Bridges as we know them are meant to cross obstacles, take us from A to B
avoiding the factor they are crossing. In the history there are examples of bridges
with a programmatic space, but after cars are introduced to our lives they
become mostly a transportation hub with no other function. They should
become public spaces and connect to the obstacle by influencing the environment in
a positive manner, or extracting green energy from it, by benefiting
from existing forces around them.
Could we rethink purpose and functions of bridges and take advantage of the knowledge we have nowadays and implement it in a way that makes the bridge structure assets with a program, that none of the other structures in an urban environment can host.


The area of the outfall of river Besos, is located in former industrial zone north of Barcelona, during the last decade the area has developed into a modern city neighborhood. Retrofitting the abandoned thermoelectric plant would be the next step to take and ad this theritory to the neighborhood and become a valuable public sea front area.
The proposal for the outfall of river Besos is to become a new public space for the whole area, new nod, new centrality, new attraction point.
By connecting the three parks (Forum, Besos and the Factory park) we gain not only connectaivity along the coast line, but also a new centrality for the region and the people of Sant Adrea de Besos and Badalona.
The outfall of river Besos is an obstacle seperating the coast line and the potential public area of the neighborhood. Flow of people could be ensured by easing the access to the former industrial zone and crossing the obstacle of river  Besos. The place is one of two disconnectivity points along the coastline north of Barcelona
By introducing a bridge structure, that not only takes us from one point to another, but also creating a valuable public space, the goal is to have an urban element designed with advanced architecture knowledge, merged with the environment in a way, that reflects the modern vision, needs and options available.


Historically bridges have been used par excellence as a connection, hub, infrastructure, but not so often as a public space, as a programmatic space, as space that is meant to keep people there. We have only very few examples throughout history of bridges, that had a program.  The reasons for this historical fact vary, from legal obstacles to not fully understanding the potential of this potentially public space, which has the ability to provide many advantages to host a program. Also a reason, that causes bridges to remain mostly as a infrastructure tool is the appearance of cars. When cars and vehicles become used in our daily life, that distances the public from the bridge as a structure, as space to enjoy the scenery while crossing it. Cars become capsules, that are protecting passengers from the surrounding environment, passing quick and meaningless. Mobility becomes fast and not dedicated to the environment around but only covers needs of ransportation and is not anymore an experience, that connects us with the surrounding that we are passing. All that leaves the bridge an unexplored territory. On another hand contemporary bridge proposals more often include a programmatic space for public use, visible from the Timeline, a lot of the new concepts for bridges are dedicated to the potential programs, that a structure like this can host, depending on its location and surroundings. The bridge’s inhabitation adds layers native to the materiality of the bridge. Then it begins to shelter and accommodate certain activities besides enabling passage over an obstacle. It contains ease as well as allowing movement. It attends to inhabitants in addition to passers by. This dual existence is conductive to raising questions about its perception at two levels. Although the property of inhabitation is not related to its ‘bridgeness’, the inhabited bridge this way becomes an inspiring object for relating exterior presence and interior essence.