Slashdot Mirror
Apple's MacBook Air-like Store Roof Wasn't Designed To Handle Snow... in Chicago (9to5mac.com)
An anonymous reader shares a report Apple opened its new flagship retail store in Chicago earlier this year to much acclaim, but as the weather turns from fall to winter, a design oversight is causing some problems. As reported by Chicago blog Spundart, Apple seemingly didn't design the MacBook Air-like roof of the store to account for snow... in Chicago. Apple's newest Chicago store garnered earlier attention for its roof design that mimics a MacBook Air, but one clear oversight is that there are no gutters to catch snow or ice. Furthermore, as the multi-level store sits along the Chicago River, the roof is sloped downward, meaning that anyone standing on the walkway along the river gets hit with falling snow and ice. Further reading: Apple is really bad at design.
If they really completely forgot about snow and ice they have a much more serious problem.
What about the WEIGHT of the snow and ice on the cantilevered roof with just the glass to support it?
I looked at the picture and couldn't tell how far it was extended out from the central supports but if there's a lot of snow on top that then catches rain and sleet to become a heavy thick blanket of ice, I would imagine there could be some structural issues (if it even flexes a little maybe it would cause the glass to shatter).
Any structural engineers who know this kind of construction and can shed some light on this issue?
The snow falls of the roof just fine, it's not accumulating to the point of a collapse. So the problem isn't the roof.
The problem is people are pedestrianing all wrong.
I browse on +1 so AC's need not respond, I won't see it.
Lots of buildings in Chicago have roped-off sidewalks in the winter.
Why isn't this a valid point? If roping off the hazardous portion of the sidewalk is an accepted solution, what is the problem here?
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
Holy shit, your complete insensitivity to anyone else and your willingness to make excuses for Apple is simply staggering.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
That's Apple nowadays: all form over function.
Circumcision is child abuse.
Because it usually applies to ancient buildings that crumble from the weight of decades and haven't seen any kind of renovation or refurbishment in about the same time. Not brand new ones that were built the same damn year.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
The roof works fine, it's the damn snow that's the problem.
Maybe write into the specs that the roof cannot be used to keep snow away. While you're at it, just to be safe, write it for water in general. Or hail. Or anything else that might fall from the sky.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Or have vision problems... which was the case.
A great thing to not care about for a company that "cares about inclusivity".
There's also 0% chance that Apple just casually designed the building and it was not signed off on by architects, engineers, the city / state building inspectors and planning commissions, and thus met all requirements for handling snow and ice. My guess is the pitch of the roof was such that it did not require snow guards, but in reality it needs them.
Better known as 318230.
You do not understand the permitting process.
The stamps of the licensed architects & engineers are a surrogate for actually understanding and vetting the design. The plan reviewers and inspectors only look for specific code issues. Actually, it would be an impossible burden for them to thoroughly review all aspects of every building design, unless you had more inspectors and plan reviewers that you have architects & engineers submitting plans, and required mountains of additional paperwork from the architects & engineers.