Starting small in a big city

AC: About a third of all architects in France are based in the Paris region, home to several architecture schools and a dense concentration of cultural and architectural activity.

GV: This ties into a broader discussion about the transition young architects face when moving from their studies in Paris to professional practice. The projects they engage with as professionals often differ entirely from those they explored as students. At least in our time, our diploma work focused on large-scale urban planning and construction projects. But as young architects starting out in Paris, we found ourselves working on small flats, mostly for renovations. Initially, this can be frustrating because it feels like you’re not doing what you trained for. But we soon realised it was an excellent way to learn—understanding how to work from an existing site, how to deal with materiality, how to design for specific inhabitants, and how to translate ideas into reality through collaboration with artisans. So, while most young architects in Paris start with small-scale projects, primarily refurbishments, we found it to be an exciting and valuable practice—very different from what we had initially expected.

AC: Even though Paris is the biggest city in France, you still start at the bottom, working on small projects. When you launch your own agency early, as we did just a year or two after school, you need to develop good habits and find a sense of stability. It’s quite difficult in the beginning, so being somewhere familiar and comfortable is important. We had studied and lived in Paris for years, so starting our practice here made sense for us.

From concrete to conscious design

AC: Many clients (municipalities, developers, and so on) are becoming more open to listening to the youngest generation of architects, who are increasingly capable of embracing sustainability values and respecting the environment. They often say they’ve been working with architects who have only built with concrete for the past decades. But now, more projects focus on renovation, and that’s where we started. Like many architects of our age, we feel differently from previous generations on this matter. While most focused on building and expanding, considering rehabilitation as a minor topic, we chose to focus on the transformation of existing structures.

GV: Renovation is something we naturally became familiar with because we didn’t have the opportunity to build from scratch. In hindsight, this has been an advantage. It has also made us more aware of materiality. Our generation is deeply sensitive to environmental issues, and we try to use less concrete, favouring ecological materials—whether bio-sourced, geo-sourced, or recycled. This shifts the project’s focus to materials and available resources, often shaping the design process itself. This competency aligns well with what many clients are now looking for in terms of ecological sustainability. It also challenges us to design differently, to develop new ways of drawing and expressing ideas. In a sense, this opens the door to a new kind of architecture.

Another key difference is our approach to territory. Aside from our urban work in Paris, we also invest our practice in Auvergne’s rural areas. These “forgotten places” lacking architects, often have remarkable built heritage or impressive landscapes that remain unstained by the excess of modernity. This creates a real opportunity for a young firm to be given responsibilities and play a meaningful role for the community.

Building less, building better

GV: Our generation is highly aware of the urgency to change how we build. We know we need to act now, and sometimes that means choosing not to build at all. Some politicians, mayors, and clients are willing to take that approach, while others are less interested. Convincing them can be a challenge. More often than not, it comes down to cost—building or renovating ecologically is more expensive and time-consuming than following standardised methods. As a result, many prefer to stick with what they know.

AC: This is where politics and leadership play a major role. Little by little, we feel that decision-makers are becoming more and more aware about this necessity to build differently. We are at a transitional moment. Change will take time, but we are in a pivotal position.

Building with trust

GV: The story we like to remind ourselves of is that Axel and I met in our last year of school and got along so well that we decided to do our diploma together. It was a complete reconfiguration of a district, designing a new neighbourhood from scratch. Almost immediately after, we worked at different firms for a few months before starting to work together. Our first project was a small 40-square-meter flat for a friend of mine, where we rediscovered how to work as an architecture firm. We learned what it meant to have a client, to work with an existing structure, and to understand the impact of materials on design. We also realised the importance of collaborating with skilled craftsmen and women to bring our vision to life. That project led to several other small flats, which we worked on for a few years before taking on larger projects. 

Despite the increasing scale, our method remained the same—designing based on the existing environment and its unique characteristics. We found this approach essential, as it allowed us to create projects that felt deeply connected to their context.

AC: Building relationships with craftspeople was key. When you first enter the profession, you know little about electricity, woodwork, or construction. The best way to learn is through dialogue with those working on-site. You meet people, ask questions, and listen. As a young architect, you must be humble and open to learning while still making final decisions alongside the client. A project evolves through collaboration. It starts like a sketch, a concept, but grows with the input of those on-site. That’s our approach to architecture—working closely with experts in their fields. Though our team is small, we are surrounded by highly skilled people who support us every day.

From mistakes to new projects 

GV: One of our most important lessons came from the first project we declined. It was a 600-square-meter refurbishment of an industrial site, and the client only wanted to turn it into an exhibition space. We saw major issues that needed fixing, but the client refused and became aggressive when we insisted. We had to ask ourselves where to focus our energy and when to walk away. Financially, we needed the project, but after declining, we felt an immense relief—proof it was the right decision.

AC: Another early mistake was trusting the wrong people. Some weren’t skilled enough, and that made projects difficult. Over time, we learned to find people who shared our mindset and values. You don’t always meet the right collaborators immediately—you have to keep trying. Now, we work with people we trust, which makes everything smoother. As young architects, we gave our trust too quickly at times, but we learned from it.

AC: We started with small flats and used them as references to secure larger projects. Then, an unexpected opportunity came with a great fashion company called Kering. We competed to redesign their employee restaurant, and we won. The design was put to a vote among employees, and they chose ours over a proposal from a much more established designer. It was a turning point. We didn’t even have an official firm yet, but Kering trusted us. This project also introduced us to incredible craftsmen who transformed how we approach design. One moment that stands out was when we showed a 3D rendering of floating tables to the craftsmen. The lack of visible legs was just for presentation, but they asked, ‘So you want tables without legs?’ and suggested an invisible iron structure attached to the wall. That moment showed us how working with experts could push our designs beyond what we thought possible.

GV: Trust, humility, and respect are key for professionals. Winning that competition allowed us to shift to a larger scale, attracting new clients who trusted us more easily. That led to projects like Michel-Ange, a vertical extension of a modernist building located in Paris, and collaborations with established firms like Patrick Mauger and Vincent Lavergne. We worked on competitions, including transforming a chapel into a cultural centre, and an ongoing office transformation. These experiences were essential for our growth.

Transforming with respect

GV: Our practice revolves around respecting the existing environment. Transforming a place isn’t just about preservation—it’s about knowing when to add and when to remove. In Chamboirat, we intervened subtly to make it seem almost as if nothing had changed, even though most of the building was restructured. This farmhouse renovation in Auvergne aimed to create a durable intervention that remained true to the building's character. We proposed using only local and ecological materials—structural reinforcements were made of wood and stone, while hemp provided thermal insulation. Lastly, local craftsmen played a crucial role in ensuring our approach respected the site's unique constraints.

In Michel-Ange, we added a vertical extension that contrasts with the original structure while maintaining a connection through materiality. The main goal was to integrate it seamlessly with the existing building, an early work by French architect Jean de Mailly. Its form and deep navy blue tone, inspired by the original metalwork, allow the extension to blend into the building’s expression without resorting to imitation. The project also included a full refurbishment of the flat, with the upper floor’s kitchen and dining room now opening onto a terrace overlooking the Parisian cityscape. 

AC: Sentier also gave us an opportunity to use the past to inform the present. This project aimed to restructure entirely a 19th-century office building in central Paris, originally a textile workshop. A 1980s renovation had obscured its industrial heritage by covering its beautiful stone columns with smoked glass facades. Our goal was to reverse this degradation by replacing the facades and restoring the building’s identity. We exposed the original stone columns and redesigned the window frames to evoke its industrial past while meeting modern standards for energy efficiency and comfort. This project allowed us to refine our approach: rediscovering a building’s vocabulary to undertake a carefully situated transformation.

Crafting a grounded future

AC: We complement each other in many ways. We share the same vision for our practice but have different strengths. Family life is important to both of us—we don’t want to stay late every night. We pick up our children from school and balance work with life. When we are working, we do it our way. Aside from working on Cove’s projects, I love designing furniture and working with craftsmen, while Gabriel is more interested in research and sharing our approach. That balance strengthens our practice. 

GV: In the future, I envision a research team engaged in exhibitions and publishing works, while Axel dreams of a workshop for crafting furniture. We feel that both directions are essential, and together they shape our firm beyond just architectural projects. Looking ahead, we want to continue diversifying. We’ve started exploring research and furniture design, but the core of our practice remains our architectural projects. We enjoy working on mid-scale projects, from flats to buildings, where we can maintain control over design and craftsmanship. Large-scale projects often strip away the hands-on approach we value. We want to keep working with the people we trust and maintain a healthy work-life balance.

AC: We often discuss what we don’t want to do as much as what we do. The goal is to work on projects that excite us, where we enjoy coming to work every day. That’s why, after seven years, we’re still just the two of us. We don’t want to rush things. We have decades ahead, so we’re taking our time, staying happy in our work and personal lives, and building our practice with lightness and intention.