A movement, three tendencies 

LM: When I reflect on the growing movement of emerging practices in France, I see three main architectural approaches at play, with some overlap between them. The first group reacts against the metropolitan way of organising territory, instead focusing on rural areas that were abandoned for a long time. They believe that working in these places can lead to broader systemic change. This movement emphasises local knowledge, resources, and craftsmanship. The second group remains engaged with cities, seeing them not only as sites of social and environmental crises but also as spaces of opportunity and transformation. They acknowledge their challenges but believe they hold the potential for social emancipation and innovation. Rather than rejecting the city, they work toward repairing and improving it. These two approaches are not in opposition but are interdependent. Actions in the metropolis impact rural areas, and vice versa.  Beyond these, there are also more militant practices that embrace radical ecological and utopian ideals, seeking complete disconnection from global energy and economic systems. Their work explores alternative ways of living, though it may be less pragmatic or immediately applicable.

Becoming HYPER

LM: I've worked in several different practices, but the three most significant ones were TVK, uapS, and l’AUC. These French firms have a lot in common, especially their approach to integrating urbanism and architecture, working simultaneously across different scales. They emphasise the permeability between architecture and broader urban systems.

Over the course of seven years in these offices, I worked on large-scale metropolitan projects. My work primarily focused on three areas. The first was infrastructure adaptation, transforming highways and crossings, always treating infrastructure as a resource to be repurposed rather than demolished. The second was the design of public spaces, which involved approaching these spaces as the starting point for urban and rural transformation, with a strong focus on the ground as a key element. Finally, I worked on maintaining the modernist heritage, understanding the original intentions behind modernist buildings and neighbourhoods to preserve, enhance, or adapt them. I also worked in both well-funded contexts and low-budget, long-term projects, navigating how to create meaningful change with limited resources. These experiences shape my current independent practice: HYPER. 

The name was an idea I had as a student. I chose it for different reasons. First, I was obsessed with hypermarkets in the suburbs—their car parks, the way they create new relationships between people, and how they represent a different way of life. While many see these places as horrible, I saw them as spaces of possibility, revealing the potential within modernity. Another reason comes from the concept of a ‘hypertextual’ society—a world where we exist in multiple places simultaneously due to technological advancements. This idea of being hyper-connected, of moving fluidly between different spaces and scales, resonated with me. Over the years, my practice has evolved through working on diverse projects, but I am still in the process of understanding where it is heading. I don’t start with a preconceived idea; instead, I explore through the work itself.

Sustainability without the spectacle

LM: The new climatic order is a critical framework for rethinking consumption. Addressing climate change requires working across different scales, from energy systems to material efficiency. But this doesn’t mean buildings need to ‘look ecological’. For me, it’s about substance over appearance. A building doesn’t have to feature green façades to be sustainable. Sometimes, the most efficient buildings don’t outwardly express their ecological performance. Communicating this to decision-makers remains a challenge. As both an architect and urbanist, I work across multiple scales and project phases. My role often begins before the architectural design takes shape—defining programmatic and ecological conditions, involving communities, and shaping the framework for projects to emerge. But I also engage in architectural design and public space planning, trying to encompass the full process of making architecture beyond just the final form.

One project that embodies these ideas is La Part-Dieu in Lyon, a major metropolitan transport hub. Working with François Decoster, we explored ecological strategies for the area, categorising approaches into four main tendencies. The first is biomimicry, architecture that imitates nature, both in appearance and function, like a building that absorbs CO₂ similar to a tree. This is often high-tech and requires substantial maintenance. The second is high-tech solutions, approaches like those of Norman Foster and Renzo Piano, where advanced technology regulates environmental performance, optimising light, wind, and energy. The third is vernacular traditions, which implies revisiting traditional construction methods as a sustainable approach, drawing from historical techniques adapted to contemporary needs. And finally, there’s low-tech pragmatism—a more realistic approach, working within today’s industrial and economic conditions while minimising material use and maximising bioclimatic efficiency, without trying to mimic nature.

I align most with the last approach, which balances ecological performance with practical constraints. This classification helps clarify contemporary ecological approaches, each of which ultimately manifests in a distinct architectural aesthetic.

Scaling impact

LM: When I work on small-scale projects, I always consider their implications at a larger scale, and vice versa. The interplay between these two perspectives is fundamental to my approach. For example, I transformed a flat in a tower near La Chapelle in Paris. This flat was part of a modernist consortium, a beautifully designed tower that felt like a micro-metropolis. We worked to open the space to the horizon of the city, creating a way of living that aligns with how we envision urban life evolving.

Another project involved repurposing a high school that had been abandoned for five to ten years. Located in a small city, the municipality initially considered demolishing it. However, we researched its architectural history and discovered it was designed by André Hermant, the architect of Le Parvis Notre-Dame. By showcasing the quality of the existing structure, we convinced them to preserve it. The project became a mixed-use space incorporating a school, associations, a production facility, and communal flats owned by the city. We demolished nothing, working within the constraints of a limited budget while embracing an aesthetic of realism and efficiency.

Finally, another of my first major projects (in Paris) was for Ville de Paris and Paris Métropole Aménagement. The mayor initiated a program to create 300 child-friendly streets, and I was assigned 13 of them. This project is deeply tied to heritage because Paris has a long-standing public space culture, shaped by figures like Haussmann. Parisian public spaces are highly structured and consistent across the city, which is both a strength and a challenge when proposing new interventions. The goal is to pedestrianise these new streets, reduce car traffic, and introduce as much greenery as possible. Working on this project has allowed me to explore how to extend Paris’ existing infrastructure while introducing new ways of thinking. However, navigating the city’s strict regulations has been a challenge, as there is a strong emphasis on control and continuity. Each street requires a tailored approach, making the project both complex and fascinating.

Joining forces and exchanging

LM: Other projects I’m involved in are much larger in scale, sometimes involving bigger teams. I don’t work alone on these; I collaborate with technical engineering firms and landscape architects, such as Réseaux, to develop holistic solutions.  

I collaborate with many different professionals, primarily architects, but each with distinct approaches—some focusing on ecological aspects, others on financial feasibility or public space. I enjoy working with these varied perspectives. For the high school refurbishment, I collaborated with four architects, each bringing expertise in different areas: programmatic and economic planning, environmental and energy strategies, participatory design, and technical engineering.

Our approach was highly horizontal, functioning as a platform for collective decision-making rather than a hierarchical structure. My role is to synthesise these different ideas into a coherent narrative rather than acting as a sole leader. I particularly enjoy working with young offices, hearing their perspectives, and integrating them into a broader architectural vision.

Interests moving forward 

LM: I have engaged in projects across various scales—transforming small flats, working on programmatic urban approaches in smaller cities, and designing public spaces. What ties these together is a focus on heritage—not just architectural heritage, but also soil and ground heritage. I am particularly interested in what we have inherited from the rapid urbanisation of the past 50 years and how we can work with it rather than against it.

Another focus moving forward is primarily on the public sector, particularly urban and public space projects. While I am open to private sector work, my main interest lies in shaping metropolitan spaces. I don’t yet have a fully defined vision of where my practice is heading, but recurring themes are emerging. When preparing responses for consultations, I consistently choose projects related to modernism and metropolitan areas, suggesting a natural direction for my work.

I also want to continue working on architectural projects, as I believe engaging with architecture itself is essential to understanding broader urban issues. Alongside practice, I am involved in research projects, such as an exhibition at Arc en Rêve in Bordeaux. This project focuses on the maintenance and operation of technical and energy infrastructure—electricity, heat, and gas distribution networks. Bordeaux serves as a case study, but the research applies to all of France. We presented a large-scale map of Bordeaux’s energy networks, analysing their impact on territories, and highlighting the workers who maintain them. The goal is to make these invisible infrastructures visible and to raise awareness of the ecological implications of energy consumption. The research builds on the work of Fanny Lopez, who explores critical energy infrastructures and the challenges of transitioning away from them. It’s not just about technical solutions but understanding what we need to renounce to achieve a sustainable future.

This project underscores the need to simplify systems while acknowledging their complexity. Cities are built on vast, hidden networks, and revealing them is the first step toward rethinking how we sustain them ecologically and equitably.