Apple gains permits to move employees into five sections of Apple Park's 'Spaceship'

AppleInsider

Parts of Apple's 'spaceship' building at the Apple Park campus are now usable by employees, after the iPhone producer received temporary occupancy permits from the City of Cupertino, and it is expected permits to use the rest of the massive structure will be granted later this quarter.

According to data compiled by Cupertino building official Albert Salvador, Apple was provided temporary occupancy permits for five of the 12 sections of the main circular Apple Park building, reports VentureBeat. The paperwork gives Apple permission to bring its employees into these defined areas to work.

It is believed Apple will gain similar temporary occupancy permits for the remaining sections of the structure in the near future. The spreadsheet containing the permit data, dated for January 17, indicates the rest of the permits could be provided by March at the latest.

Apple had in fact received a temporary permit for one section in July last year, with the permitted area containing the restaurant and atrium areas of the campus.

The temporary occupancy permits are required by building owners if they wish to use areas of a structure that is still under construction, Salvador told the report. The permits have a "list of exclusions" that limit how a space can be used, though Salvador advised such a permit would generally be granted so long as there is a safe passage to a public right-of-way.

"I would not issue a final certificate of occupancy until all the work is complete on the entire site," states Salvador. "Appropriate barriers are required to keep occupants away from any portions of the building or site where construction is still in progress."

Since receiving the permits, Apple has started to move more of its staff to Apple Park from its other nearby offices and facilities, with the building expected to fit some 12,000 people once completed. Notably, Apple is reportedly attempting to keep the staff migration as secretive as possible, though some employees have confirmed the move in social media posts.

At the time Apple gave the formerly-named "Campus 2' the official title of Apple Park early last year, it was claimed employees would start moving over to the new headquarters from April 2017, with the moving process expected to take just six months to complete.

Construction is still ongoing at the campus, though it and landscaping efforts are appearing to wind down. The latest drone flyover of the campus shows large-scale construction equipment have been removed from view, leaving a handful of cranes visible, and while landscaping in many sections seem to be completed, some areas still appear to be in a rough state that needs more work.

Soli

Who would care about permits about a measuring stick to gauge how far along a project has come? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ /s

king editor the grate

"Notably, Apple is reportedly attempting to keep the staff migration as secretive as possible ..."

Headline: Secretive company acts in secretive manner

jd_in_sb

That Apple needs permits, for any reason, to use their own private building on private property is a joke. Perhaps Cupertino will offer case by case permits to use restrooms, too?

Soli

jd_in_sb said:

That Apple needs permits, for any reason, to use their own private building on private property is a joke. Perhaps Cupertino will offer case by case permits to use restrooms, too?

How awful that employees have some level of reassurance that the new building they’re working in is safe without each and every one having to be a structural engineer themselves to make a personal assessment. /s

On 4 April 2013, a building collapsed on tribal land in Mumbra, a suburb of Thane in Maharashtra, India. It has been called the worst building collapse in the area: 74 people died, including 18 children, 23 women, and 33 men, while more than 100 people survived.

The building was under construction and did not have an occupancy certificate for its 100 to 150 low- to middle-income residents; its only occupants were the site construction workers and their families. The building was reported to have been illegally constructed because standard practices were not followed for safe, lawful construction, land acquisition and resident occupancy.

• https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_Thane_building_collapse

macxpress

jd_in_sb said:

That Apple needs permits, for any reason, to use their own private building on private property is a joke. Perhaps Cupertino will offer case by case permits to use restrooms, too?

With any building, most cities/towns/villages will require you to get an official certificate of occupancy. This isn't something new to Apple, or the city of Cupertino. The building needs to be inspected for fire and other safety precautions in order to get a certificate of occupancy. Each municipality has their own set of building codes and safety standards everyone has to follow in order to get a certificate of occupancy. 

Since Apple has a temporary certificate for a portion fo the building, I assume Apple has met these requirements for a specific portion of the main building so the city issued a temporary certificate for that portion of the building with the intention of Apple get an official certificate of occupancy for the entire building once the entire building has been inspected and passed all building code requirements. 

Otherwise, places could just do whatever they feel like, even if it meant risking the safety of the occupants of that building. 

Rayz2016

jd_in_sb said:

That Apple needs permits, for any reason, to use their own private building on private property is a joke. Perhaps Cupertino will offer case by case permits to use restrooms, too?

I had some work done my house which involved moving the staircase. We had to move out while it was being done and then the house had to be inspected before we moved back in. 

And this is just a house, so I can’t imagine them doing less for a brand new building built in a quake zone and housing thousands of people. 

macxpress

Rayz2016 said:

jd_in_sb said:

That Apple needs permits, for any reason, to use their own private building on private property is a joke. Perhaps Cupertino will offer case by case permits to use restrooms, too?

I had some work done my house which involved moving the staircase. We had to move out while it was being done and then the house had to be inspected before we moved back in. 

And this is just a house, so I can’t imagine them doing less for a brand new building built in a quake zone and housing thousands of people. 

Back in 2012, I moved into a brand new apartment complex and I had to wait for them to get a certificate of occupancy before I could move in. It was close because I had to be out of my at the time, current apartment by like the 29th and they just got the certificate of occupancy on the 29th so it was a quick move to get everything out before I had to pay for a pro-rated month for the next month. 

In other words, its nothing new. Everyone has to go through it no matter where they are. 

BTW...its sooo nice being the very first person in a brand new apartment! And I mean brand new from the ground up...not just renovated or "freshly painted" as many landlords love to say in descriptions. 

Soli

macxpress said:

Rayz2016 said:

jd_in_sb said:

That Apple needs permits, for any reason, to use their own private building on private property is a joke. Perhaps Cupertino will offer case by case permits to use restrooms, too?

I had some work done my house which involved moving the staircase. We had to move out while it was being done and then the house had to be inspected before we moved back in. 

And this is just a house, so I can’t imagine them doing less for a brand new building built in a quake zone and housing thousands of people. 

In other words, its nothing new. Everyone has to go through it no matter where they are.

Based on the charged terms he used I think he's aware that it's not new, but has a problem with even the most basic gov't oversight, and likely believes that "the free market" would make this facility as safe, if not more.

pascal007

jd_in_sb said:

That Apple needs permits, for any reason, to use their own private building on private property is a joke. Perhaps Cupertino will offer case by case permits to use restrooms, too?

That's the law, even if you build a house. It insures that the builder have followed code. Nothing new here.

anton zuykov

jd_in_sb said:

That Apple needs permits, for any reason, to use their own private building on private property is a joke. Perhaps Cupertino will offer case by case permits to use restrooms, too?

That is California for you.

Soli

anton zuykov said:

jd_in_sb said:

That Apple needs permits, for any reason, to use their own private building on private property is a joke. Perhaps Cupertino will offer case by case permits to use restrooms, too?

That is California for you.

So what US state doesn't have building codes?

neilm

jd_in_sb said:

That Apple needs permits, for any reason, to use their own private building on private property is a joke. Perhaps Cupertino will offer case by case permits to use restrooms, too?

Yeah, people want less regulation – right up until their kids get food poisoning and everyone starts wondering where the food inspectors were.

anton zuykov

Soli said:

anton zuykov said:

jd_in_sb said:

That Apple needs permits, for any reason, to use their own private building on private property is a joke. Perhaps Cupertino will offer case by case permits to use restrooms, too?

That is California for you.

So what US state doesn't have building codes?

Wrong question. The correct question would be - which state has the largest number of regulations that slow down business growth.

anton zuykov

neilm said:

jd_in_sb said:

That Apple needs permits, for any reason, to use their own private building on private property is a joke. Perhaps Cupertino will offer case by case permits to use restrooms, too?

Yeah, people want less regulation – right up until their kids get food poisoning and everyone starts wondering where the food inspectors were.

Not everyone. Just those who like to put their own responsibilities on others. Like a responsibility of not giving small spherical magnets to toddlers...

Soli

anton zuykov said:

Soli said:

anton zuykov said:

jd_in_sb said:

That Apple needs permits, for any reason, to use their own private building on private property is a joke. Perhaps Cupertino will offer case by case permits to use restrooms, too?

That is California for you.

So what US state doesn't have building codes?

Wrong question. The correct question would be - which state has the largest number of regulations that slow down business growth.

You can't change your position to one of severity when your reply of "That is California for you" is based on a comment that clearly indicates that Apple, a private company, shouldn't be required to need any permits, for any reason.

anton zuykov

Soli said:

anton zuykov said:

Soli said:

anton zuykov said:

jd_in_sb said:

That Apple needs permits, for any reason, to use their own private building on private property is a joke. Perhaps Cupertino will offer case by case permits to use restrooms, too?

That is California for you.

So what US state doesn't have building codes?

Wrong question. The correct question would be - which state has the largest number of regulations that slow down business growth.

You can't change your position to one of severity when your reply of "That is California for you" is based on a comment that clearly indicates that Apple, a private company, shouldn't be required to need any permits, for any reason.

I can. My point was that it is one of the most over-regulated states in the union (not my opinion), and nothing else should be expected from it. IT IS a question of severity.

macky the macky

Occupancy during construction is a purely optional matter... this building got occupied without any jammed stairways and elevators...

macky the macky

I’m assuming that the building is now certified for half - occupancy...?

Rayz2016

macxpress said:

Rayz2016 said:

jd_in_sb said:

That Apple needs permits, for any reason, to use their own private building on private property is a joke. Perhaps Cupertino will offer case by case permits to use restrooms, too?

I had some work done my house which involved moving the staircase. We had to move out while it was being done and then the house had to be inspected before we moved back in. 

And this is just a house, so I can’t imagine them doing less for a brand new building built in a quake zone and housing thousands of people. 

Back in 2012, I moved into a brand new apartment complex and I had to wait for them to get a certificate of occupancy before I could move in. It was close because I had to be out of my at the time, current apartment by like the 29th and they just got the certificate of occupancy on the 29th so it was a quick move to get everything out before I had to pay for a pro-rated month for the next month. 

In other words, its nothing new. Everyone has to go through it no matter where they are. 

BTW...its sooo nice being the very first person in a brand new apartment! And I mean brand new from the ground up...not just renovated or "freshly painted" as many landlords love to say in descriptions. 

Where do you live, if you don’t mind me asking. Did you buy or rent?

I’m always curious about this because I’m told that buying houses as opposed to renting them is a very British thing. 

steveau

Soli said:

macxpress said:

Rayz2016 said:

jd_in_sb said:

That Apple needs permits, for any reason, to use their own private building on private property is a joke. Perhaps Cupertino will offer case by case permits to use restrooms, too?

I had some work done my house which involved moving the staircase. We had to move out while it was being done and then the house had to be inspected before we moved back in. 

And this is just a house, so I can’t imagine them doing less for a brand new building built in a quake zone and housing thousands of people. 

In other words, its nothing new. Everyone has to go through it no matter where they are.

Based on the charged terms he used I think he's aware that it's not new, but has a problem with even the most basic gov't oversight, and likely believes that "the free market" would make this facility as safe, if not more.

Some regulations are dumb, but some are necessary. Sorting out which is which is one of the things we pay politicians for. Building regulations are usually necessary, because they often result from recommendations from a coroner's court, q.v. Grenfell Tower in London last June.