Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Some cities just have intriguing building and zoning policies. When I first moved to San Luis Obispo, California I thought it was the weirdest thing in the world that drive thru windows were illegal at restaurants.

Could be much worse for apple I think.
 
Since I live 50 km south of "The City", and frequently go up - I have a very, very different take on this.

I applaud that the "City and County of San Francisco" hasn't ripped a gash through the neighbourhoods and parks of western San Francisco to build a freeway connection between 280 and the Golden Gate Bridge. Do I care if it adds 20 minutes to a drive from Mountain View to Bodega Bay? No.

I grew up in SF. Transportation is fundamentally broken, and a long standing problem for SF, and while that might be entertaining for you on your little visits from far away, it makes life a lot more difficult for the average person in the entire region on a daily basis. Police, fire and ambulance services all suffer for aesthetics, pitiful really for a such a tiny little city.

I applaud that after the Loma Prieta earthquake compromised the Embarcadero Freeway that the "City and County of San Francisco" canceled the entire project and demolished the structure in favor of a more people friendly boulevard. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1989_Loma_Prieta_earthquake#Effects_on_transportation

The Embarcadero was a freeway span, that was band-aided on to try and help offset traffic from already diverted freeways. There's no reason the 101 N shouldn't go straight thru to the bridge, there's nothing special about Van Ness blvd (some car dealerships, a couple restaurants and that stupid gaudy city hall). Even more so with 280 and 19th avenue, there they could even clean up a lot of the tangled (and severely deteriorating ) roadways that cut through parts of Golden Gate park. All the city did was avoid the effort of replacing anything after the Loma Prieta earthquake, especially since it meant more incidental revenue for the city at the expense of the public.

Who is it 'people friendly' too? Those that sit in traffic, waste money on gas idling, the increased accidents? The city residents needlessly burdened with all the tourist traffic for 1 or 2 tiny areas on the fringe of the city? Or is it really about the revenue to the city from petty traffic violations that would be neutralized with a reasonably modern traffic infrastructure? It would be the state Highway Patrol collecting speeding tickets, instead of SF city. Ironically San Francisco is known almost exclusively for it's roadway architecture (Golden Gate Bridge). I don't think that freezing the city's transportation routing to 1910's era roadways, is 'friendly' to anyone, progress or mankind. It's just a mess that keeps getting worse.

You know what's people 'friendly' for SF... a big ole frickin' Apple Store in Union Square, that will be visited by millions of people, and generate untold employment, business taxes and revenue for the city. But then again, there's those 5 homeless guys with a cultural attachment to a decorative water fountain behind the jean shop.

The "much needed freeway" mentality is typical for Los Angeles and southern California. San Francisco hasn't chopped the city up with freeways - so most of the time I take CalTrain or BART into the city, and leave my car in my garage.

Nice try. Freeways done poorly (Los Angeles for example) is not a valid reason for having no real freeways/highways (SF). However, both are great examples of government 'city' planning.

It's not so much needed 'freeway' mentality, it's a 'welcome to the 21st century' mentality that SF needs. They/you make the faulty assumption that what they've been doing is so wonderful. Plenty of decorative cultural fountains though. :rolleyes:

I think that in the long term, our "left wing liberal democrat 'San Francisco values'" approach to life will win.

Its a common philosophical fallacy, but one more time, just for you... Democrat ≠ liberal. And besides... I didn't ask about Democrats. Being stuck and completely defined by a nonsensical rhetorical battle between intellectually dishonest, corrupt political parties, really limits you. I'd encourage you to look up the meaning of liberal, and challenge you to apply it to your life.
 
I'd like to see more innovative architecture. The minimalist lines are a good start, but the front of the building isn't quite perfect. Apple should take a design motif from the iMac's ports and move the entrance doors to the rear of the building. That way the front of the building stays neat and customers just walk around to the back to get in.

The inside is sort of busy as well. Let's get rid of the some of the extra rooms, shall we? Take a cue from the new Mac Pro and remove all the bathrooms. They can go in peripheral buildings, outhouses, if you will. Instead of having four public restrooms, Apple could add as many as 36 outhouses for the public to use. Of course there will be one superfast bathroom built inside for administrators to use.
 
Oh good, now we have city officials pitching in on building design. What could go wrong.

So there's already a lot of glass on one street and a lot of metal on the other, and Apple wants to build a building that fits into the style that both already display, and they object. What a bunch of idiots.

----------



Design Review has not always been a part of city government.

----------



Gee, how about stop getting a paycheck paid by me for doing something that government shouldn't be doing? You know, I know it may be hard to fathom, but not all government jobs are critical jobs for life. This is the USA, not the UK ;)


Clearly you have never dealt with city goverments before. I have multiple times. Hell I used to have a job that required me to go to deal work with the city and get all these approval (commercial construction 50 mil+ projects) City is city. Generally speaking while it they have a lot of rules and regulation general speaking as long as you follow all of them you do not have an issue. I am willing to bet money Apple is trying to get a lot of weavers.

As for the person who says this is what you get when you vote "democrat" hate to break it to you but the ones that were always the biggest pain in the rear for me to deal with where the Republicans ones. Not the democrat ones. Hell the democrat ones generally where the easiest to get waivers from as they tended to listen to logical arguments. Now the democrat ones hated the my way or the highway approach and that was a quick way to get shot down by everyone. Apple tends to have that way of going.
 
The "much needed freeway" mentality is typical for Los Angeles and southern California. San Francisco hasn't chopped the city up with freeways - so most of the time I take CalTrain or BART into the city, and leave my car in my garage.

I've lived in Southern California All my life and in Pasadena since college. Even though it's LA, Pasadena is taking the same great approach San Francisco has promoting alternatives to freeways.

Highways wont disappear but they're a 20th century idea and today is when the world needs to realize metropolitan areas will never be as friendly to a driver looking to park his car each place he frequents. This isn't a judgement on commuters it's a kernel of truth looking on a world moving forward.
 
You're assuming that the entire city is spending all their time and resources on "a little water fountain". This would mean the BART, water and gas, public parks, schools and police force, and all other social public systems are being ignored. A bit... dramatic.
If you'd stop being an arm chair politician and study polysci you'd realize how much wrong is in your "belief" system. We can all roll our eyes in cute little emoticons while shouting online, doesn't make you any more right. Moving on.

The city is directing these resources into 'city planning' and away from all the others you mentioned. In the Apple Store Union Square case, they've already spent a lot of time on this stupid water fountain, now they are doubling down on the stupid and wasting more of everyone's time and money.

I know it takes a teeny bit of effort to imagine... but how would anyone ever get gas, water, police or education without the SF city government... it's impossible that it could happen any other way? Or never been any different!?!? :eek: Only by extraneous, ineffective middle management and mini-bar pricing is this possible? Never question how well it's all being done... only the government knows the true path to salvation. Give them all power, nothing can go wrong... oops never mind there it goes again...

I think what you're noting is more of a communication issue between my book learning vs. your tv learning and the associated cultural differences. You might need to get the government to buy me a TV so I can relate to you, and make it a plasma... nothing under 75" inches is acceptable in my culture. And don't touch the sacred heritage of my ancestors and their disco era decorative water fountains!

What's my belief system? That people are better at almost everything than their government? That government is broken and stupid? That's less of a philosophy and more easily observable reality. Further, I'm not pretending to be a politician, in fact I find that an extreme insult. Its the lowest of professions, well below the stately sanitation worker, prostitute, carny, drug mule, and even a few Samsung phone users.

You posted a tinfoil hat picture for your retort, and now pine about the childishness of emoticon usage. Is that the usual tactic when realizing you've painted yourself into a corner?
 
Sadly it isn't fiction at all. If you look hard enough you will find newspaper articles about the complaints that Mc Donald's got for painting their restaurants partly red. It happened here in the Rochester NY area and elsewhere.

The red store nonsense actually started elsewhere. No doubt a local leftist with nothing to do saw something on the net about red stores and just had to get involved. Frankly most of these people don't have the wherewithal to get upset on their own.

The killer here is that these are transitory commercial buildings of limited lifespan. At least one of those red Mc Donald's has just been torment down to the ground to have a completely new store built on top of the old site. By the way no residential buildings within a mile so the old, "this will hurt my property values" whine is nonsense.

Another angle to consider here is just how long has Apple been in the store business? Not long really and they are already replacing old stores. That should highlight that nothing really stands for long in the commercial world. Companies move in and out of building regularly. Another five to ten years and this building could be hosting a micro brewery.

Sadly, it is less than fiction. Closer to delusion.
 
I've lived in Southern California All my life and in Pasadena since college. Even though it's LA, Pasadena is taking the same great approach San Francisco has promoting alternatives to freeways.

Highways wont disappear but they're a 20th century idea and today is when the world needs to realize metropolitan areas will never be as friendly to a driver looking to park his car each place he frequents. This isn't a judgement on commuters it's a kernel of truth looking on a world moving forward.

Pasadena isn't promoting an alternative to freeways, they are just refusing to allow the originally planned route of the 710 to be completed. I'm sure the fact that Pasadena is relatively more affluent, and that easier flowing traffic from the distinctly less affluent Alhambra and south/eastern LA county areas is distasteful to the city council, has nothing to do with these feelings of 'promoting freeway alternatives' that you might be experiencing. Its just seems its ok to be a hypocritical brand progressive and screw over the lower classes, as long as it has the appropriate earth mother spiritual reasoning behind it.

If anything development progress in expanding geographically in the US, and individual vehicular autonomy is a huge factor in driving that, literally! Metropolitan cites were once in growth, but they are generally in decay as people realize the inherent disadvantages to very large condensed clusters of humanity under centralized management. Its a big continent, lots of places to go, but public transit won't get you there. (just someone else's predetermined route and destination). Look it up, read all about it...
 
Take a cue from the new Mac Pro and remove all the bathrooms. They can go in peripheral buildings, outhouses, if you will. Instead of having four public restrooms, Apple could add as many as 36 outhouses for the public to use. Of course there will be one superfast bathroom built inside for administrators to use.

Bwahaha! That's a classic!
 
Since I live 50 km south of "The City", and frequently go up - I have a very, very different take on this.

I applaud that the "City and County of San Francisco" hasn't ripped a gash through the neighbourhoods and parks of western San Francisco to build a freeway connection between 280 and the Golden Gate Bridge. Do I care if it adds 20 minutes to a drive from Mountain View to Bodega Bay? No.

I applaud that after the Loma Prieta earthquake compromised the Embarcadero Freeway that the "City and County of San Francisco" canceled the entire project and demolished the structure in favor of a more people friendly boulevard. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1989_Loma_Prieta_earthquake#Effects_on_transportation

The "much needed freeway" mentality is typical for Los Angeles and southern California. San Francisco hasn't chopped the city up with freeways - so most of the time I take CalTrain or BART into the city, and leave my car in my garage.

I think that in the long term, our "left wing liberal democrat 'San Francisco values'" approach to life will win.

Spot on. I was just about to reference the Embarcadero Freeway tragedy in as a result of the '89 quake. That is exactly when city planners focused on larger city boulevards and especially the BART and MUNI systems.

San Francisco is an entirely different entity than Los Angeles. I lived in both cities, S.F. is much more environmentally conscious, not spread out; those two factors have lead to a "greener" and much more traffic friendly public transport system. Many of my friends at Pixar bike, then public transport to Oakland to the Pixar campus. In Los Angeles, there is a public underground, however Beverly Hills will not approve the mainly East L.A. system to pass through to Santa Monica. Cross city traffic is the issue, with the 10 and Santa Monica BLVD being the worst. I used to take Fountain as an alternative. If Los Angeles were to provide a cross city underground through West Hollywood to the coast/Santa Monica, I can guarantee you traffic congestion would be eased. The other issue is "status", many in Los Angeles live in their luxury cars. It's not uncommon to see a Range Hover HSE parked in front of an ~$800/mo apartment complexes to wealthy homes in Brentwood (and many in 2009-11 when I lived there were constantly repo'ed and towed). In Los Angeles, what you drive defines who you are, sadly.

The city isn't placing all their public resources on zoning, that's ludicrous. The Santa Monica of San Francisco, Market St, recently had a major renovation that eased city congestion while improving public transport. San Francisco may be focusing less on Freeways, but that's intentional as they have been systematically focusing on other means of transportation that better facilitate the city.
 
I dont see why they cant incorporate everything. The fountain could be a real feature of the store if its done right.
 
The city is directing these resources into 'city planning' and away from all the others you mentioned. In the Apple Store Union Square case, they've already spent a lot of time on this stupid water fountain, now they are doubling down on the stupid and wasting more of everyone's time and money.

I know it takes a teeny bit of effort to imagine... but how would anyone ever get gas, water, police or education without the SF city government... it's impossible that it could happen any other way? Or never been any different!?!? Only by extraneous, ineffective middle management and mini-bar pricing is this possible? Never question how well it's all being done... only the government knows the true path to salvation. Give them all power, nothing can go wrong... oops never mind there it goes again...

I think what you're noting is more of a communication issue between my book learning vs. your tv learning and the associated cultural differences. You might need to get the government to buy me a TV so I can relate to you, and make it a plasma... nothing under 75" inches is acceptable in my culture. And don't touch the sacred heritage of my ancestors and their disco era decorative water fountains!

What's my belief system? That people are better at almost everything than their government? That government is broken and stupid? That's less of a philosophy and more easily observable reality. Further, I'm not pretending to be a politician, in fact I find that an extreme insult. Its the lowest of professions, well below the stately sanitation worker, prostitute, carny, drug mule, and even a few Samsung phone users.

Alright, you claim I am learned through television and pop culture instead of life experiences regarding these matter, let me educate you. Concluding I am naive and unread based on a few retorts on an online tech site is rather, naive and unread. Here we go.

First, I'm speaking through 36 young but very diverse years of experience, from being raised in the U.K. and Germany with socialized democracy to being an American. I have lived in London, Munich, Barcelona, N.Y.C. (home), San Francisco, Los Angeles, Boston, upstate NY (other home) - I have had the benefit of experiencing many different cultures so do not presume to know me through a few comments on an online tech site.

Second, you are very incorrect. The U.S. system may be a Capitalistic "free market" system in theory, however government and the corporate sect have become so intertwined it is ludicrous and naive to believe they are not one and the same. Special interest groups, campaign contributions, lobbyists all impact political elections and policies from the Federal to the State level. Money talks, b.s. walks. If you truly believe government is "evil" and "corrupt" then by proxy you are stating corporations are "evil" and "corrupting". Freedom is an illusion my friend. At one point in American politics and government, one could state the opposite. Yet since the mid 20th century, the game changed.

One might site the GM and mass transit scandal (the "Great American streetcar scandal") as a crucial tipping point. The General Motors streetcar conspiracy refers to allegations and convictions in relation to a program by General Motors and other companies who purchased and then dismantled streetcar and electric train systems in many American cities. Between 1936 and 1950, National City Lines and Pacific City Lines—with investment from GM, Firestone Tire, Standard Oil of California, Phillips Petroleum, Mack Trucks, and the Federal Engineering Corporation—bought over 100 electric surface-traction systems in 45 cities including Baltimore, Newark, Los Angeles, New York City, Oakland and San Diego and converted them into bus operation. Several of the companies involved were convicted in 1949 of conspiracy to monopolize interstate commerce but were acquitted of conspiring to monopolize the ownership of these companies. The involved companies received a small fine and a slap on the wrist, and yet we are still paying the price as pollution, traffic congestion and environmental disasters have resulted from this new capitalist approach that bought politicians and votes in order to "pave the way". Couple this with Frank Lloyd Wrights contributions to fleeing over crowded cities for a new American suburban dream and Levittown, NY, and it was only a matter of time for the automobile industry and real estate and banks working with federal and local governments in pushing a new automotive and oil and gas economy.

Los Angeles was hit the hardest as it had the best electric mass transit system in the nation, only to be dismantled when GM partnered with oil companies to pave highways, use diesel buses and push the automobile as the new frontier. Frank Lloyd Wrights contributions to American sub-urbanism greatly influenced American topography for decades. In the mid-20th century Wright's belief that automobiles, gas stations, highways and suburban strongholds were the next frontier were laid out in his "Broad Acre City" model. Then Levittown, NY was established after WWII for war vets, followed by "white flight". Many left urban strong holds for the new American Dream, leading to a country of homogeneous denizens separated by class and race in suburban area's. The economical boom of the 1990's saw a reversal of such models, with the X generation pushing gentrification of inner cities. Many wanted to live near work, and enjoy the culture and heterogeneous population coastal cities had to offer. Boston's Back Bay and especially South End (formerly abandoned brownstones and crack houses) became multimillion dollar real estate almost overnight.

In today's society, the line between the corporate and government sects is a very blurred line at best. Claiming local government is to blame for urban decay is ludicrous, as cities experienced a great boom in population since the 80's, bringing business and funding to improve these area's thus requiring local oversight, the very opposite of your claims. Zoning guidelines and committees became a necessity in order to guide cities through booming populations. Without such committees, population density would negatively impact positive growth. Commercial and residential zones required severe rethinking in order to predict traffic patterns that mass transit would alleviate. Commercial (and residential) aesthetic guidelines are not simply strong arming businesses, it impacts real estate value, city image and by proxy tourism, even crime (read "Broken Windows Theory", a well established principal that a simple broken window may lead to a spiraling negative impact on city area's resulting in increased crime and decreased real estate value due to a perceived psychological notion the area must be derelict, here's a great article on its relevance to our discussion, "The 'Broken Windows' Theory and Community Supervision"). New York City's "Time Square" was not the Disney owned tourist attraction of today. Prostitutes and bars lined the once well regarded theatre district for decades. Then mayor Rudolph Giuliani "partnered" (rather, was bought off by) ABC and Disney, selling real estate to those businesses which lead to a mass gentrification of the area, paving the way for others. However, crime was a major issue, especially in the residential "Hells Kitchen" area. Giuliani approved a police task force to strong arm residents out of the area as well as (questionable) businesses such as porn stores and bars. It was widely known he was paid handsomely as large conglomerate businesses took over the area. It "cleaned up" Times Square, yet many begrudge this time in New York City's history as it took away the character and grit that many loved. Soon, other area's followed, with small mom and pop businesses that defined neighborhoods being replaced with "BestBuy's" and "GAP's". The Upper West Side especially experienced a major turn around, with Broadway and Amsterdam becoming a bland canvas of corporate American blocks and glass and steel buildings replacing the brick and mortar buildings that gave New York such character for decades. New York has experienced so much growth so quickly, places one would never walk alone in the day time let alone live have become prime real estate.

None of this is purely the result of capitalism or state/urban funding, but the working of both systems, many unethically. Stating the government is corrupt in the U.S. is one thing, claiming capitalism is the answer is completely ignorant. So you want to talk about my inexperience some more or do you want to admit you may have your belief system a bit backwards? ;)

*Aside from studying neuropsychology, I also studied urban planning and architecture, T.A.'ing courses at the University of Rochester and Columbia. I'd be more than happy in PM'ing you my dissertation on these matters, "Segregation, Isolation and Fear - The Plight of Modern Urbanism". So to counter your point that I receive my information from television and pop culture, thus I must be naive, I have real life experiences coupled with book smarts to make a rather informative and accurate depiction of the American topography over the last century. Why not discuss the matter intelligently with facts instead of passing your opinions as truth? Please don't attempt to claim I do not know what I write.

It would benefit you greatly if you knew what you were discussing and you addressed others such as "infinitech" and "AidenShaw" with respect and common courtesy.


Post 133Look it up, read all about it...

It seems you would benefit from reading as well.



People respond in kind. I took the time in addressing your claims with facts, events, and sources, try to do the same with others. This is a subject matter of which I am very passionate and well versed, I do not take personal insults lightly and will take the time in addressing relevant points as necessary. :)
 
Last edited:
Of all stores this looks the most like a warehouse, boring.

It's mainly because of the one solid wall.

The fountain is ugly and naff and should be relocated to the city dump.
 
All but one of the members of the board have a declared party affiliation and the rest are declared as "Democrat".

Who is the crazy one?


It isn't crazy at all as such comments always come from fringe leftists with no sense of reality. Unless there is a structural or safety issue it isn't governments domain to comment on how much glass is used to build a structure.

I'm guessing that you're both the type of people who will see a red car speeding and decide that only red cars must speed. Or if you see a rude woman will decide that all women are rude.

Speaking as someone who has literally sat through dozens of hours of similar discussions in a republican-led city, I can officially say you're both nuts.
 
In regards to the proposed design changes: ludicrous, but expected. That area already looks quite bad, and adding or removing glass at an Apple store won't fix that. That fountain is also hideous. I'm surprised they didn't tell Apple to recreate Victorian row homes for their store.

As per the general commuter planning aspect of SF, I actually liked the idea of I480. There absolutely needs to be a through-way between 280 and the bridge. Funneling all that traffic through the city is asinine, and it introduces extra local congestion that's not needed.

That said, the above ground approach ala I480 isn't really needed either. It's not rocket science to build a through-pass underground. No neighborhoods are split, there's no noise and above ground eyesore, and through traffic from 280 gets funneled away from the local streets.

So long as they design it correctly and don't have any loose concrete slabs as ceiling tiles, the project should be earthquake safe too (more so than the above-ground freeways).

Think big dig, but in SF (and hopefully less corruption).
 
Last edited:
"The city's planners object to the uniform wall of glass along the store's main frontage on Post Street, suggesting that Apple should do more to break up the wall by including colors or textures or vertical design elements."

How on earth did we get to the point where we think this is a proper function of government?

If you would like to see what a city looks like without zoning, planning, esthetic sensibilities, controls on outdoor advertising, or NIMBYs, visit San Salvador, El Salvador. You will be happy to have a city government that that does something.
 
I used to be a fan of Apple Store design, but have very much soured with the direction it has taken.

What started off working well in small shops: clean and white, balanced by warm wood tables & shelves, has morphed with Apple's success. The stores are now large and harsh, and dominated by cold metal, glass, and concrete.

In particular, the new Palo Alto Apple Store feels like one is in a secure prison indoor "yard", and the quality of the sound is as warm and welcoming as its totalitarian looks.

Perhaps this transition is just another sign of the times, but it would be good to see the pendulum swing back to warmth, joy, and the human scale.

I actually like what Apple did with their Barcelona store:

r55mKCz.jpg


NoId5If.jpg


Clean, modern, yet it feels a little warmer than some of their other stores.
 
City government might have an interest in creating proper pedestrian space, easements etc, but micromanaging apples design desicisions just shows how overeaching and overregulating local governments have become in California. Does anyone really want a beautiful minimalist design fronted by an ugly fountain by a "noted" artist. Anyone who has travelled in american cities knows that is corporations that have created the most beautiful public spaces. Not soviet style local administrators lobbying for "more color" and the preservation of historic trash.

----------

As for the person who says this is what you get when you vote "democrat" hate to break it to you but the ones that were always the biggest pain in the rear for me to deal with where the Republicans ones.

News flash--california, and especially san francisco--has been essentially one party affair for quite a while now
 
Los Angeles was hit the hardest as it had the best electric mass transit system in the nation, only to be dismantled when GM partnered with oil companies to pave highways, use diesel buses and push the automobile as the new frontier.

This story is repeated often, but is it mainly apocryphal. The interurban system in the Los Angeles region began to decline in the 1920s as conflicts between streetcars and automobiles became a big issue. The system was designed with few grade separations and accidents were increasingly common. Ironically, much of the region's sprawl was made possible by the interurban street car lines, so when cars became cheap and reliable after World War I, the region was a natural for becoming automobile-oriented. By the 1930s a lot of the interurban lines had already been abandoned or relegated to non-passenger freight service. Only gas rationing during World War II saved the system from complete disintegration, but only briefly. Only a few lines continued to serve passengers after the war. Note this all occurred before the infamous "deal" with GM to "push" the automobile and busses. The important fact is that nobody needed to "push" automobiles on the Los Angeles area. They were already a fact of life and had eclipsed the street car lines by the 1920s.

Note also, the interurban system was completely privately owned and operated.
 
Pasadena isn't promoting an alternative to freeways, they are just refusing to allow the originally planned route of the 710 to be completed. I'm sure the fact that Pasadena is relatively more affluent, and that easier flowing traffic from the distinctly less affluent Alhambra and south/eastern LA county areas is distasteful to the city council, has nothing to do with these feelings of 'promoting freeway alternatives' that you might be experiencing. Its just seems its ok to be a hypocritical brand progressive and screw over the lower classes, as long as it has the appropriate earth mother spiritual reasoning behind it.

Not entirely accurate. First, the main opponent to the 710 extension isn't Pasadena, it's South Pasadena. The 710 is already built through most of its route in Pasadena but would take out entire neighborhoods if it was built as planned though South Pasadena. The "refusal" is a function of the growing resistance to the 1960s thinking of the Caltrans engineers. The only solution they propose to relieve congestion is more and wider freeways, many of them plowed directly through established urban areas. In the old days, nobody much cared about established urban areas, so selling massive land acquisition wasn't difficult. This is why much of area north of downtown Pasadena was utterly wiped out for the construction of the 210. Thankfully, cities are no longer being rolled so easily by Caltrans. At the same time, the cost of building freeways this way has gone through the roof. If the 710 connector is ever built (which I doubt), it would likely be the most expensive road construction by the mile in history. And within months it would be so congested that everybody would wonder why they bothered.

Second, Pasadena is promoting alternatives. They are encouraging the densification of development around the Metro Gold Line stations. This is how mass transit is made to work.
 
More color? That would stick out like a sore thumb on that site. Here's what it looks like right now.

union-square-05.jpg


Anybody see any color on any of those buildings adjoining it? If anything, the color the building has now as a Levi's retail store make it look out of place already.
 
The whole point of the Apple design is to feel monolithic.

The design edits act like this is somehow a bad thing.

People are also acting like any sane citizens would complain about having an aesthetic contrast like that.

No normal people in San Fran are gonna go around and complain about some sleek building by the worlds most popular and elegant company showing up in an elegant upscale shopping area.

Its a welcome design contrast. A stark monolithic building surrounded by outdated design. Thats kind of cool, both for the city, and for Apple marketing.
 
This story is repeated often, but is it mainly apocryphal. The interurban system in the Los Angeles region began to decline in the 1920s as conflicts between streetcars and automobiles became a big issue. The system was designed with few grade separations and accidents were increasingly common. Ironically, much of the region's sprawl was made possible by the interurban street car lines, so when cars became cheap and reliable after World War I, the region was a natural for becoming automobile-oriented. By the 1930s a lot of the interurban lines had already been abandoned or relegated to non-passenger freight service. Only gas rationing during World War II saved the system from complete disintegration, but only briefly. Only a few lines continued to serve passengers after the war. Note this all occurred before the infamous "deal" with GM to "push" the automobile and busses. The important fact is that nobody needed to "push" automobiles on the Los Angeles area. They were already a fact of life and had eclipsed the street car lines by the 1920s.

Note also, the interurban system was completely privately owned and operated.

Very good points, but keep in mind it did occur during the GM Streetcar scandal. The companies involved (stated in my post) worked from the early 1920s-1950's and were already making an effort in subverting much of the funding for PE's electric mass transit system (much through political corporate influence as well as "selling" the new frontier from automobiles). Much of the neglect coupled with two WW's, suburban sprawl, Hollywood's influence on American culture, and other factors were integral in LA's electric mass transit system's demise, yet it was the corporate collusion with politicians that acted as the last nail in the coffin. As growth continued, private (and public) funding for PE's mass transit system and infrastructure was redirected to roads, freeways and other components for the infrastructure necessary in paving the way for GM and the service stations, etc. This didn't happen overnight, but over the course of a few decades. Both WW's impacted the change, due in part to resources as well as slight stagnation in local economic growth. The sprawling topography of Los Angeles was not nearly what it is presently, cable cars were serving their purpose and would have continued if it not had been for the push towards auto's. For the general consumer/resident, cars were not less expensive, in fact just the opposite. Before GM and the many other auto and gas corporations colluded, it was much less expensive for denizens to use mass transit systems in Los Angeles. Car ownership was pushed mainly by those who could afford it, and in Los Angeles more individuals could afford automobiles in comparison to other U.S. cities, doesn't mean the general denizen could and by proxy the mass transit system deteriorated.

It was true that Pacific Electric owned the red car system in Los Angeles, operating street cars, lighting, electric buses, etc and was the largest electric railway system in the world in the 1920's. Electric trolleys first traveled in Los Angeles in 1887. In 1895 The Pasadena and Pacific Railway was created from a merger of the Pasadena and Los Angeles Railway and the Los Angeles Pacific Railway (to Santa Monica). Large profits from land development were generated along the routes of the new lines. Huntington Beach was incorporated in 1909 and developed by the Huntington Beach Company, a real-estate development firm owned by Henry Huntington, which still owns both land in the city and most of the mineral rights. There are other local 'streetcar suburbs'. Angelino Heights was built around the Temple Street horsecar, which was later upgraded to electric streetcar as part of the Yellow Car system. Highland Park was developed along the Figueroa Street trolley lines and railroads linking downtown Los Angeles and Pasadena. Huntington owned nearly all the stock in the 'Pacific Electric Land Company'. West Hollywood was established by Moses Sherman and his partners of the Los Angeles and Pacific Railway. Moses Sherman, Harry Chandler, Hobart Johnstone Whitley, and others bought the entire southern San Fernando Valley in 1910. The railway company "connected all the dots on the map and was a leading player itself in developing all the real estate that lay in between the dots". Huntington's involvement with urban rail was intimately tied to his real estate development operations. Real estate development was so lucrative for Huntington and SP that they could use the Red Car as a loss leader, however when most of the company's holdings had been developed by 1920 their major income source began to deplete.

Although the railway owned extensive private rights-of-way, usually between urban areas, much PE trackage in urban areas such as downtown Los Angeles west of the Los Angeles River was in streets shared with automobiles and trucks. Virtually all street crossings were at-grade, and increasing automobile traffic led to decreasing Red Car speeds on much of its trackage. Traffic congestion was of such great concern by the late 1930s that the influential Automobile Club of Southern California engineered an elaborate plan to create an elevated freeway-type "Motorway System," a key aspect of which was the dismantling of the streetcar lines, replacing them with buses that could run on both local streets and on the new express roads. PE carried increased passenger loads during World War II, when Los Angeles County's population nearly doubled as war industries concentrated in the region attracting millions of workers. There were several years when the company's income statement showed a profit, most notably during World War II, when gasoline was rationed and much of the populace depended on mass transit. At peak operation toward the end of World War II, the PE dispatched over 1000 trains daily and was a major employer in Southern California. Aware that most new arrivals planned to stay in the region after the war, local municipal governments, Los Angeles County and the state agreed that a massive infrastructure improvement program was necessary. At that time politicians agreed to construct a web of freeways across the region. This was seen as a better solution than a new mass transit system or an upgrade of the PE. What this fails to take into account were the back room deals by GM and other corporations with local and state politicians to push this agenda. Many factors contributed to the downfall of PE's system, the nail on the coffin was the Streetcar collusion.

If this was a common issue cross the nation, then this would have held true for NYC, Boston, and other cities in which GM also colluded to place mass transit out of service. Los Angeles fell prey for many reasons, although still has an underground that is effective enough for East L.A., yet as I stated has been severely hampered by the town of Beverly Hills refusing to approve its continuation to Santa Monica which would greatly improve crosstown transit. Additionally, if the Streetcar collusion wasn't actually a "collusion", then the U.S. government would not have found those parties involved guilty (although the penalties were far less than what they should have been).

Excellent points all around. Definitely refreshing to have enlightening conversations for a change (gave ya an up vote) :)
 
Last edited:
Pasadena isn't promoting an alternative to freeways, they are just refusing to allow the originally planned route of the 710 to be completed.

The originally planned route couldn't even be completed because it was inherently a bad job.

A small percentage of the workforce travels anywhere besides their home and office for work.

Affluent people will always find a way to get to work because they have resources beyond normal commuters/

Public transportation helps everyone.
 
Last edited:
What? Apple is being denied something they want???

Ah poor little company doesn't get there way on the first go around. I bet it hurts when you don't get your way anymore. Well it's hard to not be the big dog on the world campus anymore; LOL...
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.