More and more architects are designing flexible buildings with the ability to adapt to changing functions, user needs and social developments. A smart or open plan, a hybrid typology and demountable systems often play a key role in this. But is this really a new concept? The use of flexible floor plans, not only in housing projects but also in public buildings, is a recurring theme in architectural history, as it turns out. How are such plans applied, then and now, and how do flexible projects age? For example, what does the large-scale renovation of the Centre Pompidou in Paris tell us today about the meaning of flexibility in architecture? And is flexibility synonymous with deliberately oversizing the structure of buildings so that they can accommodate future programmes? In A+316, we investigate the extent to which these flexible buildings are also sustainable and future-oriented in practice, and what architectural language – other than unspoken and generic – we can use for them. To this end, we compare several recently completed projects and juxtapose the plans and sections of bOb Van Reeth, XDGA, Baukunst, Bruther and Office, among others.

A+317 focuses on the small, the precise, the meticulous: the constructive detail as a thought process. Architectural detail is not merely regarded as a technical solution, but as an integral part of the architectural design, as a carrier of meaning, beauty and craftsmanship. From hand-drawn joints to parametrically generated connections: in A+317, we examine the role of detailed drawings in the design process and how seemingly simple details have often become extremely complex today due to regulations, sustainability requirements and construction technology. We also investigate the consequences of reusing materials and products for the in situ conception of architectural details, in direct interaction with the site context. We analyse hand-drawn and digital details from various architects, with an explanation of material, scale and meaning.

Co-editor: Aurélie Hachez

We often view the street as a functional thoroughfare: a hard infrastructure focused on speed, traffic flow and efficiency, as a ‘movement machine’. But what if we approach the street as a fully-fledged architectural space, as a public room between buildings, in close dialogue with the façades that border it? In various essays, we explore the issue of the redistribution of public space, examining what constitutes the right to the street, what gender-sensitive planning would mean, and what the relationship is between street design and immediate living. We look at international examples from Paris, Barcelona and New York, and showcase Belgian pilot projects that test a different typology of the street; from hard streets and unyielding pavements to green, softened meeting spaces with soft mobility.

Co-editor: Gideon Boie

In times of ecological, social and economic crisis, discussing beauty in architecture seemed problematic and even controversial for a long time. Aesthetics were secondary to more urgent values: sustainability, inclusion, context sensitivity. Yet today, the debate about beauty seems to be playing a significant role once again. The New European Bauhaus explicitly states that architecture should not only be functional and sustainable, but also aesthetic. Talking about beauty raises important reflections, not only about collective values and shared histories, but also about identity and political mechanisms. What does this mean for designers and what new design language will emerge from it? Is there a new aesthetic canon emerging from reuse, circular construction and material recovery? In A+319, we explore how aesthetics is repositioning itself in architectural practice.

Today, architectural practice is under considerable pressure. While standards and social responsibilities are increasing, fair remuneration and workable conditions remain elusive. The sector is struggling with an unhealthy competitive culture, low fees, complex regulations and a lack of collective bargaining power. At the same time, the rise of artificial intelligence is forcing the discipline to re-evaluate its creative and professional identity. What does it mean to be an architect at a time when the demands on design, technology, entrepreneurship and social engagement are ever increasing? A+320 explores how we can build a fairer, more resilient and future-oriented profession, with shared responsibility between the Order, educational institutions, clients and architects themselves.