Architecture · Spaces · Objects · Agents

Let's start simple. Who are you, and what do you do?

I'm an architect and multidisciplinary designer based in Dubai, with over twenty years of experience. Kosh Digital is my independent design studio. My work spans architecture, interiors and masterplanning from residential and hospitality to commercial and mixed-use developments. More recently, I've also been developing AI-powered tools to simplify design workflows. I work in two ways. Clients commission me for projects, from concept through detailed design, or design teams bring me in for a few weeks or months, remote or on site, when they need experienced, hands-on support. Either way, I like staying close to the actual design work. That's where I feel I add the most value.

Why do so many exciting designs become ordinary buildings?

I've seen this happen quite often. Everyone wants something iconic at the beginning. Then the cost estimate arrives, and suddenly we're removing everything that made the design look interesting. That's why I prefer bringing cost consultants in early. If we understand the budget from day one, we can be creative within it, instead of reshaping everything later.

If AI can generate designs in seconds, why do we still need architects?

Designing something is one thing. Making it work in the real world is another. Someone still has to figure out how to build it within the available time, budget and resources. And construction still relies heavily on people on site. I use AI and build my own tools to explore, in a few clicks, ideas that once took hours. But it's not just about saving time. It's about exploring more possibilities and making better decisions. Technology helps me go deeper, not just faster.

Do you trust design software more than your own judgement?

Not entirely. I use BIM, daylight studies and other analysis tools because they're genuinely useful. But software can't fully tell you how a space will feel. I also rely on what I've learned from experiencing real buildings — how proportions affect a space, how materials and textures respond to changing light and weather. For me, technology and architectural judgement should complement each other, not replace one another.

With your level of experience, why are you still so involved in the actual design work?

Because that's the part I enjoy. I like starting with an idea, developing it in BIM, coordinating with engineers and seeing how everything comes together. I've never been particularly interested in a role that's only about meetings and management.

What's an architect doing designing AI tools, websites and user interfaces?

I see them as different ways of solving problems. In architecture, I design spaces around how people use them. With digital tools, I apply the same thinking to simplify workflows and make complex tasks easier. Sometimes existing software doesn't do exactly what I need, so I explore building my own solutions. And with AI, that's become much more accessible. For me, it's not about moving away from architecture. It's about finding better ways to design.

Let's start simple. Who are you, and what do you do?

I'm an architect and multidisciplinary designer based in Dubai, with over twenty years of experience. Kosh Digital is my independent design studio. My work spans architecture, interiors and masterplanning from residential and hospitality to commercial and mixed-use developments. More recently, I've also been developing AI-powered tools to simplify design workflows. I work in two ways. Clients commission me for projects, from concept through detailed design, or design teams bring me in for a few weeks or months, remote or on site, when they need experienced, hands-on support. Either way, I like staying close to the actual design work. That's where I feel I add the most value.

Why do so many exciting designs become ordinary buildings?

I've seen this happen quite often. Everyone wants something iconic at the beginning. Then the cost estimate arrives, and suddenly we're removing everything that made the design look interesting. That's why I prefer bringing cost consultants in early. If we understand the budget from day one, we can be creative within it, instead of reshaping everything later.

If AI can generate designs in seconds, why do we still need architects?

Designing something is one thing. Making it work in the real world is another. Someone still has to figure out how to build it within the available time, budget and resources. And construction still relies heavily on people on site. I use AI and build my own tools to explore, in a few clicks, ideas that once took hours. But it's not just about saving time. It's about exploring more possibilities and making better decisions. Technology helps me go deeper, not just faster.

Do you trust design software more than your own judgement?

Not entirely. I use BIM, daylight studies and other analysis tools because they're genuinely useful. But software can't fully tell you how a space will feel. I also rely on what I've learned from experiencing real buildings — how proportions affect a space, how materials and textures respond to changing light and weather. For me, technology and architectural judgement should complement each other, not replace one another.

With your level of experience, why are you still so involved in the actual design work?

Because that's the part I enjoy. I like starting with an idea, developing it in BIM, coordinating with engineers and seeing how everything comes together. I've never been particularly interested in a role that's only about meetings and management.

What's an architect doing designing AI tools, websites and user interfaces?

I see them as different ways of solving problems. In architecture, I design spaces around how people use them. With digital tools, I apply the same thinking to simplify workflows and make complex tasks easier. Sometimes existing software doesn't do exactly what I need, so I explore building my own solutions. And with AI, that's become much more accessible. For me, it's not about moving away from architecture. It's about finding better ways to design.

You've been in architecture for over twenty years. What has experience actually taught you?

I think experience teaches you to recognise challenges before they happen and ask better questions. But I'm still learning. Sometimes a younger architect has a better idea, and I appreciate that. When someone disagrees with me, I'd rather understand their thinking than defend my own. For me, it's not about who's right. It's about what's right.

You seem to prefer minimalism. Is simple architecture less creative, and doesn't it feel cold?

Not at all, but minimalism done badly can feel cold and lifeless. For me, it's not about empty spaces or white walls. It's about clarity, proportions and thoughtful details. Materials, textures and lighting bring warmth and character. I believe every element should have a purpose. Good minimalism isn't about having less for the sake of it, it's about having everything in just the right proportion.

You've worked across architecture, interiors, visualisation and digital design. Is there one thing that connects all of it? And how can someone work with you?

I think it's curiosity, really. I like understanding how things work and finding ways to make them better. Sometimes that's a building layout, sometimes a design workflow or a digital tool. The medium changes, but the interest is the same. If you have a project, or your team needs an experienced architect for a while, book a thirty-minute call or send me a message. Tell me what you're working on, and I'll tell you how I can add value.

What's one mistake you try hardest to avoid?

Leaving a problem unresolved because it seems small. Those are the things that come back later and become expensive. I'd rather spend extra time thinking through something during design than have everyone struggling with it on site. It's not always possible to catch everything, of course, but that's what I aim for.

Do you design spaces for photographs or for the people using them?

It depends on the project, actually. If I'm designing a home, it's definitely about the people living there. A photograph captures one moment, but they experience that space every single day. For retail spaces, restaurants or entertainment venues, it's a little different. People want something visually interesting that they want to photograph and share, and that's perfectly fine — creating memorable moments can be part of the brief. But the space still needs to function well. Ideally, you achieve both.

You work across architecture, visualisation and digital development. How hands-on are you with the technology?

Very hands-on, actually. I can take a project from initial design through BIM, coordination and visualisation. I also work with parametric design, real-time environments and AI-powered tools. I've learned different software over the years, but I don't get too attached to any particular one. I choose the tools based on what the project needs. For me, it's about what I can achieve with them, not how many I know.

You've been in architecture for over twenty years. What has experience actually taught you?

I think experience teaches you to recognise challenges before they happen and ask better questions. But I'm still learning. Sometimes a younger architect has a better idea, and I appreciate that. When someone disagrees with me, I'd rather understand their thinking than defend my own. For me, it's not about who's right. It's about what's right.

You seem to prefer minimalism. Is simple architecture less creative, and doesn't it feel cold?

Not at all, but minimalism done badly can feel cold and lifeless. For me, it's not about empty spaces or white walls. It's about clarity, proportions and thoughtful details. Materials, textures and lighting bring warmth and character. I believe every element should have a purpose. Good minimalism isn't about having less for the sake of it, it's about having everything in just the right proportion.

You've worked across architecture, interiors, visualisation and digital design. Is there one thing that connects all of it? And how can someone work with you?

I think it's curiosity, really. I like understanding how things work and finding ways to make them better. Sometimes that's a building layout, sometimes a design workflow or a digital tool. The medium changes, but the interest is the same. If you have a project, or your team needs an experienced architect for a while, book a thirty-minute call or send me a message. Tell me what you're working on, and I'll tell you how I can add value.

What's one mistake you try hardest to avoid?

Leaving a problem unresolved because it seems small. Those are the things that come back later and become expensive. I'd rather spend extra time thinking through something during design than have everyone struggling with it on site. It's not always possible to catch everything, of course, but that's what I aim for.

Do you design spaces for photographs or for the people using them?

It depends on the project, actually. If I'm designing a home, it's definitely about the people living there. A photograph captures one moment, but they experience that space every single day. For retail spaces, restaurants or entertainment venues, it's a little different. People want something visually interesting that they want to photograph and share, and that's perfectly fine — creating memorable moments can be part of the brief. But the space still needs to function well. Ideally, you achieve both.

You work across architecture, visualisation and digital development. How hands-on are you with the technology?

Very hands-on, actually. I can take a project from initial design through BIM, coordination and visualisation. I also work with parametric design, real-time environments and AI-powered tools. I've learned different software over the years, but I don't get too attached to any particular one. I choose the tools based on what the project needs. For me, it's about what I can achieve with them, not how many I know.

Do you think architects sometimes care too much about how a building looks?

Yes, I think that happens. I love beautiful architecture, but if a building doesn't function well or the spaces don't feel right, what's the point? I start with functionality, context and climate, then look at how people will actually experience the space. For me, architectural expression should come naturally from those decisions, not from creating complicated shapes just to look creative.

Why do some masterplans look amazing from above but feel terrible when you actually experience them?

Sometimes masterplans are designed to look good from above, but what matters is how they work at ground level. Whether you're driving or walking, can you easily find your way? Are the streets comfortable and easy to recognise? Selling units is one thing, but people have to live there. A good masterplan should be easy to navigate and enjoyable to experience, not just beautiful in a presentation.

What happens when a client doesn't agree with your design?

Well, that's part of the job, isn't it? I first try to understand their concerns, whether it's the cost or something they see differently. I'll explain my reasoning and explore alternatives. Sometimes it's about spending more where it matters and saving elsewhere. We usually try to find a middle ground, but if the client still prefers a different approach, I respect that, as long as they understand the implications. For me, building trust is just as important as getting the design right.

What if the most energy-efficient design isn't the most commercially valuable one?

As a LEED Accredited Professional, I understand the value of energy-efficient design. But I also believe in looking at the bigger picture. Imagine an apartment with a fantastic skyline view, but the façade faces strong sunlight. Simply closing it off might reduce energy consumption, but you'd lose one of the apartment's biggest selling points. I'd rather work with engineers to find a smarter balance between energy performance, comfort and commercial value. Good design shouldn't have to sacrifice one for the other.

Have architectural renderings become a little too convincing?

Sometimes, yes. You can make almost anything look incredible with the right lighting and camera angle. But that's not really the point, is it? I use visualisation to explore and explain design. It should help us understand what we're building, not hide the things we haven't resolved.

Do you think architects sometimes care too much about how a building looks?

Yes, I think that happens. I love beautiful architecture, but if a building doesn't function well or the spaces don't feel right, what's the point? I start with functionality, context and climate, then look at how people will actually experience the space. For me, architectural expression should come naturally from those decisions, not from creating complicated shapes just to look creative.

Why do some masterplans look amazing from above but feel terrible when you actually experience them?

Sometimes masterplans are designed to look good from above, but what matters is how they work at ground level. Whether you're driving or walking, can you easily find your way? Are the streets comfortable and easy to recognise? Selling units is one thing, but people have to live there. A good masterplan should be easy to navigate and enjoyable to experience, not just beautiful in a presentation.

What happens when a client doesn't agree with your design?

Well, that's part of the job, isn't it? I first try to understand their concerns, whether it's the cost or something they see differently. I'll explain my reasoning and explore alternatives. Sometimes it's about spending more where it matters and saving elsewhere. We usually try to find a middle ground, but if the client still prefers a different approach, I respect that, as long as they understand the implications. For me, building trust is just as important as getting the design right.

What if the most energy-efficient design isn't the most commercially valuable one?

As a LEED Accredited Professional, I understand the value of energy-efficient design. But I also believe in looking at the bigger picture. Imagine an apartment with a fantastic skyline view, but the façade faces strong sunlight. Simply closing it off might reduce energy consumption, but you'd lose one of the apartment's biggest selling points. I'd rather work with engineers to find a smarter balance between energy performance, comfort and commercial value. Good design shouldn't have to sacrifice one for the other.

Have architectural renderings become a little too convincing?

Sometimes, yes. You can make almost anything look incredible with the right lighting and camera angle. But that's not really the point, is it? I use visualisation to explore and explain design. It should help us understand what we're building, not hide the things we haven't resolved.