The article forget the point that the bridge will be mostly used by the people living in one of the tower. It means that they are not going to use their bicycle, go up in the tower and down again on the other side. They will be in most of the cases already in the tower. Also, they will most likely have bicycle garage on each side of the bridge. You do not need to bring your bike in the elevators.

With respect to the Bilbao solution, do not forget that a fixed bridge has lower cost of maintenance and Copenhagen can be windy at time.

The bridge in Bilbao is a nice solution, more practical because it doesn't require to travel to the top of a building and down from the other one. Furthermore it looks prettier, but this is subjective. However you can't use it when boats are crossing so maybe this is the reason for the design they are using in Copenhagen: unrestricted access.

In Danish architecture sometimes it seems that aesthetics comes before convenience.

Isn't the 90 s claim for the Bilbao solution misleading because you'd also have to include the time spent waiting for the transporter to arrive to your side?

Also, wouldn't a ferry ship work as well as the Bilbao option?

In the CPH bridge solution too, you'll have to wait for the elevator to bring you upstairs, and another elevator ride to be back on the ground on the other side of the bridge.

But that surely takes less time. Elevators arrive quickly and move fast. I can't remember last time when I waited over 5 minutes for an elevator. If the cart just leaves I need to wait at least 1.5*2 minutes, plus whatever times is spent on the other side waiting for people to disembark and new people to embark.

The alternative bridge mentioned at the end is an example of a transporter bridge: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transporter_bridge

I just arrived at work in Copenhagen by bicycle not far from Marmormolen. And they are right almost no one in a hurry is going to take that elevator with a bicycle. I still like that it's in the tender though.

Url changed from http://m.fastcompany.com/3053678/copenhagens-new-bike-bridge..., which points to this.

Thanks.

Don't you think it's time to automate the URL changing functionality?

Sure, if we knew how. The hard part is determining what a better URL is. How would you automate that?

Maybe it doesn't need to be fully automated? An 80% solution based upon ranking news outlets in terms of type (e.g. peer review journal, newspaper, blog, clickbait site etc) and 'reliability'/'reputability' could possibly be made. This could present you with a yes/no/find out more option.

At least a convenience feature for you: Enter a new URL, automatically post a message.

At the moment you seem to handcraft your comments.

A/B test on the frequency of upvotes (requires a way to know what link the user saw)

Crowdsource: the software can pick alternate urls and people can vote for them.