I can't believe I'm saying this, but I agree with TS.
Apple has a long history of an "It's our way or the highway" attitude and I respect that business approach. Once they've made up their mind they stick with it.
Classic selective memory. Yes, there have been many memorable situations when the famous Apple will of steel won the day. There have also been situations when Apple ate crow and did what they had to do, including doing the right thing.
This is a pretty funny thread. Everyone (except a few) are so offended. Take your ball and go home. But remember that even the mighty Steve Jobs compromised on the designs of some of the Apple Stores.
The same thing happened here in Switzerland, the city of Zurich asked Apple to keep the building mostly original as well as the sidewalk and the railings around the new store, there is some silly uniformity code, Apple had something else in mind and threatened to pull out of the project. The city officials basically said don't let the door hit you in your ass on the way out, Apple dropped it. Zurich really didn't want an Apple store anyway as there is already a Swiss owned chain of stores that just sells Apple products called DataQuest, they have been around since the late 80's.
Interesting.
Wait, didn't Apple also have to make some compromises when building other stores too? Like in the US too?
So all the geniuses here who claim that Apple makes no compromise are ... wrong? Making it up? Nah, that can't be?
In response, they could submit a revised plan with a giant person hanging off the Apple store with a his/her pants down, bare butt directly over the location of the fountain. I wonder how the Planning Department would take that?
I'm not sure anyone would notice. San Francisco used to be a beautiful city. Now it's just a toilet for pan handlers, criminals and ne'er-do-wells. There's literally streets in down town San Francisco where the stench of urine and feces can be smelt a 1/2 block away.
The clowns running and working for the city of San Francisco - paid or not, need to re-assess their priorities. Stop worrying about fugly water fountains and how to put more belligerent bicyclists on the road. Start worrying about making the city a place for humans to inhabit.
1) The architect's rendering shows that the surrounding structures are unremittingly characterless. As a Los Angeles native I have to admit it looks more like a shot of a typical part of my town than the usually much more interesting SF. That said, though I usually love Apple's stores, I think this particular store standard (the giant slab-sided desk) is TOO much like what's around it. (Look at the upper wall of the building to the left--Apple's right wall mirrors it perfectly--not a good thing IMHO. I love the store like this in Phoenix, where its minimalism looks very right.
2) That fountain. Would have to see it in person to judge, since scale and siting are important, but from what I see it clashes horribly with those steps. Apple should take the option offered of working with the city to find some way to move it to a more harmonious and flattering setting--lots of trees would enhance its organic look. Golden Gate Park?
What San Francisco is asking for seems pretty reasonable. I don't know how it is in the US but we take our historical landmarks pretty serious and no amount of money or promised jobs would ever change that, especially when our landmarks are 100's of years old and businesses come and go.
If you want to count a 70's eyesore as "historical" by all means.
I think it should be replaced with another '70's San Francisco icon, Dirty Harry with a Smith and Wesson 44 and a "Do you feel lucky, punk?" inscription.
If you want to count a 70's eyesore as "historical" by all means.
I think it should be replaced with another '70's San Francisco icon, Dirty Harry with a Smith and Wesson 44 and a "Do you feel lucky, punk?" inscription.
Where's the Boston Bomber when you really need him? . . . Too soon?
I bet that every sports team in SF demanded that the city build them a stadium and much more, so why would SF not respectfully move this fountain (to the dump in my opinion) and let Apple build?
You might lose that bet. Although the Giants tried for many years to get the city to participate in building them a new stadium, the supervisors and electorate never went for it and Pac Bell Park (now AT&T park) was privately financed. Similarly, the 49ers tried and failed to make a deal with the city, and so they are building a new stadium in
Santa Clara. The NBA Warriors were once in San Francisco, could not get a publicly financed gym, and so moved to Oakland. The new owner of the Warriors is planning to build a privately financed arena a few blocks from the baseball stadium and move the Warriors back to SF. Your premise is misinformed.
"We'll just give another city our business, then."
I suspect SF generates enormous sales. Packing up and leaving would be cutting off your nose to spite your face. Not the appropriate response. The way I see it incorporate the fountain into the building. Just think of the business the fountain will generate. Visitors will come to see it and yeah, there's an Apple Store there too. Lets buy stuff.
If they incorporate the fountain into the building they become responsible for it. And I doubt they would do that. Plus it's ugly as hell. Even many folks in SF think so. No way would Apple want that anywhere in their space.
As for the nose, they have stores in SF and could still build another one but it might not be a flagship. No special architecture eric. That honor could be moved to say Oakland right next door.
If they incorporate the fountain into the building they become responsible for it.
Simple. Build a brushed concrete wall all the way around it and a brushed concrete floor over top of it, not touching it on any side. Then that floor becomes the design of the second story of the Apple Store.
Anyone having something to do with Apple's stores must be enraged right now. The most successful company in the world, with the best designers, is being told by some m*ron city planners, "it's too glassy, put up some vertical sh*t and colors to break it up," as if you can't see right through it, allowing the contents if the store to be featured as a way to break up the monotony of glass (which doesn't exist because it's gd transparent).
My issue with that whole thing from them is that it shows they either don't on know or don't care about Apple's signature style for their flagships. They want them airy, few breaks to cast weird shadows etc. and given that its not a historic building issue like Grand Central etc it is just way over the top. Sure the flat wall I can understand, it's a tad ugly. Although Apple might have even planning to put up advertising or something. Perhaps require them to have a certain amount of trees put in that area with maybe a built in bench run, maybe even something to provide free wifi to the plaza.
I'm not sure anyone would notice. San Francisco used to be a beautiful city. Now it's just a toilet for pan handlers, criminals and ne'er-do-wells. There's literally streets in down town San Francisco where the stench of urine and feces can be smelt a 1/2 block away.
Got that in LA too. Govt won't pass laws to get homeless off streets. In fact some folks want to make it even more legal for them to loiter etc.
I've never been or lived in San Francisco so has to the worst of the climate from summer to winter (Fog, Smog..).
The fountain in question should just be moved elsewhere but could be replaced with an Aztec Fountain self-circulating, small streaming river situated behind with a bit of greenery & some palms would give a cool-spot (watering hole) attracting certain insects to the flowers. Bees, dragonfly, butterflies of course mosquitoes & dragonflies would not lay eggs for the moving water.
Since the Apple store will be fully open allowing sunshine all the way through this will give a reprieve to not only heat but noise from traffic around.
They should move that fountain and place it in front of the Mayors residence or his or her home, then I'm sure they'll be glad they can keep a watchful eye on it's decay.
If you want to count a 70's eyesore as "historical" by all means.
I think it should be replaced with another '70's San Francisco icon, Dirty Harry with a Smith and Wesson 44 and a "Do you feel lucky, punk?" inscription.
Simple. Build a brushed concrete wall all the way around it and a brushed concrete floor over top of it, not touching it on any side. Then that floor becomes the design of the second story of the Apple Store.
Haha, I was thinking carbonite but your solution works.
Wait a minute, this is almost all a complete lie. Some self-righteous, anti-Apple reporter at the SF Examiner did an op-ed on this Apple Store location proposal, and was the one that stated that the fountain was to be destroyed. There was another story however that had shown that this was absolutely NOT true! The way that the property is currently laid out, there is this weird angle of the Levi store's building. The proposed Apple store @ Union Square will be changing a significant portion of the location back to a large rectangular shape of course, but it does NOT go back far enough to affect the fountain in question. You can even look at the proposal submitted to the city manager's office and it shows the same. Now the one aspect that does ring true is that there will be a windowless wall on Stockton street. But the distance is not quite that long, and it's not just blank brick either. It should also be noted that according to the renderings it will also be obscured from most traffic by trees anyway!
In fact, here is a story from this very site showing you all of this:
I certainly understand Apple wanting to work with communities and ensure that everyone is as happy as possible. However I also agree that if Apple doesn't get what they want here, especially since these are all lies anyway, Apple should just retract their proposals and wait for another time. Financially, San Francisco needs Apple a whole lot more than Apple needs this one location. And the mayor especially doesn't need to be labeled during his reelection about being "business unfriendly" with his opponents attacking him with killing jobs and millions in retail sales and tax revenue for the city. Which make no mistake, they will. And once another mayor takes office, one who is more friendly to Apple and business in general, he or she will get this pushed through and will get the Apple and the businesses that they bring into this location. They'll also beautify what has been a long-criticized area, and they'll reap all of the benefits that this spineless one could not.
Comments
Apple should just pull up stumps on this one and move on.
Leave that crappy triangle building to fall into disrepair, along with the jacuzzi beside it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DroidFTW
I can't believe I'm saying this, but I agree with TS.
Apple has a long history of an "It's our way or the highway" attitude and I respect that business approach. Once they've made up their mind they stick with it.
Classic selective memory. Yes, there have been many memorable situations when the famous Apple will of steel won the day. There have also been situations when Apple ate crow and did what they had to do, including doing the right thing.
This is a pretty funny thread. Everyone (except a few) are so offended. Take your ball and go home. But remember that even the mighty Steve Jobs compromised on the designs of some of the Apple Stores.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
"We'll just give another city our business, then."
That's just silly.
Apple will not abandon San Francisco. To do so would be counterproductive to the company itself.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Relic
The same thing happened here in Switzerland, the city of Zurich asked Apple to keep the building mostly original as well as the sidewalk and the railings around the new store, there is some silly uniformity code, Apple had something else in mind and threatened to pull out of the project. The city officials basically said don't let the door hit you in your ass on the way out, Apple dropped it. Zurich really didn't want an Apple store anyway as there is already a Swiss owned chain of stores that just sells Apple products called DataQuest, they have been around since the late 80's.
Interesting.
Wait, didn't Apple also have to make some compromises when building other stores too? Like in the US too?
So all the geniuses here who claim that Apple makes no compromise are ... wrong? Making it up? Nah, that can't be?
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheUnfetteredMind
In response, they could submit a revised plan with a giant person hanging off the Apple store with a his/her pants down, bare butt directly over the location of the fountain. I wonder how the Planning Department would take that?
I'm not sure anyone would notice. San Francisco used to be a beautiful city. Now it's just a toilet for pan handlers, criminals and ne'er-do-wells. There's literally streets in down town San Francisco where the stench of urine and feces can be smelt a 1/2 block away.
The clowns running and working for the city of San Francisco - paid or not, need to re-assess their priorities. Stop worrying about fugly water fountains and how to put more belligerent bicyclists on the road. Start worrying about making the city a place for humans to inhabit.
1) The architect's rendering shows that the surrounding structures are unremittingly characterless. As a Los Angeles native I have to admit it looks more like a shot of a typical part of my town than the usually much more interesting SF. That said, though I usually love Apple's stores, I think this particular store standard (the giant slab-sided desk) is TOO much like what's around it. (Look at the upper wall of the building to the left--Apple's right wall mirrors it perfectly--not a good thing IMHO. I love the store like this in Phoenix, where its minimalism looks very right.
2) That fountain. Would have to see it in person to judge, since scale and siting are important, but from what I see it clashes horribly with those steps. Apple should take the option offered of working with the city to find some way to move it to a more harmonious and flattering setting--lots of trees would enhance its organic look. Golden Gate Park?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Relic
What San Francisco is asking for seems pretty reasonable. I don't know how it is in the US but we take our historical landmarks pretty serious and no amount of money or promised jobs would ever change that, especially when our landmarks are 100's of years old and businesses come and go.
If you want to count a 70's eyesore as "historical" by all means.
I think it should be replaced with another '70's San Francisco icon, Dirty Harry with a Smith and Wesson 44 and a "Do you feel lucky, punk?" inscription.
You might lose that bet. Although the Giants tried for many years to get the city to participate in building them a new stadium, the supervisors and electorate never went for it and Pac Bell Park (now AT&T park) was privately financed. Similarly, the 49ers tried and failed to make a deal with the city, and so they are building a new stadium in
Santa Clara. The NBA Warriors were once in San Francisco, could not get a publicly financed gym, and so moved to Oakland. The new owner of the Warriors is planning to build a privately financed arena a few blocks from the baseball stadium and move the Warriors back to SF. Your premise is misinformed.
If they incorporate the fountain into the building they become responsible for it. And I doubt they would do that. Plus it's ugly as hell. Even many folks in SF think so. No way would Apple want that anywhere in their space.
As for the nose, they have stores in SF and could still build another one but it might not be a flagship. No special architecture eric. That honor could be moved to say Oakland right next door.
Simple. Build a brushed concrete wall all the way around it and a brushed concrete floor over top of it, not touching it on any side. Then that floor becomes the design of the second story of the Apple Store.
My issue with that whole thing from them is that it shows they either don't on know or don't care about Apple's signature style for their flagships. They want them airy, few breaks to cast weird shadows etc. and given that its not a historic building issue like Grand Central etc it is just way over the top. Sure the flat wall I can understand, it's a tad ugly. Although Apple might have even planning to put up advertising or something. Perhaps require them to have a certain amount of trees put in that area with maybe a built in bench run, maybe even something to provide free wifi to the plaza.
Got that in LA too. Govt won't pass laws to get homeless off streets. In fact some folks want to make it even more legal for them to loiter etc.
The fountain in question should just be moved elsewhere but could be replaced with an
Aztec Fountain self-circulating, small streaming river situated behind with a bit of greenery
& some palms would give a cool-spot (watering hole) attracting certain insects to the flowers.
Bees, dragonfly, butterflies of course mosquitoes & dragonflies would not lay eggs for the moving water.
Since the Apple store will be fully open allowing sunshine all the way through this will give a reprieve to not only heat but noise from traffic around.
They should move that fountain and place it in front of the Mayors residence or his or her home, then I'm sure they'll
be glad they can keep a watchful eye on it's decay.
Awesome, yeah they should do that.
Haha, I was thinking carbonite but your solution works.
In fact, here is a story from this very site showing you all of this:
http://appleinsider.com/articles/13/05/30/apples-new-union-square-store-will-not-even-reach-fountain-of-controversy
I certainly understand Apple wanting to work with communities and ensure that everyone is as happy as possible. However I also agree that if Apple doesn't get what they want here, especially since these are all lies anyway, Apple should just retract their proposals and wait for another time. Financially, San Francisco needs Apple a whole lot more than Apple needs this one location. And the mayor especially doesn't need to be labeled during his reelection about being "business unfriendly" with his opponents attacking him with killing jobs and millions in retail sales and tax revenue for the city. Which make no mistake, they will. And once another mayor takes office, one who is more friendly to Apple and business in general, he or she will get this pushed through and will get the Apple and the businesses that they bring into this location. They'll also beautify what has been a long-criticized area, and they'll reap all of the benefits that this spineless one could not.