Southern France riverbank projects in Montpellier and Perpignan: from designed space to interpreted space

(1)

This article was downloaded by: [82.245.48.119]

On: 18 March 2014, At: 10:20 Publisher: Routledge

Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Journal of Landscape Architecture

Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:

http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rjla20

Southern France riverbank projects in Montpellier and Perpignan: from designed space to interpreted space

Fanny Romain^a

a National Institute of horticulture and Landscape, Agrocampus ouest, Angers UMR CNRS 6590 Espaces et Sociétés (Spaces and Societies) 2 rue André Le Notre 49045 Angers cédex 01 France Phone: + 33-2-41-22-55-25 Fax: +33-2-41-22-55-28

Published online: 14 Mar 2014.

To cite this article: Fanny Romain (2014) Southern France riverbank projects in Montpellier and Perpignan: from designed space to interpreted space, Journal of Landscape Architecture, 9:1, 32-41, DOI: 10.1080/18626033.2014.898827

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/18626033.2014.898827

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic

reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/

terms-and-conditions

(2)

Fanny Romain, National Institute of Horticulture and Landscape, Agrocampus Ouest, Angers, France

Southern France riverbank projects in Montpellier and Perpignan: from designed space to interpreted space

Abstract

This examination of recent landscape architecture interventions along two rivers in southern France_the River Lez in Montpellier and the River Têt in Perpignan_questions the popular notion of ‘intervening in space’.

Observing the features of the interventions and their consequences, the au- thor investigates whether a change of paradigm occurs with regard to the approach employed. The results of this analysis demonstrate an evolution in the role of the landscape professional, who now seeks to translate or interpret a space rather than to act upon it materially. Pertinent tasks com- prise not only installation in the sense of designing or bringing order to space, but also producing communications about the site. The landscape architect aims, at at a local scale, to persuade the community to accept the existing space (notably using a discourse on the values of natural and cul- tural heritage); and at a territorial scale, to use the riverbanks, and more generally the idea of the river, to restructure or give coherence to the city.

Finally, this river intervention approach produces either conceptual pieces (such as reports, maps, films, animation) or minimal changes for ambitious infrastructural projects.

Communication tools / conceptual design / Montpellier and Perpignan / riverbank projects / landscape practices

P r o J E C t N a M E

Green Lez

l o C a t i o N

Montpellier, France

C o M M i s s i o N i N G a G E N C y

City of Montpellier, Landscape and Nature Department

P r i M E C o N t r a C t o r o r d E s i G N E r

City of Montpellier, Landscape and Nature Department

d a t E s o F s t U d y

Not available

d a t E s o F C o N s t r U C t i o N

2004, Riverbanks of Rimbaud Park 2005, Riverbanks of Méric Park 2006, Riverbanks of Lavalette

s U r F a C E a r E a

900 hectares, for the three areas

t o t a l C o s t

€ 393,650

Rimbaud Park area:

€ 170,539 Méric Park area:

€ 38,111 Lavalette area:

€ 185,000

P r o J E C t N a M E

Têt River project

(First segment: along Orry dyke)

l o C a t i o N

Perpignan, France

C o M M i s s i o N i N G a G E N C y

Perpignan Méditerrannée local authorities association

P r i M E C o N t r a C t o r o r d E s i G N E r

Landscape architect:

Marti Franch, Barcelona, Spain Architect: Philippe Pous, Perpignan

d a t E o F s t U d y

2004, analysis at a territorial scale by the Perpignan Médi- terrannée local authorities association

Spring 2006, consultation phase involving the local population

2006, completed segment along Orry dyke

d a t E o F C o N s t r U C t i o N

2007, segment along Orry dyke

s U r F a C E a r E a

2,65 hectares

t o t a l C o s t

€ 731,000

Under the sky

Downloaded by [82.245.48.119] at 10:20 18 March 2014

(3)

Marseille Toulon

Nice Montpellier

Perpignan

le R hône

la Durance le Verdon

le V ar

l‘Huveaune le Gard

l‘Hérau lt

l‘Orb l‘Aude

l‘Agly

le Tech la Têt

le L ez

River installation projects receive considerable media atten- tion. Such projects, as recreative public spaces, represent a subject among landscape architects that has been explored only since the 1990s, and one that is capable of revealing the evolution or stasis of a practice. Within the framework of a doctoral thesis (Romain 2010), landscape architectural strate- gies for riverbank design in two French Mediterranean cities, Montpellier and Perpignan, and their evolution were studied (Fig. 1). The two sites in question had not been transformed previously by landscape projects and were considered mar- ginal locations before 2000. The geomorphological and his- torical contexts of the sites explain this situation: the cities’ centres were located at some distance from the torrential rivers Lez and Têt respectively until controls for flood risks, such as barrage, recalibration, retention ponds, and dykes, were integrated in the 1970s and ’80s.

In Montpellier, the Green Lez Operation (Fig. 2) com- prised three projects along the Lez by the city’s Landscape and Nature Office. They included the riverbanks of Rim- baud (2004), Méric (2005), and Lavalette (2006) parks. Because the landscape architecture team was part of the City Office, and not a completely distinct entity from the commissioning agency, the design (order) was not expressed clearly. In Perpignan, the first segment of the Têt River project_along Orry dyke (2007) by landscape architect Martí Franch and ar- chitect Philippe Pous_was studied (Fig. 3). In this case, the local authorities association was the commissioner of the work. The design (order) occurred in several steps: first, a river analysis at the territorial scale was completed in 2004 by the local authorities association; [1] second, a consulting phase with the population took place in spring 2006; and, finally, orientation meetings were held for the treatment of the city’s riverbanks. These orientation sessions called for a landscape treatment of the left bank, including riparian plantings, and a maintenance programme that would

‘sculpt’ the existing landscape, as mentioned in the architectural team’s file. [2] Although a certain approach was encour- aged, the indications were wide enough to grant some free- dom to the landscape architect’s team. A comparison of these projects with those carried out during preceding decades that incorporated more engineering (such as the River Basse in Perpignan and one on another section of the Lez in Mont- pellier), reveal a strong evolution in forms and landscape practices. The transformations become increasingly minimal. Therefore, the role of the landscape professional when addressing riverbank spaces must be reassessed. Is there a paradigm change with regard to riverbank intervention?

To answer this question at both the riverbank and city scale, the methods used in both Montpellier and Perpignan were examined. The presentation folders were researched and semi-directive interviews were conducted with the landscape architects and contracting authorities who participated in the Têt and Green Lez installations.

Figure 1 Localization of the rivers Lez and Têt in the hydrographic context of the Mediterranean Arc rivers

LAvALEttE

LEZ rivEr

LUnArEt ZooLoGicAL pArK

MÉric

GUiLHEM nAvitAUx

st-LAZArE cEMEtEry

MontpLAisir

sAUrEt

riMbAUD pArK

sALicAtE sEMALEn

L’ÉvEˆQUE MArtinEt

OU T DO OR ACT IV IT IE S IN A NAT UR AL MILIE U N AT U R E

E CO LO GY

T HE BR IDGE S R N 4 13 -S NCF

O UT DOOR ACT IV IT IE S IN AN U R BAN M ILIE U

UR BA N GRE E N LE Z

Figure 2 Different sections of the River Lez in Montpellier, from the more ‘natural’ to the more ‘urban’

AntiGonE

(4)

southern France riverbank projects in Montpellier and Perpignan: from designed space to interpreted space Fanny romain

Staging existing spaces

In both cities there is a flagrant difference between recent river projects and those of the past. Architect Ricardo Bofill’s 1977 design of the urban Lez extension of the Antigone dis- trict in Montpellier channelled the river with straightened meanders, large concrete embankments, and the total sup- pression of riparian vegetation. In Perpignan, the channeli- zation in 1975 of the Basse, a tributary of the Têt River, fol- lowed the same overall principles, except the lower quay was rendered physically inaccessible and horticultural approach- es, such as mowed lawn and flowerbeds, were used. By con- trast, more recent projects_the Green Lez in Montpellier and the Têt in Perpignan_valorize existing riparian vegetation; favour paths of rural inspiration, stabilized for instance with concrete; and try to conserve the original aspect of these torrential rivers. There is a shift from quay to riverbank; no longer is it a question of transforming stretches of riverside into urban quays, but a matter of response by retaining wild banks_the same banks that shortly before were considered disreputable wasteland. This evolution has occurred with- in a larger context (Romain 2010: 27–51) of flood risk policies, ecological preoccupations, and economic interests_commer- cial use of the river’s image (Chabenat 1996)_which led to a generalization of (re)naturing operations or disinstallation of engineered waterways (Lechner 2006), such as depoldariza- tion in the Netherlands (Van Kote 2007), the rediscovery of the

Sumida in Tokyo (Waley 1990), and the abandonment of the Rhine–Rhône junction canal in France (Bethemont 2002). Even if opposite examples exist such as the Penn’s Landing water- front in Philadelphia (Giband 1998), or ambiguous ones such as the successful Cheonggyecheon River restoration in Seoul, which uses a system of pumps to bring water in the new river (Rinaldi 2007), here we examine how landscape professionals’

tools and values are modified by this evolution.

A few important elements can aid in understanding these on-site, small material transformations. First, the pathways along the banks of the Têt and Green Lez were already in use, but because they were not labelled public space, only a small part of the population made use of them. Paths already existed and it was simply a case of providing better signage.

In Perpignan, the paths were moved a few metres (Fig. 15) to (re)compose the riverbank space and make it more homo- geneous with similar distances between water, paths, and stone paving (Fig. 6). In Montpellier, the pathways were left untouched (Figs. 12 &13) or simply reinforced at points, notably through the use of a stabilizing layer or exposed ag- gregate concrete. The very act of change can be put into question through plant intervention. The ‘reorganization of the Lez banks’ on the Lavalette domain demonstrates that existing plant species (oaks, bald cypresses, yews, sycamores) and hydro-morphological features such as the dry riverbed Figure 3 General remodeling project for the River Têt in

Perpignan, conceived for the river's entire urban passage

Figure 4 Wooden balcony footpath on the Têt, making the river and riverbank more visible (2013)

nUrsEry nEW tHEAtrE

conGrEss pArK orry DyKE (sEction rEALiZED)

A RAGO B RI D GE

Exposition pArK

st. JAcQUEs GArDEns

vAUbAn DyKE

P. PoUS AND M. FRANCh, 2006

TÊT R I VE R J O F F R E B RID G E SNCF BR IDG E

(5)

Figure 8 A more sweeping view of the Têt’s riparian vegetation, contrasting with the palm trees of the Orry dyke’s

‘exotic garden’, created prior to the remodeling project (2012)

Figure 5 top left A view of the River Têt in Perpignan that shows the unity of its two riverbanks, despite the fact that the inaccessible right bank (left in the photograph) is outside the project territory (2012)

Figure 6 left The left bank's pathway along the Têt, centred, but retaining the appearance of the earlier goat path (2012)

Figure 7 right The conserved riparian buffer facing the Eastern Pyrenees in the background. A city—nature relationship valorized by this natural heritage project at the heart of the city (2012)

(6)

A B C D

E G F

H I

serve as toponyms of the projected space (Fig. 9), becoming key points. When new plant choices were made, the goal was to transform the users’ literal and figurative perspectives of riverbank landscapes; such changes remained minor. In Per- pignan, the cane of Provence_an invasive species_was sup- pressed, but most of the tree species were retained (Figs. 5

& 7). On the Têt and Green Lez riverbanks_which were not

‘denatured’, so one cannot speak of ‘(re)naturing’_the riparian vegetation described as ‘natural heritage’ is thus revealed and orientates the reading of the river (Fig. 10).

From an architectural viewpoint, two actions can be described. In Perpignan, a wooden footbridge was installed along the Orry dyke garden as a balcony over the river (Figs. 4

& 8). This footbridge, the only real intervention in this space, highlights the river waters, riverbanks, and pedestrians, so often hidden by plants. Before the restructuring, the riverbank was a kind of hidden space and considered by many users as a dangerous area. In Montpellier, small scenographic elements were implemented to guide viewing of the site by channelling users’ discovery modes, notably by constructing wooden platforms that are quite common to peri-urban or forest leisure spaces: picnic areas, pontoons, pontoon-trib- unes, and passageways (Figs. 11 & 14). [3] These structures protect the flora and fauna by guiding movements and use while also emphasizing the river’s specific significance. It is not only a question of constructing ‘good practices’ for the site, but also of achieving a ‘good’ reception as visitors ex- perience the river and its banks physically and intellectually.

The approach of ‘creating heritage’ aimed at giving a vi- sion and understanding of a site is also reinforced off-site through mediation. Such mediation is facilitated by written and visual tools: communications, articles, and brochures [4]

in Montpellier, and film [5] on the Têt shown during public meetings in Perpignan. User orientation and guidance are thus indeed considered to be indispensable corollaries to the reception of the riverbanks. Animation tools are also used to transmit information about both the river ecosys- tem through ‘thematic visits’, [6] considered to be scientific, and guidelines for users, such as informing visitors of their rights and obligations on site and, thus, protecting the river from its public. This responds to a frequently voiced desire for social regulation.

The interest shown in the wild aspects of riparian vegeta- tion (Romain 2010: 216–220) and its conservation and protec- tion is translated into the staging of existing spaces through small-scale, episodic interventions and communications operations. This shift in the practices of Perpignan and Mont- pellier’s landscape architects preceded changes in public policies, [7] for the projects had existed since the 1990s, but remained on paper. In the meantime an emphasis on riparian vegetation has become a major element in the public policies of Perpignan and Montpellier (Barthement 1998: 354).

Through the Têt and Lez projects new ways of comprehend- ing river landscape have been introduced. Yet, even if the longing for ‘wild’ nature is at the heart of the proponents of riparian vegetation, constant and careful maintenance is

LAvALEttE pArK oaks

(Picnic area)

Yew allée

Bald cypresses Passageway

Wooden platforms

Threshold, platforms, and stairs Pontoon, stairs, and wooden platform Wooden gradines

Stairs, passageway, and wooden platform Picnic area

Threshold, platforms, and stairs Existing Green Lez pathway Secondary pathway (wooden platform) A

B C D E F G H

Figure 9 Extract from the Lavalette domain’s ‘Lez riverbanks reinstallation plan’: a selection of existing elements that form the key spaces of the project

Sycamor e allée LEZ rivEr

Dry riverbed

(7)

Figure 10 In Montpellier, the Green Lez at the level of the Lavalette domain.

A conserved natural space in one of the large French agglomerations (2008)

Figure 11 Example of a wooden deck construction on the Lavalette trail aimed at preserving the site against human frequentation (2008)

Figure 12 left & 13 right Here the river access space along the Lez was not modified. The space became a project only because it was referred to as a project (2008).

(8)

required to maintain a ‘natural’ aspect (Kalaora 1993; Picon 1988). In addition, although the scenographic intervention remains minimal, the ideological intervention aimed at con- vincing users to follow ‘good practices’ and develop a com- petent understanding of the sites is considerable and has proven effective, as the implementation of the projects has demonstrated.

Articulating the river in urban space

The initial aim was to reclaim the rivers in Montpellier and Perpignan through a minimalist staging of the existing riparian vegetation. A second goal, this time at the urban scale, was defined in response to the desire to give the river a new role within the territory of the surrounding municipalities.

Two levels are to be distinguished here: the river level and the public space level.

Today, it is apparent that river projects have become part of urban marketing strategies, often contributing to the at- tractiveness of a city’s terrain (Ingallina 2007: 9). Due to its strong features and clearly defined identity, a river usually provides a crucial element to a town’s or city’s character and serves as the origin of myths and histories through which it

positions itself at a regional, national, or even global scale. In France, in Lyon (In Situ Agency), Bordeaux (Claire and Michel Corajoud), and now Paris (with recent riverbank transformations from the Orsay to the Quai Branly Museum) the role of rivers are being reinforced as distinctive signs, even signa- tures. The new status given to watercourses manifests itself in planning strategies that seek to link individual, isolated river projects. While placing major public buildings on the riverside (the new City Hall in Montpellier and the Théâtre de l’Archipel in Perpignan, both designed by the architect Jean Nouvel and completed in 2011) or the construction of locally isolated river parks along the banks (similar in man- ner to the large autonomous urban parks of the nineteenth century_New York’s Central or London’s Regent’s parks_

and twentieth century_the André Citroën or Bercy parks in Paris) can serve as strong signals, it is the overall continuity of the banks that is key to constructing an urban identity.

The watercourse becomes a blue framework, ordering and articulating the variety of projects along its banks.

In what ways can a process of comprehensive riverside transformation then be implemented? First of all, in the two riverbank projects studied, it has been a work of longi- Figure 14 The River Lez, before (2006) and after (2008) project realization.

Few elements changed, only an installation of picnic tables was added.

Figure 15 The River Têt, before (2006) and after (2013) the remodeling.

A discreet project with a widened path and several plantations

CITY oF MoNTPELIIER

(9)

tudinal linking that makes it possible to render the concept of a green/blue continuum effective. Transits, access points, linkages, lengthenings [8] are so many different modes of im- agined connection through which the framework logic becomes manifest. In Montpellier the constituency of the river continuum stretches 5 kilometres past the city to Palavas-les- Flots where the Lez empties into the Mediterranean, following the commissioning authorities’ objective to transform the city into a coastal town. Next, discursive operations and, notably, cartographic communication are carried out so that the space appears as logically continuous from one end to the other of municipal or even inter-municipal limits. This off-site work impacts and modifies social representations of the river. For example, there is a grading of both landscape and semantics along the Montpellier watercourse: ‘The installation project unfurls […] a “wild” Lez near the scrub- land, a “green” Lez at the city gates, “urban” channelling and smoothing for the staging of the concrete-lined segment and, further downstream, a “port-like” Lez at the opening of the Port-Marianne artificial basin’ (Ferras & Volle 2002: 187). The

idea of this ‘logical’ landscape construction, this coherent

‘global space’,[9] which is perceived as being beneficial to the municipality, is highlighted also in the rhetorical strategy.

Hence, at this register as well, the challenge of intervening in a landscape lies not only in actions of material modification of space, but it also consists in the schematic structuring of urban space. That is, here the landscape architecture becomes more a work of urban planning at the territorial scale rather than a pure process of design at the riverbank scale.

This observation is confirmed through the way urban river ‘re-appropriation’ is treated by landscape architects and town planners in its second phase. Not only is the riverbank project within the confines of the city based on an inclusive process of reconstituting the river format as a coherent ‘blue framework’, as described above, but it also aims to use this format as an armature for structuring a set of open urban spaces (Fig. 16). To do so, two types of action are performed.

Perpignan, Têt River project Torcatis Prairie Park The nursery Théâtre de l'Archipel Orry dyke garden Vauban dyke Congress Park Exposition Park 1

2 3 4 5 6 7

1

2 3

4 5

6 7

Montpellier, Green Lez operation Lavalette riverbank

Méric riverbank Rimbaud riverbank 1

2 3 1

2

3 Lez River

Figure 16 Location of projects and polarization of public spaces around the Perpignan and Montpellier river courses

Têt River

0 1 km 0 1 km

(10)

The first acts directly on the river space, modifying it physically. In Perpignan, this includes areas surrounding the Têt as part of the scheme laid out by the landscape architect: [10]

among the different points of intervention identified, only the first applies to the riverbed. All other interventions focus on the river’s context, which comprises a variety of spaces in proximity to the river: development of the Claudion Prai- rie–Torcatis Park, re-development of Torcatis Avenue, the fairgrounds parking area, and the exhibition park. The second type of action impacts indirectly on the river space, once again through cartographic indications found in urban documents. The hydrographic network is shown in relation to the Urban Locations Plan as one type of large green space within the urban agglomeration, which greatly increases the documented volume of public space (Bonin 2007). Not only does the river represent additional natural space within the city, but it also polarizes and unifies the contiguous open spaces, thus forming the outline of the urban ‘green framework’. In Montpellier, the hydrographic network is indeed presented as an element that ‘irrigates’ the city with green spaces: numerous parks, amongst them the city’s larg- est, are located along the Lez and, on the western municipal limits, its tributary the Mosson. This string of public spaces linked by the river is called the ‘Green Marathon’: a 42-kilo- metre continuity of more or less natural spaces for recrea-

tion that encircles the city and reinforces the role of urban open spaces by elevating their magnitude and visibility (Fig.

17). The river is synonymous, as it were, with the holistic approach that is the basis of the city’s new open space policy. It seems to constitute a spatial continuity, which henceforth participates in city design. Even if urban expansion tends to remove certain landmarks, original structures of the urban fabric, and limits of the city, the geographical support on the part of the river becomes an intra- and inter-urban marker in its own right. The river assumes a preponderant role.

The format of urban river transformations thus concerns two successive levels: the river itself at the first level, the blue framework, and the river within the structure of urban spaces at the second level, the green framework. At both levels, landscape architecture intervention no longer focuses so much on transforming the concerned spaces physically, but on articulating the different scales in a territorial organiza- tion. The river landscape appears as an essential element of present-day urban construction in both cases: its material reality and its images.

Conclusion: the case for a readjustment of riverbank intervention schemes?

The initial question was: Is there a paradigm change with regard to riverbank intervention? An analysis of the recent landscape architecture projects involving the Lez in Mont- pellier and the Têt in Perpignan shows that there has indeed emerged a different approach toward riverbanks, one that consists in a shift from designed space to interpreted space.

At the various scales to be considered, the question of design decreases, whereas the role of communication tools grows.

Figure 17 The public spaces around the rivers Lez and Mosson, surrounding Montpellier in a

‘Green Marathon’

St-Clément aqueduct

O domain Paillade Mas Park

St-Lazare Cemetery Méric domain

Rimbaud Park MOSSON

RIEUCO ULO

N

LIRO NDE Malbosc Park

Rauze Park

Méjanelle Agricultural Park Lunaret Natural Reserve

Pastourelles Park

Grammont Castle Park

St-Etienne Cemetery

Marianne Park Lironde Park Richter Park

Bonnier de la Mosson domain

Font-Colombe Park

Jacques Roseau Park

Bagatelle Park OVALIE-GRISETTE

Grisettes Agricultural Park

City Hall Park

Montaubérou

ANTIGONE

Flaugergues GRAMMONT MONTMAUR-LUNARET

LEZ

ST-JEAN-DE-VÉDAS GRABELS

SAINT-CLÉMENT

DE-RIVIÈRE MONTFERRIER

CLAPIERS

CASTELNAU-LE-LEZ

SAINT-AUNÈS

MAUGUIO

LATTES LAVÉRUNE

JUVIGNAC

(11)

Notes

1 Perpignan (Communauté d’agglomération et Conseil Géné- ral) (2004), “Étude globale sur le bassin versant de la Têt, phase I: étude et diagnostic, et phase II: diagnostic et propositions d'objectifs”, unpublished internal study, 222.

2 Pous, P. and Franch, M. (2006), “Aménagement des berges de la Têt à Perpignan”, unpublished draft, 35.

3 Ville de Montpellier (2007), ‘Travaux de réaménagement des berges de Lavalette dans le cadre de l'opération “Lez vert”’, press kit, March 2007, 6.

4 Communauté d’agglomération de Montpellier (2010), ‘Le Lez est sauvé’ and ‘Environnement: les paysages du Lez deviennent intouchables', La Gazette de Montpellier 1131, Feb. 2010; and Communauté d’agglomération de Montpellier (2006), ‘Excur- sion au bord du Lez vert’, Harmonie, le magazine d’information de Montpellier Agglomération 232, Sept. 2006.

5 Tricot, C. (2006), La Têt, un courant de nature dans la ville, film commissioned by the Perpignan-Méditerranée local authorities association, 33 min.

6 Ville de Montpellier (2007), ‘Travaux de réaménagement des berges de Lavalette dans le cadre de l'opération “Lez vert”’, op. cit. note 3.

7 Conseil en Architecture Urbanism and Environnement des Pyrénées orientales (1995), “Parcours d’eau: la Têt et Perpig- nan, un vaste parc urbain au fil de l’eau”, 45 pages; Ville de Montpellier (1990), “Aménagement du Lez vert, entre les lim- ites nord de la commune et le pont de l’Auberou”, unpublished internal study, 56.

8 Expressions used in ‘Aménagement du Lez vert, entre les lim- ites nord de la commune et le pont de l'Auberou’, op. cit. note 7.

9 Idem.

10 Pous, P. and Franch, M. (2006), “Aménagement des berges de la Têt”, op. cit., note 2; 4-6.

Sources of illustrations 2, 9, and 17:

City of Montpellier, Landscape and Nature Department.

References

Bartement, D. (1998), Projet de ville et représentation. Montpellier:

Recherche sur les figures emblématiques du patrimoine et de l'écologie dans le projet de ville, Ph. D. dissertation, Paul Valéry University, Montpellier, 384.

Bethemont, J. (2002/1999), Les grands fleuves, entre nature et société (Paris: A. Colin), 255.

Bonin, S. (2007), ‘Fleuves en ville : enjeux écologiques et pro- jets urbains’, Strates: matériaux pour la recherche en sciences sociales 13: 185–197 [website], http://strates.revues.org/5963, accessed 15 March 2013.

Chabenat, G. (1996), L’aménagement fluvial et la mémoire:

parcours d’un anthropologue sur le fleuve Rhône (Paris/Montréal: L’harmattan), 302.

Donadieu, P. (2006), ‘Landscape Urbanism in Europe:

From Brownfields to Sustainable Urban Development’, JoLA 2, Autumn, pp. 54 –65.

Ferras, R. and Volle, J.-P. (2002), Montpellier Méditerranée (Paris: Economica), 212.

Giban, D. (1998), ‘Les paysages du front d’eau à Philadelphie : du passéisme au post-modernisme’, special edition ‘Les pay- sages des cours d’eau’, Revue de géographie de Lyon 73: 321–330.

Ingallina, P. (2007), ‘L'attractivité des territoires’, in L'attractivité des territoires: regards croisés, Actes des séminaires:

février-juillet 2007 (Plan Urbanisme Construction Architecture et al.), 9–18.

Kalaora, B. (1993), Le musée vert. Radiographie du loisir en forêt (Paris: L'harmattan— Collection Environnement), 304.

Lechner, G. (2006), Le fleuve dans la ville, la valorisation des berges en milieu urbain, note de synthèse (Paris La Défense: Direction Gé- nérale de l'Urbanisme, de l'habitat et de la Construction), 119.

Picon, B. (1988), L'eau, l'espace et le temps en Camargue (Arles: Actes Sud), 342.

Pupin, V. (2008), Les approches patrimoniales au regard de la ques- tion de la prise en charge du monde, Ph. D. dissertation, Institut na- tional agronomique Paris-Grignon, 301.

Rinaldi, B. M. (2007), ‘Landscapes of Metropolitan hedonism.

The Cheonggyecheon Linear Park in Seoul’, JoLA 4, Autumn pp. 60–73.

Romain, F. (2010), La construction contemporaine des paysages fluviaux urbains (le cas de deux villes nord méditerranéennes: Perpig- nan et Montpellier) (Saarbrücken: Éditions Universitaires Euro- péennes), 316.

Van Kote, G. (2007), ‘Les Pays-Bas font leur révolution de l’eau’, Le Monde, 3 April.

Waley, P. (1990), ‘The Sumida: Changing Perceptions of a River’, special edition ’Villes et fleuves au Japon et en France’, Revue de géographie de Lyon 65: 261–276.

Biographical note

Fanny Romain is a lecturer at the Angers National Institute of horticulture and Landscape (Agrocampus ouest, France).

Following studies in applied arts and contemporary literature, she was awarded a DPLG in Landscape Architecture (2007) from the École Nationale Supérieure du Paysage de Versailles and a doctorate in Landscape Architecture Sciences (2010) from Agro- ParisTech. her present research, carried out within the CNRS

‘Spaces and Societies’ laboratory, focuses on meta-analyses of projects elaborated by landscape architects: their goals, their procedures, and the forms adopted.

Contact Fanny Romain

National Institute of horticulture and Landscape, Agrocampus ouest, Angers

UMR CNRS 6590 Espaces et Sociétés (Spaces and Societies) 2 rue André Le Notre

49045 Angers cédex 01 France

Phone: + 33-2-41-22-55-25 Fax: +33-2-41-22-55-28

fanny.romain@agrocampus-ouest.fr

While the two projects discussed here are mainly based on conceptual aspects, their impact is nevertheless relatively sig- nificant. With regard to the riverbanks proper, in-situ projects and written documents attest to the determination on the part of landscape professionals to achieve acceptance by the public of the formerly shunned riverbank areas. Rivers have indeed become a major stake for cities, and the public policy aims in Montpellier and Perpignan are to abolish their status as wastelands. A change of discourse on rivers, which foregrounds their significance as elements of a country’s cul- tural heritage rather than as objects of human engineering feats geared towards the mastering of nature, has enabled the public to reread the symbolic appearance of urban water- scapes and has begun to shift the views of citizens and users accordingly. The projects presented here intervene at this discursive level via innovative strategies of mediation. Further- more, the communication strategy aims at reorganizing the coherence of the cityscape by counteracting the discontinuity of the river format and the open urban spaces around it, for

this relying on semiotic cartographic intervention in urban documents. It appears that the tasks of the landscape architect move away from their classical definition as the bringing about of a metamorphosis of a space or similarly interven- tionist objectives, to actions that are more generally associ- ated with the competencies of the commissioners: laying out a programme, fixing goals, creating an overview for the ju- dicious grafting-on of subsequent projects. If this observation is correct, landscape architecture practice is currently moving substantially away from the design process proper to much more abstract planning tasks. This tendency has not yet become very evident in the French context, though such changes have been demanded by landscape architects for a long time. In our opinion, it is indeed highly important that the need for new competencies on the part of landscape archi- tects and urbanists (Donadieu 2006), such as of the orchestra- tion of multi-disciplinary teams, large-scale planning tasks, etc., be fully recognized so that the challenges of the future can be met as efficiently as possible.