On the World Heritage Day, “heritage” is often framed in terms of protection — of what must be preserved, maintained, safeguarded. Yet, increasingly, its relevance lies elsewhere: in its capacity to be reinterpreted, reactivated and brought back into use.
In Port Louis, the Victoria Urban Terminal offers a compelling example of this shift. At the centre of the project stands the remains of the former central railway station — a 19th-century structure listed by the National Heritage Trust Fund, long abandoned and progressively deteriorating. Rather than treating it as a fragment to conserve in isolation, the project positions heritage as a driver within a broader urban transformation.
A Structure in Time
The former central railway station of Port Louis, built in the second half of the 19th century, once formed part of a wider infrastructural network that structured movement across Mauritius. At a time when rail transport underpinned the island’s economic and social organisation, the station operated as a key urban node — connecting territories, facilitating trade, and anchoring daily flows within the capital.
Its architecture reflects this role. The combination of stone masonry and metal structure expresses both durability and industrial logic, characteristic of the period. Beyond its function, the building contributed to the identity of Port Louis, marking a point of arrival and departure within the city.
With the gradual decline of the railway system, the station lost its purpose. What followed was a progressive abandonment. Fire further compromised the structure, accelerating its deterioration and leaving it exposed within an increasingly dense and active urban environment.
Recognised and listed by the National Heritage Trust Fund, the building remained a significant yet vulnerable landmark — one of those architectural joyaux whose presence endured, even as its future became increasingly uncertain.
What Remained
Prior to intervention, the building existed in a heavily degraded state.
Left abandoned for years, it had no defined use or maintenance. Sections of stone walls remained standing, alongside fragments of the original metal framework, but the overall integrity of the structure was compromised.
The impact of the fire was still visible, affecting both stability and legibility. Elements had been damaged, displaced or lost altogether. Its condition also raised broader concerns. Located within a highly frequented public environment, the site had become an eyesore in the city — posing safety and health risks due to its instability and lack of control.
Environmental pressures further compounded the situation. The site was subject to recurrent water management issues characteristic of Port Louis, with increasing vulnerability linked to climate change and rising sea levels. And yet, despite its degradation, the essential qualities of the building remained legible.
Its proportions, structural rhythm and the material presence of the stonework continued to define the space.
Beyond its physical condition, the structure remained an archive — its materials, proportions, and traces offering a direct reading of its history. The challenge was therefore not only to preserve what remained, but to determine how a structure at once fragile and incomplete could be meaningfully re-engaged.
Working with the Existing
The development of the Victoria Urban Terminal — conceived as a new piece of transport infrastructure — provided the framework within which this question could be addressed.
Delivered through a public-private partnership and led by a private consortium, the project required a high degree of coordination across stakeholders. The support of public authorities, including the National Heritage Trust Fund, proved essential throughout.
Within this context, the decision to retain and repurpose the historic structure constituted a deliberate — and in many respects, bold — move. Before any intervention, the existing fabric first had to be understood.
Surveys, documentation, and heritage assessments provided a precise understanding of what remained — extending beyond the physical to include proportion, rhythm, and material logic. The building revealed itself as a structure to be interpreted, rather than replaced.
The stonework, in particular, emerged as a defining element — both structural and expressive, carrying the logic and identity of the building.
Intervening on a structure more than 150 years old demanded both technical rigour and restraint. In collaboration with ARUP, structural strategies were developed to stabilise and consolidate the existing fabric, while preserving its legibility.
A key aspect of the intervention lay at foundation level. In response to structural requirements, as well as increasing risks associated with climate change and rising sea levels, the building was carefully raised. This operation required full access to the base of the structure, making it necessary to dismantle the existing stonework.
Each stone for part of the building was therefore individually removed, numbered and meticulously documented, allowing for precise reassembly in its original position.
This process was not simply a method of reconstruction, but a prerequisite to enable the adjustment and consolidation of the foundations, while integrating improved water evacuation strategies adapted to the Port Louis context.
Once these interventions were completed, the structure was reassembled with precision — maintaining its original reading while ensuring long-term resilience.
Le métier qui rejaillit
If the intervention required technical precision, its execution relied equally on craftsmanship. Working with existing stone calls for a different approach. It cannot be imposed — it must first be understood. Each element carries its own irregularities, shaped by time and previous construction methods. As Steeve Flore, the main stone craftman of the project explains:
“Lor enn proze koumsa, li pa koumadir pe travay lor enn nouvo kiksoz. To bizin adapte ar seki deza la. Bann ros-la desid enn parti travay-la. Nou fer travay-la par lame, pa avek masinn, pou ariv sa nivo presizion-la.”
(*On a project like this, it’s not like working on something new. You have to adapt to what is already there. The stones decide part of the work. We do the work by hand, not with machines, to achieve that level of precision.)
Many of the stones date back to the colonial period, assembled under very different conditions. Intervening on them is not only a technical operation, but a continuation of that history.
“Sa bann ros-la finn la depi bien lontan. Kan nou travay lor zot, nou pe osi travay avek zot listwar. Ou pa kapav tret zot kouma bann nouvo materyel.
Zordi dan Moris, bann artizan an ros pe vinn rar, parski se enn metie bien fizik ek exigean”
(*These stones have been here for a long time. When we work on them, we are also working with their history. You cannot treat them like new materials. Today in Mauritius, stone craftsmen are becoming rare, as it is a very physical and demanding trade.)
On site, Mauritian craftsmen and builders played a central role in this process. Their work required constant adjustment, interpretation, and coordination. The stones were often heavy, weathered, and irregular, demanding careful handling and precise positioning.
“Ena pies ki bien lour, parfwa andomaze. Ou bizin aziste sakenn avek swin e parfwa invant bann nouvo teknik lor plas pou fer bann zafer marse. Proze-la ti enn vre defi, me zame nou dir non a enn defi — nou touletan rod bann solision anmemtan ki nou asir enn travay de kalite ki pou dire avek letan.“
(*“Some pieces are very heavy, sometimes damaged. You have to adjust each one carefully and sometimes invent new techniques on the spot to make things work. The project was a real challenge, but we never say no to a challenge — we always look for solutions while ensuring quality work that will last over time.”)
The dismantling and reassembly process required a high level of accuracy, where each element directly influenced the coherence of the whole.
“Sak ros ti marke avan tir li. Si sekans-la perdi, alignman-la perdi. Li kouma enn puzzle — tou bizin retourn dan so bon plas. Avek lexperyans, nou finn devlop nou prop fason pou anrezistre sak eleman dan enn kaye, pou ki enn fwa ki finn demonte, kapav re-monte li exakteman kouma avan. Sa metod-la asir kontinite — mem si mo pa la enn zour, travay-la kapav kontinie.”
(*”Each stone was marked before being removed. If the sequence is lost, the alignment is lost. It’s like a puzzle — everything has to go back in the right place. With experience, we developed our own way of recording each element in a notebook, so that once dismantled, it can be reassembled exactly as before. This method ensures continuity — even if I’m not there one day, the work can continue.”)
At times, the process demanded collective problem-solving.
“Ti ena bann moman kot nou finn bizin arete ek reflesi ansam avek tou bann parti prenan: National Heritage Trust Fund, bann mason, ek bann arsitek. Lor enn proze sa lanpler-la, pa tou ki kapav rezoud tousel. Me nou bien fier nou kontribision ek konfians ki bann arsitek finn met dan nou.”
(*There were times when we had to stop and think together with all the stakeholders: the National Heritage Trust Fund, the builders and the architects. On a project of this scale, not everything can be solved alone. But we are very proud of our input and the trust that the architects have placed in us.)
While contemporary tools supported the work, the essential precision remained in the hand — guided by experience rather than automation.
“Zordi nou ena bann zouti ki fer bann zafer vinn pli vit, me vre travay ankor dan lame. Mo ena 55 an zordi, e mo dan sa metie-la depi mo 14 an. Sa nivo presizion-la se enn zafer ki ou aprann avek letan — depi mo granper ziska zordi.”
(*Today we have tools that speed things up, but the real work is still at hand. I’m 55 today, and I’ve been in this profession since I was 14 years old. That level of accuracy is something you learn over time — from my grandfather to today.”)
This knowledge, often transmitted over time, is becoming increasingly rare. Fewer practitioners are trained in these techniques, making their contribution all the more critical. What emerges from this process is not simply reconstruction. It is continuity.
“Nepli ena boukou dimounn ki aprann sa kalite travay-la. Me li inportan — si nou pa fer li kouma bizin, nou perdi enn parti nou leritaz. Mo kwar li inportan partaz seki nou kone avek bann seki anvi aprann ek konpran. Transmet sa konesans-la li esansiel pou mwa”
(*Not many people learn this kind of work anymore. But it’s important — if we don’t do it properly, we lose part of our heritage. I believe it’s important to share what we know with those who want to learn and understand. Passing on this knowledge is essential to me.”)
What emerges from this process is not simply reconstruction. It is continuity.
“Nanye pa inposib. Nou bann anset finn realiz sa avek boukou mwins mwayin — alor kouma nou kapav dir ki nou pa kapav, avek bann teknolozi ki ena zordi? Nou valoriz travay avek bann arsitek ki soutenir sa vizion-la e ede pou fer sir ki nou leritaz kontinie viv.”
(*“Nothing is impossible. Our ancestors achieved this with far fewer means — so how could we say we cannot, with the technologies available today? We value working with architects who support this vision and help ensure that our heritage continues to live on.”)
A Heritage Reintegrated
Today, the former station no longer reads as a fragment left behind.
Repurposed and integrated within the Victoria Urban Terminal, it now forms part of a broader urban composition — one that reconnects the site to the rhythms of the city. The building is once again accessible, visible and inhabited, no longer set apart but embedded within everyday movement.
Its significance no longer lies solely in what it once was, but in what it now enables. As part of a contemporary infrastructure, it contributes to circulation, public life and the continuity of the urban fabric.
In this shift, preservation moves beyond safeguarding. Through repurposing, heritage becomes operative — not something to be only observed but something that participates in the life of the city and most importantly must be viable financially.
Repurposing the Existing
Beyond the project itself, the Victoria Urban Terminal raises a broader question: how should existing structures be approached within rapidly evolving urban contexts?
Rather than positioning heritage as a constraint, the project demonstrates its potential as a resource — one capable of anchoring new interventions while carrying forward a sense of place.
This approach moves away from superficial or purely aesthetic restoration, favouring instead a precise engagement with the existing fabric and its inherent logic.
Repurposing, in this sense, offers a viable alternative to both demolition and static conservation. It allows buildings to adapt, to accommodate new uses and to remain relevant without losing their architectural and historical identity.
In Mauritius, this approach opens meaningful perspectives for other historic structures where reactivation through new programmes could ensure both preservation and continuity.
Acknowledgements
Our sincere thanks to all those who made this project possible, especially Steeve and Ketty Flore, whose passion, energy, and talent were key to the realisation of the restoration.
To the vision behind the Victoria Urban Terminal and to the strong collaboration between public and private sectors that allowed it to take shape. To the leadership within the consortium and to all partners involved, for their trust and commitment throughout.
We are especially grateful to the National Heritage Trust Fund, the authorities, our clients, colleagues, builders and craftsmen, whose engagement, energy and dedication were essential at every stage.
It is through this collective effort that the opportunity was given to bring the building back into use and integrate it within a larger whole — a bold step made possible by shared conviction and collaboration.
