26.01.2026

Horizontal development: changing land typologies

Building design

Knowledge

Visitors and worshippers move through the play of light in the spacious corridor of the Masjid Istiqlal in Jakarta - Photo by Alim

Corridors are the underestimated heroes of architecture – sometimes a necessary evil, sometimes a stage for social interaction, often enough simply wasted space. But especially in times of space shortage, climate crisis and digitally driven change, horizontal circulation is increasingly becoming the focus of innovation. The classic corridor typology is under pressure, requirements are growing and solutions are becoming more complex than ever before. Anyone who still believes that the corridor is a relic of post-war modernism should take a closer look. Welcome to the age of corridor transformation.

Corridors are more than just access routes – they reflect social, technical and ecological trends.
In Germany, Austria and Switzerland, a fundamental change in corridor typology is taking place.
Digital tools and AI are opening up new possibilities for multifunctional, adaptive and sustainable corridor concepts.
Smart building technology and sensor technology are transforming the corridor from a dead space to an active resource.
Sustainability requirements are forcing new ways of thinking in corridor planning – from space efficiency to climate adaptation.
Professional planning today requires in-depth technical expertise in the interplay of architecture, building physics and digitalization.
The debate about privacy, community, land use and social control along the corridor is more topical than ever.
Corridor typologies not only shape buildings – they influence work culture, social interaction and urban identity.
Global trends such as co-living, mixed-use and smart buildings are putting traditional corridor models under massive pressure.

Hallway typologies in the DACH region: status quo and paradigm shift

Anyone who thinks the hallway is an architectural side note is very much mistaken. In Germany, Austria and Switzerland, the corridor is not just a question of organization, but a social statement. For decades, the motto was: as narrow as possible, as functional as possible, as cheap as possible. The classic central corridor principle – cellular offices or apartments to the left and right, with a bleak corridor in between – was a symbol of efficiency, but also of social isolation. Residential buildings were dominated by porticos and column solutions, office buildings by endless corridors that turned every working day into a walk through no man’s land.

But times are changing. Today, corridors are the real-life laboratory for a whole range of challenges: Pressure on space, increasing requirements for accessibility, fire safety and quality of stay. While spectacular co-living projects with generous circulation areas are being built in Zurich, in Munich there is still a fight for every square meter. In Vienna, people are experimenting with open, community-promoting corridor types that allow people to meet and retreat in equal measure. The reason: although space efficiency is still treated like a dogma, social added value is gaining in importance.

In Switzerland, corridors are no longer just circulation zones, but an integral part of the building culture. Innovative cooperative projects rely on wide, light-flooded circulation spaces that serve as meeting points, play areas and climate buffers. In Germany, on the other hand, the DIN standard often still reigns supreme, keeping the corridor in check – and with it the imagination of the planners. Austria is somewhere in between, between pragmatic function and occasional excursions into the world of communication spaces.

The result is a patchwork of solutions that are sometimes visionary, sometimes backward-looking. Some celebrate the corridor as a “third address” between the private and public spheres, while others simply try to rationalize it away. What is often forgotten: The corridor is not only a traffic area, but also a social and ecological control instrument. Saving on it means saving at the wrong end.

The paradigm shift is therefore underway, but it is proceeding slowly. The reasons range from legal requirements and cultural barriers to lazy planning. But the time of the passive corridor is over. The future belongs to the hybrid, adaptive and intelligent circulation space, which can do far more than just send people from A to B.

Digitalization and AI: the corridor as intelligent infrastructure

If the corridor was previously considered a static element, digitalization and AI are radically changing this. Sensors, smart access controls, adaptive lighting systems and building-based data analysis are turning the corridor into a dynamic space. In more and more office and residential buildings in Zurich and Vienna, corridors are being equipped with motion sensors that not only ensure energy efficiency but also analyze user behaviour. AI-based systems adapt the lighting, ventilation and even the acoustics to the actual use – a boon for the quality of stay and the climate in the building.

Digitalization opens up even more possibilities. Corridors are becoming platforms for communication, orientation and even for services such as parcel acceptance or sharing offers. In smart residential complexes, corridors communicate directly with residents – from displaying the next free washing machine to informing them about the next neighborhood event. The data generated here is worth its weight in gold: it helps to make better use of space, optimize maintenance cycles and increase comfort. At the same time, however, the risk of surveillance is also growing. The line between smart infrastructure and Big Brother is thin – especially in semi-public spaces.

From a technical perspective, all of this requires new skills from planners and operators. Anyone planning corridors today must not only draw floor plans, but also be familiar with IoT architectures, interface management and data security. Traditional construction drawings are no longer enough. What is needed is an interdisciplinary approach that combines architecture, electrical engineering, software development and operations management. In Germany, this is still a dream of the future, but in Switzerland and Austria it is already a reality in many pilot projects.

The aim is for the corridor to evolve from a neglected corridor to an intelligent infrastructure that understands the building as a system. Self-learning systems recognize changes in use and adapt to them – be it for escape routing, temporary repurposing as a lounge or the integration of new services. The question is no longer whether the corridor will become smart, but how quickly and how consistently it will be integrated into the digital value chain.

Of course, there is also resistance. Data protection, investment costs and the fear of losing control are slowing down development. But the direction is clear: anyone who ignores the hallway in the digital age will miss out on the next generation of construction – and therefore also on the requirements of an increasingly networked society.

Sustainability and space efficiency: the hallway as a resource

The climate crisis is forcing architecture to rethink – and the corridor is suddenly in the spotlight. At a time when every square meter of a building is being re-evaluated, horizontal circulation is becoming the focus of the sustainability debate. The classic criticism is that corridors are energy wasters, unused areas that have to be heated, lit and maintained without offering any real added value. However, this view is too short-sighted and does not do justice to the possibilities of modern corridor typologies.

In Switzerland, numerous projects demonstrate how the corridor can become a climate buffer: Sophisticated ventilation concepts, daylight guidance and thermal zoning make it a link between the outdoor and indoor climate. In Vienna, access areas are being created with green façades and integrated rainwater systems, which not only improve the microclimate but also contribute to biodiversity. Floor space becomes a resource, not a deficit.

The topic of space efficiency also shows that the corridor can be more than just a passageway. Multifunctional zones, temporary uses, communal areas and flexible furnishings transform the corridor into real added value for the building. In Germany, this development is still hesitant. Fears of wasted space and rising costs are too prevalent. But the reality is that those who plan corridors intelligently make savings elsewhere – for example by reducing traffic areas through better routing or by creating a quality of stay that increases the attractiveness of the rental property.

Technically, this requires a new approach to planning. Building physics, daylight simulations, acoustic calculations and energy analyses must become an integral part of every corridor concept. The times when access space was simply dimensioned according to the remaining space in the floor plan are over. If you want to build sustainably today, you have to think of the corridor as an active part of the building balance.

And this is where the real challenge lurks: the balance between structural requirements, user wishes, ecological responsibility and economic rationality. Those who master this squaring of the circle will turn the corridor into a resource for the future – and the building into a sustainable organism.

Social dynamics and architectural identity: corridors as a mirror of society

The corridor is not only a space for movement, but also for encounters – or rather for avoiding them. The design of the horizontal circulation has a decisive influence on social life in the building. In classic residential buildings, the narrow, anonymous corridor led to social isolation, in office buildings to the segmentation of departments. Modern typologies, on the other hand, focus on meeting zones, visual relationships and open structures that promote informal exchange and facilitate community.

In Switzerland and increasingly also in Austria, corridors are being created that are more than just routes: they are becoming a stage for living together, a place of exchange and an identity-forming address. Spacious stairwells, seating niches, communication islands and visual axes create spaces that strengthen togetherness. The architecture thus responds to the growing desire for community without forgetting retreat. The hallway becomes a mediator between private and public, a flexible space that adapts to different lifestyles.

However, this development is not without controversy. Critics fear the loss of privacy and the danger of social control. The debate about the transparent corridor is in full swing: how much transparency is desirable? Where does communication end and surveillance begin? These questions are not only architecturally relevant, but also socio-politically. They show that the corridor has long since become a venue for cultural negotiation processes.

The architectural identity of a building is increasingly shaped by its circulation spaces. In international projects – from the co-living high-rise buildings in Singapore to the hybrid buildings in Copenhagen – corridors are the hallmark of innovative architecture. They embody openness, flexibility and adaptability – qualities that are becoming increasingly important in a dynamic society.

The key insight: the corridor is the social backbone of the building. Anyone who understands and designs it is designing more than just floor plans – it shapes interaction, well-being and ultimately the identity of living and working environments.

Global trends, visions and the future of corridor typology

From a global perspective, corridor typologies are developing faster than many people realize. Co-living, co-working, mixed-use concepts and smart building structures are challenging traditional development. In Asian megacities such as Tokyo or Singapore, corridors serve as urban lifelines that seamlessly combine living, working and leisure. In the USA, developers are experimenting with flexible floor plans that temporarily transform corridors into meeting zones, fitness areas or community spaces. Europe is following suit, but with traditional restraint and a great deal of regulatory zeal.

The digital transformation is accelerating this change. AI-supported planning processes enable simulations that evaluate and optimize corridor concepts in real time. BIM models and digital twins make it possible to think of circulation spaces as an integral part of building management. The question of how much corridor a building really needs is becoming a data-driven decision – and a strategic resource.

Visionaries have long been calling for a radical reinterpretation of the corridor. Why not design circulation areas as urban commons that are not only available to residents, but also to the neighborhood? Why not think of corridors as catalysts for the circular economy, sharing concepts and local energy production? The boundaries between private, semi-public and public are becoming porous – and with them the classic corridor models.

Of course, there are also critical voices. The danger of commercialization, the loss of identity and the dominance of technical solutions are in the air. But this is precisely the challenge of the coming years: to redefine the hallway as a hybrid space that combines technology, ecology and society without degenerating into a mere gadget.

The future of hallway typology is open – but it will be anything but boring. Those who experiment now are not only designing better buildings, but are also setting standards for the urban society of tomorrow.

Conclusion: The corridor is dead? Long live the corridor!

Horizontal corridors have long been more than just circulation areas – they are seismographs of architectural, social and technological change. The corridor may be a symbol of bureaucracy, but it is also the field in which the big questions of sustainability, digitalization and social dynamics are decided. Anyone planning corridors today must be able to do more than just use a yardstick. Interdisciplinary thinking, technical expertise and the courage to break new ground are required. The hallway typology is facing its biggest transformation in decades. And who knows – perhaps the former passageway will soon become the heart of architecture.

14.01.2025

Portrait

What Raddatz teaches architectural criticism

Building design

“Time to say goodbye” is the title of this immensely clever, worldly, brutally honest text with which the critic Fritz J. Raddatz explains the end of his journalistic writing. A goodbye that packs a punch. “I have outlived myself,” writes Raddatz. His aesthetic criteria were outdated, the diagnostician’s best features were rusting, the “greed for the beauty of […]

In relation to the reality of cultural and especially architectural criticism, I can only say: Wow. Not only is Raddatz more adept at using language than the average member of our profession (though also than the average feuilletonist). But above all, you rarely find so much unsparing self-reflection. Raddatz argues: If the world around you becomes alien to you, then you lack the criteria to discuss it appropriately. And if you don’t feel like engaging curiously with this world, i.e. if your own attitude is constantly pushing the corners of your mouth down in your face, then it would be selfish to expect others to feel the same ill-temperedness.

You don’t have to adopt Raddatz’s radicalism. And before the obvious counter-argument comes up that criticism needs distance: Raddatz knows that, of course. He himself is someone who always creates distance – if only through his provocative nature. He has done this explicitly, for example by publishing his diaries (which are also extremely readable). His merciless dissection of the behavior of others is likely to have lost him a few friends. It’s not about detachment either. But it is about the constant readjustment of one’s own conceptual instruments. It’s about remaining curious as a critic, not falling into complacency. The permanent pose of those who believe they can discuss a complex reality with a few supposedly knowledgeable words. And yet they are only concerned with their own, ultimately provincial microcosm.

A favorite example for me at the moment: the term “deconstructivism”. Architecture critics throw it around like a bouncy ball, each time declaring that the concept is dead and consequently the architecture that is supposedly built in a deconstructivist mindset. But this is usually not based on a deep understanding of deconstructivist thinking. It cannot be assumed that much Derrida or Deleuze has been read beforehand. The concept becomes a mere cipher for everything that comes across as too oblique or without context. And so the effect remains that of a flummery: insubstantial pinballing around.

This pinballing around is alien to Raddatz. In this sense: Goodbye Mr. Raddatz. Your voice will be missed.

12.01.2026

Architecture basics

What is ‘joint formation’ in the floor plan?

Building design

Knowledge

Family house with clear forms - symbolizes articulation in the floor plan and the connection of rooms to create an architectural experience. — How spatial connections create atmosphere. Photo by Filip Velitchkov from Unsplash.

Articulation in the floor plan – it sounds like orthopaedics for buildings, but is actually the salt in the architectural soup. Anyone who understands why rooms are not simply clapped together, but how they connect, is planning more than just functional boxes. Articulation is the difference between space and experience, between corridor and joint, between scheme and architecture. But what is it really about – and why is this age-old topic more topical today than ever before?

Joint formation refers to the spatial, structural or functional connection of floor plan areas and is a central tool of architectural quality.
In Germany, Austria and Switzerland, the discussion about articulation is facing new challenges due to densification, digitalization and flexible forms of living.
Innovations such as parametric design, BIM and AI are opening up new possibilities for floor plan modelling and optimization.
Sustainability brings new requirements: Space minimization, redensification and adaptability require intelligent joints instead of dead corridors.
Architects today have to combine technical, design and social knowledge in order to design sustainable floor plans with strong joints.
Criticism: between standardization, cost pressure and regulation, articulation threatens to become a minor matter – with consequences for the quality of living.
The debate about articulation is global: international role models show how differentiated transitions bring spaces to life.
Digital tools and AI could redefine the art of articulation – or flatten it with algorithmic simplicity.

The anatomy of the floor plan – why joints are more than just nodes

When experts talk about joint formation in the floor plan, they are not talking about technical details such as hinges or expansion joints – but about the spatial connections, transitions and interfaces between functional areas. Unlike the banal corridor or the mere doorway, the joint in the floor plan is a spatially consciously staged transition. It can function as a buffer, a threshold, a filter or a widening. These joints are the architectural equivalent of the human body: they enable movement, flexibility and connection. If you plan a floor plan simply as a sequence of rooms, you end up with a sequence of cells – but if you understand the joints, you create permeability, privacy and communication in a very small space.

In German-speaking countries in particular, articulation has a long tradition. From the Frankfurt kitchen corridor to the Viennese walk-through room, from the open hallway in the Swiss chalet to the Berlin enfilade: everywhere it can be seen that the quality of a floor plan lies not in the individual rooms, but in their connection. Joints are not luxury details, but essential for access, lighting, ventilation and social interaction. They are the invisible framework that supports floor plans – and they turn a functional matrix into a habitable home.

But the reality is often different: Standardization, cost pressure and regulatory constraints mean that creating joints in the floor plan becomes a minor matter. The result? Corridors that are too narrow to park more than one vacuum cleaner, or passageways that resemble air shafts. The art of transitions is in danger of disappearing between efficiency and square meter optimization. Yet, especially in times of urban densification and new forms of living, the quality of the joints is decisive for the usability and atmosphere of a building.

In practice, it is clear that those who think boldly about joints can save space, shorten distances and use rooms in multiple ways. A hinge can serve as a checkroom, workplace or play area, as a light catcher or acoustic buffer. The best floor plans are not rigid templates, but dynamic systems whose joints can be adapted to changing needs. The challenge lies in creating the right transitions in the balancing act between standards, costs and user requirements – without slipping into arbitrary design.

The topic of joint formation is therefore anything but an academic sideshow. It is the underestimated key competence that determines the future viability of our buildings. Those who cut corners here will be punished by users – be it through vacancy, conversion or simply poor ratings.

Innovations and trends: how digitalization and AI are changing joint formation

Anyone who believes that joint formation is purely a hobby for traditionalists has missed out on the digital revolution. The introduction of Building Information Modeling (BIM), parametric design and AI-supported planning tools is taking the design of floor plans to a whole new level. What used to be laboriously developed on a drawing board can now be varied by algorithms in a matter of seconds. Digital tools make it possible to generate hundreds of variants of a floor plan, analyse their transitions and optimize them according to criteria such as lighting, walkways or quality of stay. This sounds like progress – but it also harbors new dangers: Where is the architectural instinct when the computer decides how wide a joint should be?

In Germany, Austria and Switzerland, these technologies are slowly gaining ground. Pioneering projects use parametric models to dynamically adapt floor plans to the location, user profile and climate data. The joint formation is no longer determined statically, but simulated in real time. AI algorithms can make design proposals based on empirical values from thousands of reference projects. The potential is particularly evident in multi-storey residential buildings and flexible working environments: joints are becoming intelligent interfaces that respond to changing lifestyles.

But the digital euphoria has its downside. Too often, floor plans are “optimized” algorithmically – and then end up with one-size-fits-all solutions that lack any individuality. AI can calculate walking routes, but it doesn’t sense atmosphere. It knows no cultural codes, no social rituals. The danger: the art of creating joints is being leveled in the digital mainstream. The architect becomes a data keeper, the user an extra in the digital grid.

Resistance is needed here. Digital tools are tools, not substitute thinkers. They can help to test variants, but not to replace an architectural approach. The best projects are created where technology and intuition work together – where the digital design space is used to try out new joints without losing the feeling for spaces. The task for planners is to use the possibilities of digitalization without relinquishing creative responsibility.

Internationally, it can be seen that digital approaches can inspire the creation of joints. In the Netherlands and Scandinavia, floor plans are being created whose joints are based on user behavior, daylight and movement flows – all digitally simulated. Switzerland is experimenting with AI-supported designs that measure the quality of living based on the quality of transitions. Germany and Austria are often still lagging behind – the fear of losing control is too great, the building culture too sluggish. But change is inevitable: those who do not think digitally are planning past reality.

Sustainability and space efficiency: the new role of joints

The days when spacious hallways and wide corridors were considered status symbols are over. Today, every square meter counts – from a cost perspective, but also for ecological reasons. Minimizing floor space is the order of the day, and this puts the creation of joints at the heart of sustainable planning. This is because intelligent hinges are the answer to the need to design living and working spaces efficiently, flexibly and sustainably. A well-planned articulation can take on several functions, minimize traffic areas and at the same time create a quality of stay.

In Germany, Austria and Switzerland, the balancing act between space efficiency and quality of life is particularly tricky. On the one hand, rising construction costs and political requirements for densification are pushing for ever smaller floor plans. On the other hand, the demand for comfort, light, acoustics and privacy is growing. The solution lies in the quality of the transitions: joints must be capable of more than just being a corridor. They are the buffer zone between public and private, between work and leisure, between inside and outside.

The issue of sustainability also brings new technical challenges. Joints must be planned in such a way that they optimize energy flows, enable ventilation and distribute daylight. This is where digital simulation tools come into play, which analyze thermal, acoustic and visual comfort at the design stage. Particularly in the case of refurbishments and conversions, it is clear that the clever transformation of corridor zones into articulated zones can make the difference between demolition and reuse.

Critics complain that the trend towards optimizing space comes at the expense of the quality of stay. All too often, corridors are reduced to a minimum and transitions are treated as a necessary evil. The result: cramped, dark, impersonal spaces that nip social life in the bud. The art of creating articulation lies in creating spaces that function as articulation – not as constriction – despite the pressure of space and standards.

The sustainable future of building will depend on whether planners see articulation as a resource – as an opportunity to create more quality with less space. Those who think innovatively here can not only save CO₂, but also create quality of life. This is not a question of style, but a question of survival.

Global perspectives and the future of joint creation

The topic of joint formation is not a purely German hobbyhorse. Internationally, the discussion has long been part of the architectural avant-garde. In Asia, for example, high-rise buildings are being built with articulated floor plans that serve as social meeting points, climate buffers and access nodes. In Denmark and the Netherlands, transitional spaces are deliberately staged as meeting places – from co-working foyers to shared roof terraces. The best examples show: Joints are the stage of everyday life, not the storage room for bicycles.

Digitalization is accelerating this trend. Global architecture firms are working with networked design tools that optimize floor plans in real time and adapt them to local needs. The art of differentiated transitions is becoming the new currency in the international competition for innovative living and working environments. Those who rely solely on standard solutions will remain stuck in mediocrity. The future belongs to planners who see the diversity of joints as an opportunity – and not as a disruptive factor.

But there are also dissenting voices. Critics warn against the commercialization of floor plan design: if digital tools and standardization gain the upper hand, individual solutions are in danger of disappearing. The debate revolves around the question of how much freedom the design needs – and how much standardization it can tolerate. The debate is particularly lively in Germany, Austria and Switzerland. Here, tradition and innovation, rules and regulations and the desire to experiment collide head-on.

Visionary voices are calling for articulation to be established as an independent discipline – with its own fields of research, chairs and digital tools. They see the fusion of architecture, sociology and computer science as a great opportunity: joints as interfaces not only of spaces, but also of data, users and technologies. The future of joint creation could therefore become much more hybrid, multi-layered and interdisciplinary than ever before.

In the end, the question remains: who will design the joints of the future – the algorithm, the investor, the user or the architect? The answer is open. One thing is certain: those who have mastered the art of creating joints will have the best basis for the building of tomorrow.

Conclusion: Articulation – the underestimated backbone of architecture

Articulation in the floor plan is far more than just a technical gimmick. It is the backbone of good architecture, the prerequisite for sustainable, flexible and liveable spaces. In German-speaking countries, it is at the interface between tradition and innovation, between cost pressure and creative freedom. Digitalization and AI open up new possibilities, but also harbour risks of standardization and alienation. Sustainability requires intelligent joints that combine space efficiency and quality of life. The global architecture debate shows: Those who master the art of transitions create buildings that are more than the sum of their spaces. The future of articulation lies in the combination of technical know-how, creative courage and digital expertise. Everything else is just a hallway.