The municipality of Ålesund aims to create a more sustainable, vibrant, and future-proof city, yet faces major challenges related to population growth, limited spatial capacity, transport congestion, and demographic imbalance. To address these issues, three interconnected cases were investigated: (1) identifying an optimal replacement for the ageing Steinvåg bridge, the only link between Hessa and the rest of the city; (2) assessing whether the Devold building in Sørsida should be demolished or reused; and (3) analysing Ålesund’s transport network to determine the potential for car traffic growth and the role of public transport in reducing congestion.

A multimodal traffic model of the city shows that the main east–west corridor experiences peak-hour congestion and cannot sustain further increases in car traffic. Meanwhile, analysis of the public transport network using GTFS data indicates that the system is robust and well-dimensioned, but significantly underutilised for reasons beyond infrastructure alone. Increasing bus frequency by 50% yields negligible ridership gains.

A multi-criteria decision analysis comparing alternative alignments for a new Hessa–Aspøya connection identifies the current bridge location, with a slightly modified orientation, as the optimal solution. A tied-arch design was selected to maintain local visual identity and meet technical requirements, with capacity sufficient even under substantial future development on Hessa. Chloride content forecasts for the existing Steinvåg bridge show that its concrete cannot be reused structurally, while steel components can be recycled.

Parallel life cycle assessments using Norwegian and European methodologies demonstrate that reusing the Devold building has significantly lower environmental impact than demolition and new construction, especially due to the high emissions associated with producing new building materials. Potential future use of the building as a concert hall, however, would introduce additional peak-hour transport strain.

Finally, a comparison of Norwegian and Dutch engineering cultures reveals differing approaches to flexibility, planning, and project duration, each with distinct advantages.