not have been more accurate.

Hugo Berenguer with Soledat Berbegal and Roberto García at MDF 2026
Hugo Berenguer with Soledat Berbegal and Roberto García at MDF 2026
Respecting heritage means studying it, understanding it, and taking it into account when designing—which is very different from imitating it, because that leads to the fossilization of cities, and buildings should be living entities, constantly evolving.

How important is collaboration between architecture firms and industry in the evolution of spatial design?

In my opinion, it’s very important. The development of the industry and new technologies has led to a vast array of technical solutions on the market for solving the same problem.

Today, it is impossible for an architect to have in-depth knowledge of all the advances taking place in materials, construction systems, building services, sustainability, or digitalization. That is why collaboration with the industry is increasingly necessary.

The best solutions usually emerge when both parties work together from the outset with shared goals. Architects contribute a holistic vision of the project, while industry brings specialized knowledge, innovative capacity, and technical expertise.

Furthermore, this collaboration helps bridge the gap between an idea and its realization. Often, projects that would have been impossible just a few years ago can now be built thanks to the development of new technologies or new production systems.

I believe that innovation in architecture is rarely the result of the isolated work of a single person. It usually emerges when different disciplines collaborate and share knowledge.

How can architectural spaces foster collaboration, creativity, and collective well-being?

That’s an interesting question. You see, before the pandemic, there was a whole theory about new workspaces designed to foster collaboration among employees in order to boost creativity, share ideas and visions, and so on. This all stemmed from the understanding that the best ideas often don’t come up in planned meetings, but rather during informal interactions—in hallways, cafeteria areas, and so on.

Based on that, offices began to be designed to encourage spontaneous encounters among employees—I think they called it “creative collisions.”

Then the pandemic hit, and for a while, all talk of this ceased as we shifted to remote work and working from home… which, in my view, is a mistake because I completely agree with the pre-pandemic trends—they make perfect sense, and I believe they work very well, and that architecture had a lot to contribute in this regard.

Another very interesting example is its application in hospital buildings, where the goal is not simply to design spaces to prevent problems or illnesses, but rather to create environments that actively promote people’s well-being and health.

In this sense, architecture ceases to be merely functional or aesthetic and becomes a tool that influences how people perceive, understand, and experience space.
Rey Juan Carlos University Hospital by Rafael de la-Hoz Architects
Rey Juan Carlos University Hospital by Rafael de la-Hoz Architects

When applied to design, this translates into strategies such as the use of natural light, a connection to nature, air quality, the selection of healthy materials, and the creation of spaces that foster both social interaction and privacy. It’s not just about preventing stress or illness, but about enhancing the positive experience of the space.

Numerous scientific studies have shown that the availability of natural light in hospital rooms has a positive influence on patient outcomes, promoting faster recovery and improving their overall well-being.

Likewise, views of the natural environment help reduce stress and the need for pain medication, which results in a more positive hospital stay and a more efficient recovery.

As a leader and creative professional, how do you develop a strategic vision without losing conceptual depth?

I am convinced that an architect is not just a great designer, but much more than that. An architect must have a strong humanistic perspective. As we discussed, they must have a solid understanding of history and the work of our ancestors; they must also possess strong analytical skills and be good with numbers. Furthermore, the profession requires technical knowledge of other disciplines such as materials, structural analysis, building systems, acoustics, and sustainability… In fact, on construction sites, by law we serve as directors and coordinators of all disciplines.

An architect must also know how to explain their architectural vision to a client so that the client understands it, convince them, and secure the commission. They must be articulate and, therefore, a good salesperson. If they’re good at this, they’ll sign contracts and, therefore, must have legal knowledge. And they’ll also have to negotiate their fee, since a lot is at stake.

They must know how to organize their firm, whether large or small; they must understand what the industry needs at that moment and decide how to set themselves apart…

And, of course, they must also be a good designer and possess conceptual depth.

But what sounds complicated when put that way is exactly what architects have been doing all their lives and what we’ve been trained to do in architecture schools.

What are the major challenges that architecture must face in order to remain relevant in a constantly changing world?

I believe there are major challenges on different scales and fronts… Here are a few examples.

On a general level, I believe architecture has diminished its capacity to serve as a social tool in the face of a culture of spectacular, “Instagrammable” buildings that are often disconnected from society’s real needs. In this sense, it has lost a great deal of influence to political and economic interests… I believe that a field with such a strong social mission should be much more independent of all that.

In urban design, I’m very concerned about the challenge many cities face with the growth of tourism, which is turning them into theme parks where I find it impossible to live. What’s more, I find it almost unbearable to even be a tourist in certain cities… It’s something that’s spiraled out of control and deserves deep reflection.

I think we need to discuss the emergence of AI as a challenge that the profession must integrate. As a tool, it can enhance creativity, but it carries the risk of replacing critical thinking. It’s also an issue that will spark many debates about intellectual property and authorship — debates that , I have no doubt, will be a major headache in the coming years.