LA Times critic disparages Apple Campus 2 as 'retrograde cocoon'

11011121416

Comments

  • Reply 261 of 305
    nhtnht Posts: 4,494member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by island hermit View Post


    Fuck me... why don't you answer the question instead of all these mind games.



    Because his primary mode of debate is appeal to authority.



    Which is funny as hell because he regularly feels competent to offer definitive opinions about business, technology and computers. Something he has "no preparation to intelligently discuss, and using that lack of knowledge to disparage those who do."



  • Reply 262 of 305
    nhtnht Posts: 4,494member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Flaneur View Post


    I'm interested in what he's saying now, not what his history has been. I'd be interested in anyone, including you, commenting on two points raised in all this discussion:



    How is it incumbent on a corporation in the business of inventing the technology of the future to open its central transparent building to the public, which everyone is cloyingly euphemising as "the urban environment."



    It isn't. Which means you aren't going to get a substantive answer.



    Quote:

    How is it possible to design a building that is more in contact with nature (for the benefit of the workers and their creativity) than the four-story glass torus, without compromising its human scale?



    I can imagine that Apple may provide some public access to their park at the fringes, by the way. But not to their glass-walled Arcadia in the center. That's for the workers. What is so hard about that to deal with that you architecture critics fail to assume it as a primary fact?



    Edit: Nicely anticipated by island hermit above.



    The design can at most be considered bland except for the scale but it seems that to be an architectural poser...excuse me, critic...it is de rigeur to hate anything associated with Sir Norman Foster.
  • Reply 263 of 305
    flaneurflaneur Posts: 4,511member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by nht View Post


    The design can at most be considered bland except for the scale but it seems that to be an architectural poser...excuse me, critic...it is de rigeur to hate anything associated with Sir Norman Foster.



    Aha, so that's how it is. I wonder why the Dr. or the others didn't mention that?

  • Reply 264 of 305
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Flaneur View Post


    Aha, so that's how it is. I wonder why the Dr. or the others didn't mention that?





    http://www.fastcodesign.com/1664840/...sed-in-america
  • Reply 265 of 305
    flaneurflaneur Posts: 4,511member
    Quote:



    Interesting that the Apple building escapes any taint of critical failure in that article.



    I just watched Foster's TED talk, in which he covers EVERY SINGLE POINT raised in this shameful, carping thread, started by Hawthorne's misappropriation of the Berkeley professor's book.



    http://www.ted.com/talks/norman_fost...en_agenda.html



    What a conceptually retrograde guy that Foster is. A Bucky Fulleresque planetary view, urban and public space considerations, energy conservation, worker happiness, all these antiquated preoccupations from the late sixties. He even talks about Dieter Rams, iPods and iPhones.



    No wonder they got the job. Retrograde like Steve and Jony. Worth watching the talk.
  • Reply 266 of 305
    nobody reads the LA Times.
  • Reply 267 of 305
    Apple and Foster just announced that Apple Campus 3 will be a replica of the gherkin placed in the center of the spaceship.
  • Reply 268 of 305
    flaneurflaneur Posts: 4,511member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by island hermit View Post


    Apple and Foster just announced that Apple Campus 3 will be a replica of the gherkin placed in the center of the spaceship.



    There goes the neighborhood.



    Actually, pass it on to The Onion.
  • Reply 269 of 305
    hirohiro Posts: 2,663member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by nht View Post


    Because his primary mode of debate is appeal to authority.



    Which is funny as hell because he regularly feels competent to offer definitive opinions about business, technology and computers. Something he has "no preparation to intelligently discuss, and using that lack of knowledge to disparage those who do."







    I wish I had thought of that one. Brilliant!
  • Reply 270 of 305
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by island hermit View Post


    The building itself might be from a past era but does it really follow a "failed" paradigm?



    Yes; massive isolated single-use buildings, with minimal connections to the surrounding community that are focused almost exclusively on automobiles. Especially this type of redevelopment (it's not infill) on consolidated properties with public roads removed. Apple will be adding more employees than exist at any other employer in the area--more than 20% the size of Cupertino's population--along with many visitors. But no changes to infrastructure were planned for the increased traffic (other than removing a road). The design ignores the surrounding community and the impact it will have upon it.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by island hermit View Post


    Apple built the campus specifically for cutting itself off from the rest of the community in the name of security.



    Since Apple's new building is much like a rounded-off Pentagon with glass curtain walls, a comparison could be helpful. The outer dimensions are nearly the same, though the Pentagon has an extra floor, and multiple rings that house about twice as many people. While the Pentagon has greater security concerns, even today anyone is free to walk anywhere on the grounds and close to the building with no obstructions at all, and though it's surrounded by freeways, it's easy to approach on foot. The R&D facilities at the new Apple campus may have the highest security requirements, but they're located across the street, outside the large fenced-in area, near the road in traditional buildings. The Pentagon has always been a mixed-use transit-oriented building. It includes a shopping mall inside, and the largest transit hub in the region with a subway station and dozens of bus bays. It was built with a large tunnel (closed to the public now) that allowed buses to drive right through and stop inside the building. If the Pentagon can be integrated into it's surrounding community, Apple's new campus could too.
  • Reply 271 of 305
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by dalesun View Post


    Yes; massive isolated single-use buildings, with minimal connections to the surrounding community that are focused almost exclusively on automobiles. Especially this type of redevelopment (it's not infill) on consolidated properties with public roads removed. Apple will be adding more employees than exist at any other employer in the area--more than 20% the size of Cupertino's population--along with many visitors. But no changes to infrastructure were planned for the increased traffic (other than removing a road). The design ignores the surrounding community and the impact it will have upon it.



    I asked if it was a "failed" paridigm. People might not like it... but has it really failed. Do you really think that Apple and Foster wouldn't have anticipated these concerns. I've already stated that I don't like the idea of cutting off a road and also not allowing the public on the grounds... but is it not up to the EIR to address these issues. The number one concern at the EIR scoping meeting was traffic.





    Quote:

    Since Apple's new building is much like a rounded-off Pentagon with glass curtain walls, a comparison could be helpful. The outer dimensions are nearly the same, though the Pentagon has an extra floor, and multiple rings that house about twice as many people. While the Pentagon has greater security concerns, even today anyone is free to walk anywhere on the grounds and close to the building with no obstructions at all, and though it's surrounded by freeways, it's easy to approach on foot. The R&D facilities at the new Apple campus may have the highest security requirements, but they're located across the street, outside the large fenced-in area, near the road in traditional buildings. The Pentagon has always been a mixed-use transit-oriented building. It includes a shopping mall inside, and the largest transit hub in the region with a subway station and dozens of bus bays. It was built with a large tunnel (closed to the public now) that allowed buses to drive right through and stop inside the building. If the Pentagon can be integrated into it's surrounding community, Apple's new campus could too.



    So what? If Apple doesn't want people accessing the property that is up to them. I don't like it. You don't like it. The people of Cupertino may not like it... and if that's the case the EIR will handle it. One of the concerns at the public meeting was access.
  • Reply 272 of 305
    nhtnht Posts: 4,494member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by dalesun View Post


    Yes; massive isolated single-use buildings, with minimal connections to the surrounding community that are focused almost exclusively on automobiles. Especially this type of redevelopment (it's not infill) on consolidated properties with public roads removed. Apple will be adding more employees than exist at any other employer in the area--more than 20% the size of Cupertino's population--along with many visitors. But no changes to infrastructure were planned for the increased traffic (other than removing a road). The design ignores the surrounding community and the impact it will have upon it.



    You mean no infrastructure other than an interstate? One that already serviced the existing office park and it's former HP resident? And a new transit hub and already has VTA bus service? And these employees already WORK in Cupertino. They aren't adding 13,000 new employees.



    Have you completely ignored everything said to this point?



    Quote:

    Since Apple's new building is much like a rounded-off Pentagon with glass curtain walls, a comparison could be helpful. The outer dimensions are nearly the same, though the Pentagon has an extra floor, and multiple rings that house about twice as many people.



    Which makes traffic far less of a problem than around the Pentagon doesn't it?



    Quote:

    While the Pentagon has greater security concerns, even today anyone is free to walk anywhere on the grounds and close to the building with no obstructions at all, and though it's surrounded by freeways, it's easy to approach on foot.



    You can get to the memorial but there's a perimeter fence. Depends on your definition of "close". You can probably get just as "close" to the Apple HQ. As in not all THAT close. This was true even before 9/11 given the protests there in the 60s.



    Quote:

    The Pentagon has always been a mixed-use transit-oriented building. It includes a shopping mall inside, and the largest transit hub in the region with a subway station and dozens of bus bays. It was built with a large tunnel (closed to the public now) that allowed buses to drive right through and stop inside the building. If the Pentagon can be integrated into it's surrounding community, Apple's new campus could too.



    The Pentagon isn't "integrated" into the surrounding community any more than the Apple HQ will be. There is no "surrounding community" except highways. Nobody who lives in Arlington goes to the Pentagon unless they work there or for a rare touristy type visit. The shopping mall inside is fairly small and mostly there for the Pentagon employees. Transit is, again, mostly focused on servicing the folks that work in the building. The building sure as hell isn't "transit oriented" or "mixed-use".



    Have you even been there? This is like saying Norfolk Navy Base is "food oriented" and "mixed-use" because there's a McDonalds, KFC and large NEX on the base.
  • Reply 273 of 305
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post


    The architecture critic for the Los Angeles Times has panned Apple's proposed mega-campus in Cupertino, Calif., as lacking vision and resembling a "retrograde cocoon."

    [ View this article at AppleInsider.com ][/url][/c]



    How is it that this self-professed paragon of architchture opinion(s) matter to anyone other than him/her self?



    Why does s/he feel the need to denigrate another's work based on arbitrary self-referenced standards?



    Will s/he be forced to drive by the campus each day? Unlikely. Mandated to work in such an 'offending' environment? Probably not (thankfully). Required to live nearby this new Apple (but not Apple designed) complex? Apparently not.



    Other than an apparent need to to see his/her name in print and generate controversy, his/her opinion(s) would be best kept to his/her self as they appear about as useful as styrofoam windchimes.
  • Reply 274 of 305
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by island hermit View Post


    I asked if it was a "failed" paridigm. People might not like it... but has it really failed. Do you really think that Apple and Foster wouldn't have anticipated these concerns. I've already stated that I don't like the idea of cutting off a road and also not allowing the public on the grounds... but is it not up to the EIR to address these issues. The number one concern at the EIR scoping meeting was traffic.



    After a half-century of development with an auto-centered paradigm of segregated land use, the full costs are just beginning to become apparent; I don't think it's too much to say that paradigm is failing. People increasingly agree that it needs to be changed. There's a lot of movement towards smart growth, and Cupertino has incorporated those concepts into it's General Plan. That old paradigm continues to appeal to developers because they don't pay the full costs themselves.



    Apple and Foster intended to create a nostalgic design and know most concerns can easily be overcome. The questions of the road closure and scale affecting traffic, and closing off the grounds (which now include zoning requiring some park space), are sure to be worked out in some way in the EIR process.
  • Reply 275 of 305
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by nht View Post


    And these employees already WORK in Cupertino. They aren't adding 13,000 new employees.



    Some of the employees will relocate from several dispersed locations in Cupertino. Apple will continue to add employees and already is planning a third campus. http://www.mercurynews.com/cupertino...ercurynews.com



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by nht View Post


    You can get to the memorial but there's a perimeter fence.



    Wrong. While there's fencing to the north, there is no fence around much of the perimeter. Anyone can drive or walk into the main south parking area at several points, and walk right up to an entrance before encountering any security. Since it's a maze of parking lots, bridges, and bus lanes, there are few places to walk, but you can ride a bike in one side of the grounds and out the other without stopping. The Pentagon doesn't have as much controlled area, or the perimeter fence, that Apple is proposing for it's new campus.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by nht View Post


    Transit is, again, mostly focused on servicing the folks that work in the building. The building sure as hell isn't "transit oriented" or "mixed-use".



    The Pentagon Transit Center is mostly for folks who DO NOT work in the building, it's a major bus-rail tranfer point for Nothern Virginia, and transit has always been ingtergral to the building's design, so it "sure as hell" IS "transit oriented." I've been in the shopping mall; it has a variety of stores like clothing, drug, electronics, jewelry, etc., but since it's closed to the general public now, "mixed-use" actually is a stretch--other than public transit.
  • Reply 276 of 305
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by dalesun View Post


    After a half-century of development with an auto-centered paradigm of segregated land use, the full costs are just beginning to become apparent; I don't think it's too much to say that paradigm is failing. People increasingly agree that it needs to be changed. There's a lot of movement towards smart growth, and Cupertino has incorporated those concepts into it's General Plan. That old paradigm continues to appeal to developers because they don't pay the full costs themselves.



    Apple and Foster intended to create a nostalgic design and know most concerns can easily be overcome. The questions of the road closure and scale affecting traffic, and closing off the grounds (which now include zoning requiring some park space), are sure to be worked out in some way in the EIR process.



    ... and through all of this I feel more strongly than ever that Hawthorne's review is just an opinion... whether it is based on knowledge or not... it's one man's opinion based on theories that is not supposed to be read as the final unassailable truth about the Apple campus project. Failed paradigm or not... that's something that only time will tell and only then will we see if Apple is wrong about the design of this new campus.



    Sadly... I'm quite certain that I won't be here in another 6o years to see how everything is working out with the campus and also the new urbanism (for lack of a better word). Chances are that a bunch of people will be discussing a new development and saying how it is based on the failed paradigm of urban/community development. Of course, there will most likely be someone in the crowd making fun of them, saying that they are all too stupid to discuss the issue.
  • Reply 277 of 305
    ronboronbo Posts: 669member
    "Oh! what a superior man," said Candide below his breath. "What a great genius is this Pococurante! Nothing can please him."



    -Voltaire
  • Reply 278 of 305
    OP - where did you get this post? did you copy and paste a press release?
  • Reply 279 of 305
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by island hermit View Post


    ... and through all of this I feel more strongly than ever that Hawthorne's review is just an opinion... whether it is based on knowledge or not... it's one man's opinion based on theories that is not supposed to be read as the final unassailable truth about the Apple campus project. Failed paradigm or not... that's something that only time will tell and only then will we see if Apple is wrong about the design of this new campus.



    Sadly... I'm quite certain that I won't be here in another 6o years to see how everything is working out with the campus and also the new urbanism (for lack of a better word). Chances are that a bunch of people will be discussing a new development and saying how it is based on the failed paradigm of urban/community development. Of course, there will most likely be someone in the crowd making fun of them, saying that they are all too stupid to discuss the issue.



    I actually like the design, but also think much of Hawthorne's criticism is valid. I don't think any one's saying the design is bad or wrong, since it's a big improvement over what's there--perhaps just that they expect even more from Apple. Others seem so dazzled they're appalled that anyone could criticize it in any way.



    It's amazing how well old urban design can hold up. The 220 year-old plan for Washington, and my 105 year-old townhouse, were designed for horse-drawn carriages and candle lighting, but they still work as well as any modern planned community.



    I won't be here for the discussion in 60 years either, but I hope there will be plenty of objective people among experts, fanboys, and haters.
  • Reply 280 of 305
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by dalesun View Post


    I actually like the design, but also think much of Hawthorne's criticism is valid. I don't think any one's saying the design is bad or wrong, since it's a big improvement over what's there--perhaps just that they expect even more from Apple. Others seem so dazzled they're appalled that anyone could criticize it in any way.



    It's amazing how well old urban design can hold up. The 220 year-old plan for Washington, and my 105 year-old townhouse, were designed for horse-drawn carriages and candle lighting, but they still work as well as any modern planned community.



    I won't be here for the discussion in 60 years either, but I hope there will be plenty of objective people among experts, fanboys, and haters.



    Maybe within the next thirty years Apple will have released some of the land surrounding the complex and retail, office and living space will develop around the campus... and the replica gherkin will have been completed in its center.
Sign In or Register to comment.