All roads lead to Paris

RP: France is a highly centralised country, with Paris at its core. While there are other dynamic and interesting cities, Paris has historically concentrated administration, economic activity, and cultural institutions. The spatial structure of Paris reflects this centralisation, from the Seine and the Île de la Cité to the Grand Boulevards, the old city walls, and the Périphérique.

This centralisation extends to architecture. After May 1968, architecture schools emerged from the Beaux-Arts tradition. Initially, Paris had six or seven schools, and later, cities like Nantes, Bordeaux, Lille, Marseille, and Toulouse established their own. Still, Paris has remained a hub for architectural education and practice. The transportation network reinforces this concentration. The TGV connects Paris to other cities within hours, allowing architects based in Paris to work across France. Many architects in Paris can easily travel to project sites in Lyon, Bordeaux, or Nantes in just a few hours, maintaining a strong presence across the country.

Opportunities for emerging practices in Paris are closely tied to the city's urban policies. In recent years, Paris has prioritised reducing car use, promoting cycling, and addressing CO2 emissions. The city actively pushes for new construction methods, reducing reliance on concrete in favour of materials like wood and béton de chanvre (hempcrete). This shift is part of a broader ecological strategy. Public clients such as the Ville de Paris, Paris Habitat, and RIVP (Régie Immobilière de la Ville de Paris) have the financial means to experiment with new construction techniques. When I was a student in the early 2000s, environmental concerns were already present, but they were not the primary focus. The ‘French Touch’ generation of architects was known for bold gestures, colours, and material experimentation, often prioritising form over function. Our generation has taken a different approach, emphasising efficiency, user experience, and sustainability. We seek to move away from purely formal exercises and instead focus on how buildings are used and how they impact the environment. This awareness of climate change and CO2 emissions has become a defining characteristic of contemporary practice.

Behind the name

RP: The name of our practice, Echelle, comes from the desire to work with and understand the city on multiple scales. ‘Echelle’ means ‘scale’ in French, and scale is central to our approach. After graduating, I worked at an urban planning office, focusing on large territories and the connections between urban, architectural, and design scales. One of Echelle Office’s main ambitions was to remain engaged across various scales rather than specialising in just one. Architecture as a profession requires an understanding of geography and territory, as well as the connections between elements across scale and time. In our daily practice, we strive to understand how scales interact and function together. Echelle also refers to the three-dimensional aspect of architecture, particularly the section. As a student, I had teachers who worked almost exclusively in three dimensions, emphasising the section, while others focused solely on the city’s master plan, viewing it from above. By incorporating the section into our vision, we bring in the notion of usage. Moving beyond a top-down, master-planned approach allows us to focus on how spaces are used in reality. When we were students, we were influenced by the work of OMA—a major office that shaped our perception of the profession. The book S, M, L, XL by Rem Koolhaas was a key reference. It oriented our way of looking at architecture and urbanism, not just structurally but as an approach to the profession. Échelle also carries another meaning. In French, ‘l'échelle’ can signify a step or a transition between levels, evoking the idea of shifting between scales. Additionally, the term “office” has a double meaning—it refers to both a workspace and a kitchen. We often compare our office to a kitchen, a place where we experiment, manipulate models, plans, and designs. We see our work as ‘cooking’ architecture and urbanism, bringing ingredients together to create something meaningful.

Gaining ground, project by project

RP: At the beginning of my career, securing projects was essential to maintaining activity. Since I was born in Nantes, I had connections there, including my father, who was an architect. Our first project was a small development of 12 housing units in Nantes, which we designed together. This project increased our visibility, opening up new opportunities. At the same time, I worked on private commissions, primarily restructuring and refurbishing flats in Paris and its surroundings. After these initial projects, I focused on presenting the office and shaping its identity. In the beginning, you just say, ‘I’ve done this, I have a few references,’ but I also had experience working in offices before, so I spent a lot of time explaining what I had done and how I envisioned the office evolving in the coming years.

Since the beginning I participated in many competitions for housing projects, schools, and other programs. Over time, we began to be selected, and occasionally, we won. In the first two years, we were in a phase of defining the practice, balancing private commissions with public competitions. After two or three years, we secured three commissions—one small, one medium, and one large-scale social housing project. We worked on these between 2013 and 2018, and they are now completed. 

Winning public competitions made it easier to apply for new ones. Around 2019–2020, we focused on prospecting, which became a daily part of the office’s work. We typically submitted one proposal per week for public competitions. The more projects we had, the more we could demonstrate stability and capability. The first two or three years were about establishing ourselves, then came public projects, and now, after ten years, I feel it has become somewhat easier to be selected—though never entirely easy—but we continue in this direction.

Contextual solutions

RP: Right now, our office is evenly split between public/social housing and private projects. Paris and its surrounding areas have remained our primary base, allowing us to travel efficiently for site visits without excessive distances. Nantes has a strong architectural scene, making it a competitive but stimulating place to work. In both contexts, we have actively pursued public and social housing because the organisations involved are highly professional and state-funded, aiming to provide affordable housing for low-income residents. Their approach is very different from private developers, who focus on building and selling for profit. Private developers still aim to produce quality projects since they rely on municipal approvals to continue working in different territories, but their primary goal is to sell. With social housing, the developers retain ownership for decades, meaning they prioritise long-term maintenance, durability, and quality. The teams we work with in social housing tend to be highly engaged, considering aspects such as sustainability, affordability, and longevity. Public clients also push for diverse materials, bio-sourced construction, and sustainability. While we collaborate with private developers, and some are excellent, the public sector’s focus is more on creating quality living spaces rather than maximising profit. 

As for our guiding themes, the word "hybrid" defines our practice today. Each project responds to its specific context with different forms, materials, and solutions rather than adhering to a fixed style. For example, in 2018, we won three public competitions: one in full concrete, one in brick, and one in enduit. Each material choice was based on the specific needs of the site and project. While we always consider CO2 reduction, it is not our sole focus. When I was a student in the 2000s, my professors emphasised deconstructing a question to find the right answer, rather than following trends. In one competition, we were tasked with designing a building under a strict budget to make housing affordable in Paris, where prices are typically around €10,000 per square meter. The project, part of the BRS (Bail Réel Solidaire) initiative, allowed residents to buy flats without purchasing the land, reducing costs. Our approach was pragmatic, balancing CO2 reduction with financial constraints. We proposed two buildings: one tall structure made of concrete with terra-cotta facades, ensuring fire safety compliance while keeping costs low, and a lower building constructed entirely from wood and hemp to reduce carbon impact. We lost the competition because the jury felt there was too much concrete, even though our solution ensured affordability. The winning project, which was entirely wood-based, struggled with cost and execution. 

This experience highlighted the complexity of balancing environmental concerns with budget realities. While CO2 reduction is crucial, our office prioritises pragmatic solutions that make sustainable housing accessible to low-income families. Today, we live in a hybrid era, reflecting past architectural movements while addressing modern environmental concerns. Architecture is evolving, and we have entered a unique period shaped by sustainability and economic constraints.

Future goals 

RP: Our website isn’t always up to date, but it still represents our practice well. The homepage features images of models, 3D renderings, construction site photos, finished projects, and material studies—all elements we engage with daily. Even if not perfectly current, the website conveys the hybrid and complex nature of our approach.

Over the past ten years, we have built a foundation of projects we are proud of, allowing us to apply for public competitions with confidence. Recently, we have focused heavily on housing projects. However, when I founded Echelle Office, my goal was to work across different scales. I have a strong interest in urban planning and geography, understanding how territories evolve over time, and I would love to engage in urban-scale projects in the future.

Architecture is about being a generalist—housing is fascinating because it directly impacts how people live, but I am also interested in designing schools. Schools contribute to shaping neighbourhoods, offering an opportunity to think about architecture’s role in communities. Diversifying our practice with new programs and larger-scale projects would be a great goal for the coming years.