Tourism Office / LINK Architectes Associés

closed

In this context, our work begins with understanding and measuring the scale of such an undertaking as the construction of this aqueduct in Roman times, to transport water over long distances. It is also defined by the awareness of the ingenuity of the mechanisms employed, which contribute to the technical and aesthetic coherence of the structure. The historical path of the aqueduct engages in dialogue with the topography of the land, sometimes following it, sometimes confronting it. The project site has the specificity of incorporating several states of the aqueduct, between its aerial and buried positions within the town of Chaponost, and at the start of the siphon, which crosses the Yzeron valley below.The aqueduct is a massive, powerful structure, built using a system of repetitive arches made of stone, brick, and earth. The ruin, in its current state, reveals a rudimentary construction, which we are interested in revisiting according to modern production methods. It is not about recreating the arches, nor repeating a construction system that would make no sense today. Instead, it is about reinterpreting a way of building and adapting it to the skills of our time and locality. The project therefore chooses concrete, but with the ambition of working this material in resonance with the aqueduct, through its grain, its tones, and its texture.The project is defined and reduced to two elementary intentions: a wall that installs the project within the site and organizes the uses, and a roof that shelters. The wall, made of tinted and then sandblasted concrete, is set parallel to the aqueduct and defines a platform embedded in the depth of the land, hosting parking and public service functions. It emerges on one side and disappears into the ground on the other, extending far beyond the space of the tourist office. The wall crosses the building and continues beyond. It thickens at certain points within the building to accommodate service functions. In front, a large open and traversing space brings together the public reception, the exhibition, and the meeting room. Space being limited, the idea here is to lose no surface area in circulation; every square meter is valuable. Within the wall, the recessed functions serve the main space. The roof shelters the reception and exhibition space and extends beyond to protect the façades and form a porch at the entrance, thus doubling the interior area of the building and reinforcing its welcoming function. The boundary between interior and exterior is deliberately blurred. This is the ambition of the project: to offer a space backed by a wall of functions, open to the aqueduct.The project is imagined as a service infrastructure rather than a building, much like the aqueduct itself. The intention is not to reduce the intervention to a mere constructed object but to shelter a space that, in a sense, has neither a beginning nor an end, embracing the entire landscape that faces it. The project is set within the site, following the geometry of the aqueduct in a linear fashion. The project is divided into three layers: *The first layer, which rationally places the parking areas in direct connection with the existing roadway. A path that links the entrance to the tourist office, and a meadow that distances the building from the street, both to protect it from nuisances and to open up the view of the aqueduct. *The second layer inscribes the building, supported by a retaining wall that manages the slope of the land. *The third layer is left open, so as not to alter the entire site.The aqueduct works at both the "macro" scale of the territory and the "micro" scale of the construction and materiality of the arches. A system that makes sense, which shapes and reveals a unique landscape. The new tourist office is anchored in this logic. However, any overly simplistic analogy with the ancient structure cannot compete with the historical depth that the aqueduct evokes. Moreover, the small size of the program (100 m²) complicates the desired relationship between the two buildings. The project cannot compete in terms of size and presence, so it draws its initial intentions from a reflection encompassing the site, the landscape, the soils, and the paths. It is envisioned as a scenographic device that showcases the aqueduct from the visitors' perspective. It serves as a complement to the aqueduct, less an architectural object than the construction of a landscape.Text description provided by the architects.Nearly 2,000 years ago, Lugdunum (Lyon) was mainly located on the hill of Fourvière. In order to provide drinking water to the entire city, four aqueducts transported water from the nearby mountain ranges (Mont d'Or, Monts du Lyonnais, Pilat Massif) to the capital of Roman Gaul. The Gier aqueduct was by far the longest (over 80 km) and the most technically complex, given the geography it traversed. Its most spectacular legacy today is the alignment of 72 arches, which powerfully emerge at the Plat de l'Air site, to the north of the town of Chaponost. It is here, in direct contact with one of the last tangible remnants of the Roman memory of the area, that the Vallée du Garon Community of Municipalities chose to establish a new tourist office in 2019, at the heart of this remarkable site. The project plot, located in direct view of the aqueduct's arches, was then a slightly sloped, vacant lot, classified as agricultural land in the local urban planning map, limiting the future construction to a maximum floor area of 100 m².A series of Douglas fir posts supports a beam, which in turn supports all the roof purlins. This structure mirrors the rhythm of the arches, but expresses lightness. The roof is therefore reduced to its simplest expression, with a visible purlin network on the ceiling that characterizes the space, giving it a domestic identity. The project aims to be welcoming, and the raw materials are left exposed, without coatings. The zinc roof blends into the landscape, ensuring the greatest possible delicacy in a spirit of "disappearance," leaving space for the presence of the aqueduct, without any spectacular gestures. The project, not by mimicking but by interpretation, resonates with the aqueduct. Beyond the materiality of the walls, an attentive dialogue is established regarding the proportions and composition of the two structures.