Campus 2, Apple Inc.'s proposed ring-shaped office facility in Cupertino, Calif., could cost $5 billion to build, according to a report by Bloomberg. Confidential souces told the publication that the budget has escalated since 2011, when a $3 billion price tag was predicted, and could reach more than $1,500/sf. The scale of the project has evolved over time; initally the building was only intended to accommodate 6,000 employees, vs. the current scope of 12,000 to 13,000.
Contributing to the high price is a design that calls for a façade incorporating 40-foot tall curved glass panes, imported from German firm Seele. The campus, created on land the company already owns, would be planted with 6,000 trees. In addition to the main building, the plan includes a corporate auditorium, fitness center, central plant, underground parking, and 300,000-sf research building.
The Building Team includes Foster + Partners as lead architect, and a joint venture of DPR Construction and Skanska USA Building as general contractor. A 2016 move-in date is projected, with demoliton of existing buildings on the site set to begin this summer.
Bloomberg quotes several shareholder sources who expressed trepidation about the cost of the project, in particular its innovative (and costly) use of curved glass. Apple execs say that Campus 2—part of the late Steve Jobs' dream for the company—will go forward. Apple will also continue to use its "Infinite Loop" headquarters, home to 2,800 employees.
The roof of the main building will hold 70,000 sf of solar panels, a key to the project's net-zero energy design. Other sustainable features will include high-efficiency fans, advanced daylighting, intensive plantings, and sustainable wood. Prefabricated, modular construction is anticipated as a key construction strategy.
(http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-04-04/apple-new-campus-cost-seen-jumping-to-5-billion-tech-correct-.html)
Related Stories
Giants 400 | Oct 20, 2017
Top 40 sports architecture firms
Populous, HOK, and HKS top BD+C’s ranking of the nation’s largest sports sector architecture and AE firms, as reported in the 2017 Giants 300 Report.
Giants 400 | Oct 19, 2017
Race for talent drives office designs
Is the shift toward attracting younger workers too much or not enough?
Sponsored | Designers | Oct 18, 2017
Universal design principles: Part 2
The CDC targets the bathroom as the most dangerous room in the house. Architects can use principles of Universal Design (UD) to reduce these hazards.
Giants 400 | Oct 17, 2017
Top 110 office architecture firms
Gensler, Jacobs, and HOK top BD+C’s ranking of the nation’s largest office sector architecture and AE firms, as reported in the 2017 Giants 300 Report.
Giants 400 | Oct 16, 2017
Data center market forecast: Clearly cloudy
Look for mission-critical construction to double in the next few years.
Resiliency | Oct 13, 2017
Resiliency takes center stage in new projects around the country
Projects like these, where resilience is central to their design and construction, are becoming more commonplace.
Architects | Oct 11, 2017
Architects to policymakers: Buildings are infrastructure, too
Left out of this ongoing national debate over infrastructure are the nation’s other public buildings: the libraries, community centers, courthouses, community college buildings, affordable housing developments, and justice facilities.
Giants 400 | Oct 11, 2017
Top 25 data center architecture firms
Jacobs, Corgan, and Gensler top BD+C’s ranking of the nation’s largest data center sector architecture and AE firms, as reported in the 2017 Giants 300 Report.
Multifamily Housing | Oct 9, 2017
6 new products for the multifamily construction market
Bamboo wall panels, an adaptable prep sink, and a two-tiered bike parking system are among the product innovations geared for multifamily buildings.
AEC Tech | Oct 6, 2017
How professional bias can sabotage industry transformation
Professional bias can take the form of change-resistant thinking that can keep transformational or innovative ambitions at bay. Tech consultant Nate Miller presents three kinds of bias that often emerge when a professional is confronted with new technology.
