A bit confused.
I dont see any reference to "living bridge" in the brief.
The only mentions are in the title of the other thread (Started by alan D)
in one of the schemes.
THe dragonfly one.
And in the evening times article. Which claims that the bridge will incorporate bars and restuarants.
This does not seem to be part of any of the designs, unless you count the river bank areas alongside?
Was this a freudian slip up on your part alan?
As far as the designs go.
CLYDE9: Interesting Design. Doubt the funicular is really neccessary feasible or desired!
GLASGOWS MRROR BRIDGE: Tired old metaphors overlayed onto a standard piece of engineering
LATICE: Cannot even see the bridge in the image, floggin the make it green and natural (plant a few bushes) and everything will be ok
NEPTUNES WAY: A bit too similar to Wilkinson Eyre Millenium Bridge in Newcastle/Gateshaed. Pushes the idea that walking across the bridge is an enjoyable activity that should be prolongued, a bit too far. BUt could be an interesing experience. BUt seems like they have ignored the railway bridge?
PEOPLE CROSSING: More of a pontoon or pier rather than a bridge, very future systems. Again, Trees are not essential.
VIA:Very similar to clyde9 but without the coloured glass and the funicular.
Dont see neccessity for closing it off (the door/canopy)
UNless thats for the observatory?
IF i had to pick one. IT would eithe be The dragonfly or the pontoon.
the mirror, via, are obviously (from the image styles) the two big boys. and they dont really deserve it.