7 ms·

Parts of this should be open to the public. The public has had to endure all of the construction and has lost a large amount of land-space that could have been

Parts of this should be open to the public. The public has had to endure all of the construction and has lost a large amount of land-space that could have been used for the community. Instead, we have a completely private & inaccessible area. Sure, there are cafes, fitness centers, and working areas within the building but none of it is public and all at the expense of the people who live there.

jonwachob91 10y ago
Quoted from the article "Apple Park will also include a visitors center with an Apple Store and cafe open to the public"
FreakyT 10y ago
This sounds like pure NIMBY entitlement to me. "How DARE they build a corporate headquarters when they could have built a PARK!?" Somehow I doubt the construction of this facility incurred any meaningful "expense" to any of "the people who live there"
nodesocket 10y ago
> Parts of this should be open to the public. Who do you think financed this? Apple consumers and investors (I am one) that's who, not taxpayers. Why should it be open to the public? If it were a government project it would still be under construction for the next 10 years. > The public has had to endure all of the construction and has lost a large amount of land-space that could have been used for the community. Or, in reality, Apple bought the real-estate, and pumped hundreds of millions (actually I just looked it up, it is billions with a B) of dollars into the economy and put scores of construction, engineers, and high skilled people to work building it. This isn't soviet Russia comrade.
- dmreedy 10y ago
  Nor is this Howard Roark's wet dreams (even if it does also involve architecture). Your points are not unfounded, but I don't think the Godwin's Law-esque strawmaning is helpful here.
mikeash 10y ago
If the public wants to use land for a community park, then they should buy some land and build a park. It's not Apple's responsibility to fund it for them. Cities all over the country manage to build and maintain parks on their own. I'm sure Cupertino gets, or at least could get, a lot of tax revenue from Apple.
dbbk 10y ago
If you read the press release, there is a public visitors centre, cafe and Apple Store.
Someone1234 10y ago
> has lost a large amount of land-space that could have been used for the community Huh? The site they built on wasn't green field, they purchased previously constructed commercial real estate, knocked it down, and then built up their new campus. Look at this image: http://i.imgur.com/lzAbM0R.jpg http://i.imgur.com/lzAbM0R.jpg Please explain to us how the old use of the space was used by the community? All I see are commercial buildings and car parks. Because to me it seems like what Apple are doing with it (e.g. planting trees) will be far better for the local area than what was there previously. The ironic thing is that you likely only posted this because Apple called it a "park" and has planted a ton of greenery. You assumed it was a green field site before without checking, and claimed Apple stole it "from the community." If anything Apple has improved the local area dramatically with this development, they've added a park, not stole one.
- briandear 10y ago
  Not to mention have it powered entirely with renewables.

jonwachob91 10y ago

Quoted from the article "Apple Park will also include a visitors center with an Apple Store and cafe open to the public"

FreakyT 10y ago

This sounds like pure NIMBY entitlement to me. "How DARE they build a corporate headquarters when they could have built a PARK!?" Somehow I doubt the construction of this facility incurred any meaningful "expense" to any of "the people who live there"

nodesocket 10y ago

> Parts of this should be open to the public. Who do you think financed this? Apple consumers and investors (I am one) that's who, not taxpayers. Why should it be open to the public? If it were a government project it would still be under construction for the next 10 years. > The public has had to endure all of the construction and has lost a large amount of land-space that could have been used for the community. Or, in reality, Apple bought the real-estate, and pumped hundreds of millions (actually I just looked it up, it is billions with a B) of dollars into the economy and put scores of construction, engineers, and high skilled people to work building it. This isn't soviet Russia comrade.

dmreedy 10y ago
Nor is this Howard Roark's wet dreams (even if it does also involve architecture). Your points are not unfounded, but I don't think the Godwin's Law-esque strawmaning is helpful here.

mikeash 10y ago

If the public wants to use land for a community park, then they should buy some land and build a park. It's not Apple's responsibility to fund it for them. Cities all over the country manage to build and maintain parks on their own. I'm sure Cupertino gets, or at least could get, a lot of tax revenue from Apple.

dbbk 10y ago

If you read the press release, there is a public visitors centre, cafe and Apple Store.

Someone1234 10y ago

> has lost a large amount of land-space that could have been used for the community Huh? The site they built on wasn't green field, they purchased previously constructed commercial real estate, knocked it down, and then built up their new campus. Look at this image: http://i.imgur.com/lzAbM0R.jpg http://i.imgur.com/lzAbM0R.jpg Please explain to us how the old use of the space was used by the community? All I see are commercial buildings and car parks. Because to me it seems like what Apple are doing with it (e.g. planting trees) will be far better for the local area than what was there previously. The ironic thing is that you likely only posted this because Apple called it a "park" and has planted a ton of greenery. You assumed it was a green field site before without checking, and claimed Apple stole it "from the community." If anything Apple has improved the local area dramatically with this development, they've added a park, not stole one.

briandear 10y ago
Not to mention have it powered entirely with renewables.