Opening paths in Paris

CY: In the dynamic and competitive world of architecture, I’ve become very aware of the many architecture offices in Paris, both through my personal connections and social media. I’m particularly impressed by the maturity and quality of work coming from the new generation of architects. It’s common to see offices founded less than five years ago that already have access to major projects and are designing at an exceptionally high level. What’s striking to me is how impressive this is, given that architecture takes time—there are often years between first connecting with a client and finally seeing a project built. In my case, after seven years of work, I’m only now starting to see the first results. 

Paris is a big city, but within the architecture world, we often cross paths. There are places like the Pavillon de l’Arsenal, a kind of home for architecture, where we meet at exhibitions or talks. We hear each other’s names, even if we don’t all know each other personally. What’s also inspiring is how these new offices engage with themes I work on as well—reuse, refurbishment, using fewer materials, and avoiding demolition. Some are even rethinking how practices are structured, with four, five, or six partners instead of the traditional model, maintaining a flexible structure capable of providing immediate solutions to complex problems. This diversity of practices creates a dynamic ecosystem, making it one of the most exciting times to be an architect in Paris.

Over the past seven years, I’ve never had to worry about not having enough work. I’ve worked hard to get here, attending numerous meetings and networking—both in the public and private sectors—to stay ahead of new projects. As a result, I’ve never been in a position where I had to scramble for work. That said, I know it can be tough for young firms to access quality projects. In the public sector, clients often ask for references before giving out a project. But if you’re just starting, you have to be innovative in telling your story—showing how smaller projects had complexity, making the case that your experience is relevant. The first project is the hardest to get, but once you have it, opportunities open up.

Between logic and intuition

CY: My background combines two very different types of education. I first studied engineering, and I was taught to start with a broad set of hypotheses and narrow them down to a solution. Then, in architecture school, it was the opposite—we began with strict constraints and had to expand our thinking, drawing from memories, environment, and intuition. Switching between these two mindsets was the hardest part of my education, but it’s also what makes my practice unique. I always approach topics from both perspectives, which enriches my work and fuels discussions with my team. Many of them also have backgrounds in both engineering and architecture, so we naturally explore multiple angles before merging them into a final approach.

Before starting my own practice, there were four key experiences that shaped me. First, my dual educational background in engineering and architecture. I studied engineering at L’École Centrale-Supélec in Paris, then moved to London, specialising in Design and Environmental Engineering at the Bartlett School. Afterward, I returned to Paris to continue my studies at the Paris-Belleville School of Architecture. It was inspiring to see how, in other countries, engineering and architecture are more deeply integrated. There, I learned the importance of diagnosing the existing conditions before starting any study—something that still influences my approach today. Then, I worked for Alejandro Aravena’s practice in Chile. Initially, I was recruited as an engineer to help develop construction details for the incremental housing projects, where families build half of their homes themselves. The challenge was to make construction as simple as possible for future residents while maintaining quality. Over time, I had to embrace both the engineering and architectural aspects, focusing not just on technical solutions but on how people would actually use and complete their homes. This experience taught me that good detailing isn’t just about precision—it’s about making things simple and functional. After this experience, I joined Anne Démians’ office in Paris, which works on large-scale projects like office campuses and high-rises—very different from what I do now. I spent three and a half years following a construction site from start to finish, which gave me a deep understanding of how projects are actually built. That experience solidified my belief that, as architects, we need to stay involved throughout construction to ensure our designs are realised as intended. 

Finally, the turning point came in 2018. I was visiting my family in Brittany when Cyclone Carmen hit, devastating the coastline and harbour of my hometown, Crozon. At the time, I wasn’t yet fully independent—I was still employed—but I went to the local authorities and suggested we start discussions about how to rebuild. I even sketched out some initial ideas to get the conversation started. Over the next year, we collaborated with local architects and technical teams, developing a vision for the reconstruction. At first, it was purely out of concern for my hometown, but over time, I realised I wanted to be directly involved in the process. That’s when I decided to start my own practice. The town eventually launched a public competition for the reconstruction, and thanks to the groundwork I had laid, my office won a part of the project. That became Upsilon’s first commission. Looking back, it wasn’t something I planned. I wasn’t actively searching for a way to start my own practice—it just evolved naturally. But the opportunity in Crozon gave me the push to start something of my own. I remember speaking with the mayor, who explained how the reconstruction would be divided into three phases. That’s when I knew I had to structure my office so I could compete for at least one of them.

Balancing acts

CY: My first project was in Crozon. It took a long time to engage with people and develop the idea, and in the end, I only secured a small refurbishment project for the harbour offices and the sailing centre. In terms of time versus money, it wasn’t particularly efficient, but it was incredibly rewarding and fascinating to be in the upstream part of the process. Meanwhile, I developed my own activities in Paris to support myself. After a year or two, as the project in Brittany took shape, I realised it could be valuable to maintain both. There’s a growing trend among emerging practices like mine to position themselves between the city and more rural areas, where new opportunities have been emerging in the wake of the pandemic.

In Paris, I worked in the private sector, which was fascinating because many of the city’s most beautiful buildings are owned by banks, insurance companies, and property managers. These clients operate under strict regulations but also prioritise quality since they own their buildings for the long term. Their goals often align with ours in aiming for sustainable, high-quality projects. In Brittany, working with the public sector exposed me to very different project types and scales, making for a rich contrast. After three or four years, my practice was evenly split: I spent one week in Brittany, one week in Paris. It was interesting, but exhausting, especially after the birth of my first son. I had to re-centre my activity in Paris and, at the same time, structure my team, creating a stable foundation. 

As for project diversity, I like to renew and challenge myself every year by working with different types of clients and scales. I started with private sector refurbishments in Paris, then moved to public projects in Brittany. Quickly, I experimented with new construction, using re-employed materials like shipping containers, such as in the project Saint Jacques for emergency housing in Saint Jacques de la Lande, and local earth, such as in the project Kerlinou for social housing in Brest. But I questioned the impact of new builds, so I returned to refurbishment, this time focusing on preservation and reuse of the existing building and materials. I recently started to work on a new theme: office conversions. With many large buildings abandoned post-COVID, we worked on transforming them into housing and community spaces. This has been a new and exciting challenge.

A method for change

CY: Our core focus lies in the transformation of existing buildings. Sometimes we build new, but almost always in relation to an existing structure. I approach this urgency from three angles: social, ecological, and aesthetic. Socially, refurbishment helps accommodate demographic shifts, preventing disruption in city centres while creating affordable housing. Ecologically, it reduces demolition and material waste. Aesthetically, historic buildings often have qualities we struggle to replicate in new construction, making preservation an obvious choice. Our work mainly focuses on transformation, conversion, refurbishment, and extensions—essentially, regeneration. When our work deals with new construction, we incorporate reuse as the core idea of the design, like the emergency housing unit built entirely from repurposed shipping containers or the social housing project where we used site-excavated earth for the walls.

To support this approach, we developed a precise methodology. Every project begins with an in-depth diagnostic phase, where we negotiate with clients to take the time necessary to study existing conditions and on-site resources. The goal is to preserve as much as possible and only demolish when absolutely necessary. When demolition is unavoidable, we prioritise reusing materials within the project. This requires client education—explaining why we’re keeping certain elements and how any removed materials will be repurposed. I have a team member who specialises in this field—an engineer with a consulting role across all projects. He ensures we integrate reuse strategies from the very beginning because if we consider reuse too late, it’s already impossible to implement effectively. Another key team member focuses on material sourcing. She collaborates with companies, producers, and suppliers to find ecological, high-quality materials suited to each project’s constraints and objectives. Working with existing buildings means every project has unique details that must be carefully considered. We prioritise intelligent solutions that minimise material use and avoid overly complex or resource-intensive approaches.

Our team is structured into two main groups. One focuses on diagnostics, resource analysis, and sustainability strategies, ensuring each project adheres to our methodology. The other manages client interactions and oversees daily project execution. Maintaining a stable team is difficult, but we’ve built a solid foundation. At the very least, the three of us working on diagnostics, reuse, and material sourcing are committed for the long term. My role is more transversal—I oversee the big picture, ensuring refurbished buildings meet contemporary comfort and regulation standards. This is particularly challenging without defaulting to standard insulation or heating solutions that might not be suited to the building’s materials, whether it’s wood, stone, or metal. My engineering background helps me navigate these challenges and select appropriate materials for long-lasting, high-performance and cost-effective results.

Adaptive workspaces and material experimentation

CY: Right now we work with a fairly even balance between private and public clients, and I intend to keep it that way. I like this equilibrium because when the public sector slows down, the private sector is often stronger, and vice versa. It is a more resilient approach in uncertain times. The projects are also quite different, which keeps things interesting and allows us to engage with a wide range of issues. In 2025, we won two large competitions, one of them for the refurbishment of a major office building in Montreuil, just outside Paris. The project, called Terranova, has now been completed. It involved a complete transformation of the building to accommodate offices, restaurants, and a wide range of services for the workplace. From the outset, the program was very flexible, and in our competition proposal we described the building as a potential destination in itself, with a strong identity, its own climate, and its own culture. We used the project as a space for experimentation, both in terms of use and materials. On the programmatic side, we placed sport, mobility, and outdoor spaces at the centre of the design. On the material side, we focused heavily on on-site reuse—ceilings, floors, walls, acoustic panels—and introduced local and natural materials such as earth and brick, aiming to improve air quality and create a more vibrant atmosphere, which remains uncommon in office environments. We also developed key furniture elements in rammed earth. The client supported a highly experimental approach throughout the process.

We also won another competition to extend a beautiful historic building in the 8th district of Paris, adding more housing in a historical courtyard. It’s a small project, but we’re focusing on making it as sustainable and efficient as possible. This project for two villas will be in massive stone, wooden structure and bio-sourced insulation. It will be called HQE Excellent. We are reusing stone, pavement and bathroom equipment available onsite. We are sourcing the stone locally. We are transforming the traditional pavement courtyard into a permeable ground, reusing the same pavement to absorb rainwater.

A space for growth

CY: A few months ago, we moved into our new office, and I’m really excited about this new chapter. We designed the space ourselves for a client we’ve known for a long time — in fact, one of the first clients I ever worked with. By chance, they were able to buy the building, which made the project even more special. There’s a strong sense of trust between us, and because it’s such a personal project for them, they gave us the opportunity to design something we truly believe in, including our own office space, which marks a significant change for us.

It’s also located in an area that perfectly reflects the kind of projects we work on. The move has been a real turning point for us because it allowed me to experiment with ideas that we often can’t fully explore in other projects due to budget constraints, technical complexity, or client preferences. Since this is also our own workspace, I had the opportunity to introduce design solutions that I might not have been able to implement elsewhere. We had much more freedom, and the client is deeply committed to sustainability and energy performance, which gave us the chance to further explore these aspects. Designing a space where we actually work every day is especially exciting. It’s an opportunity to push further the values we already focus on in our practice, such as the reuse of existing materials, the use of natural materials, and energy-efficient design strategies. The office is organised around three particularly important spaces. First, there is the meeting room, which plays a central role in our daily activities. Since I spend a great deal of time meeting with clients and collaborating with the team, we wanted to create a comfortable environment where people could spend long periods throughout the day. Then there is the material library, which brings together all the materials we work with. It takes the form of a large, highly scenographic wall with a strong presence within the space. Beyond simply displaying materials, it has also become a place where we often go to concentrate or even meet with clients. Finally, there is the courtyard, which offers a very pleasant outdoor space and allows us to remain constantly connected with the exterior.