Broadway Getting $4.8M Apple Makeover

Yea Apple!

I guess there's no stopping the yuppie surge. Apple is a horrible company that employs sweat shop labour to produce overpriced toys for the bourgeois.

@Atwater - What computer are you typing on? What was the wage of the person that built the components and assembled it? I'd love to see proof that other computer companies are any better for the world than apple is.

Who gives a .......?

One more store I can't afford to shop at. I remember when Broadway was for everybody, not just for Yalies. Sigh

With $4.8 million going into the store there's going to be sky high overhead. Better buy your gizmos from a deep discount on line retailer.

It shows you how bad Yale wants Apple that they are spending $5mm to renovate their space. Landlord concessions to prime tenants are not unusual, but this one seems a bit much. [And truth be told, we don't know the lease details, so maybe it's not all Yale money, but that's what this article says: "Yale will spend $4,868,678 on a complete overhaul of 65-77 Broadway St., the future site of a new Apple store."]

Charlie, that seems unlikely given the fact that Apple stores are probably the most successful major chain store in the world, in terms of sales per square foot.

Hopefully Apple's presence on Broadway will draw customers from the region who otherwise would get in a car and go shopping at the Apple Store in West Hartford (as I have done in the past), thereby helping to support many other businesses and jobs in New Haven.

You say Apple i say bananas!

Good to see.

More tax revenue for the city just might mean less taxes for the rest of us.

Mr. Ray, you seem to forget - we WANT an Apple Store ;)
There was even a SeeClickFix Issue for it - http://www.seeclickfix.com/issues/7465

Apple Stores aren'tjust for rich college kids, they're for many people. Even the kids in Newhallville have iPods. Apple is such a popular brand, this really is something that will attract people from all over the city, as well as people from this county, and the neighboring ones.

Well done to Yale for getting an Apple Store here! I look forward to going in sometime

Somebody needs to say something positive, so I will. Hurray for getting rid of that God-awful archway and Dryvit facade! NHI: where is evidence of this "sleek and stripped-down" exterior? Are there pictures somewhere we can see?

p.s.
I'm not necessarily pro-Apple, just anti-ugly building.

Today, amid all the hoopla on Apple coming to town, Nokia announced 5,000 layoffs worldwide. The cell phone business must be really booming for Yale to put up $5 million to get Apple to come to New Haven. Or is it. Downtown property rentals are obviously getting very desperate. Barnes & Noble have lost 50% of their sales nationally in the last 2 years, and they are retrenching into the hole in the wall that's left of the old Yale Co-op building. If they are selling books, or anything else there 2 years from now I'll be very surprised. Wasn't there some Dean of a Yale School who suddenly departed a few years back to go work for Apple. No doubt he's twisted a few arms to get a foot in the door selling really expensive electronics to freshmen who don't know the value of a dollar. There will not be any suburbanites lining up to use the store with the cost of parking going up when the meters are privatized. I hear you can pay as much as $4.25 for 20 minutes in Chicago. If you want a really good tip watch to see if the Yale endowment sells Apple shares in the next few months. Also look to see if they buy the City's general obligation bonds.

I'm not so sure it's such a great thing that residents of Newhallville or more accurately and specifically, very low-income residents throughout the city, have access to high-tech electronics before they have access to basic needs like decent employment, quality fresh produce, adequate pedestrian amenities and cycling infrastructure, etc. I'm not against Apple, although I don't use any of their products, but there seems to be a bit of a problem with what we prioritize. Is it really a good thing that low-income residents are spending money on personal cell phones, lap tops, or designer clothes before or in lieu of providing basic needs for children? With the reality of limited employment for low-skill workers in this city, where do people think that money comes from to buy these goods some of the time? It's not all extra hours at McDonalds, or Kohl's, sometimes it's from drug dealing, theft, robbery...
I don't necessarily think that encouraging a new apple store to open is mutually exclusive to encouraging access to basic goods and services in our city, but again it begs the question of priorities.

I don't own a computer. I use one at the office, an Acer, which is also made by sweatshop labour. Almost all electronics are. Why do I single out Apple? Because it seems their products are the epitome of American gluttony. Completely unnecessary products (Ipad, Ipod, Iphone, etc.) sold with huge mark-ups to unwitting or uncaring American consumers. Every time I hear about the new igadget debut and see the lines of people waiting outside an electronic store my heart breaks a little. If only our drive to create a more equitable and just society were half as great as our drive to buy the latest gizmo from Steve Jobs and company. If only...
John Hopkins is right, our priorities are completely out of whack.

NHI: we get it, you think Apple is great. This has to be like the 30th story you've run on the topic.

As anon mentions, Apple retail is one of the most profitable retail operations in the world (as in the brick and mortar stores). Apple brick and mortar revenue $34 Million. Per store.

An Apple store is similar to Ikea in that it will be bringing many people into the city specifically to go to this store, who will then discover that it's actually a great place.

Johnathan, it's Yale properties priority to bring the highest and best use of their rental properties, and that is what they are doing here. Like it or not, this is a successful higher-end retail district, and it is one that is actually growing.

I'm amazed at the negativity of responses about this. An Apple store is like a Starbucks, it's a bet from a national chain that there is money to be made in New Haven. That very fact alone has a HUGE spilldown effect on the city.

Banks, retailers and investors are all ridiculously cautious when it comes to regional cities, so when a hugely successful chain opens up shop in a downtown area it has the potential to cause a massive boost in interest for the area. I guarantee you that retailers who would have not given New Haven a second look are now reconsidering plans. This is all a good thing.

Wow!
Who knew there was so much resentment towards Apple. Are you the same people that bitch about taxes and Yale? I'm so confused.

Jonathan Hopkins, access to the web is critical for access to the rest of the world and an iPhone is cheaper than a computer for the most part. I'm glad that smartphone adoption is growing faster than pc's and closing what's left of the digital divide.

This is excellent that Apple is coming to town. Well done Yale. This will bea real boon for other retailers nearby. Apple is the second most valuable company in the United States. I'm sure that's not fueled by rich Yale kids alone.

Stop hating.

The Apple store will create 30 or more jobs for New Haven residents, bring much needed tax revenue to the city, beautify the Broadway area and help Apple customers save time and money but having an Apple store/repair facility close to home/school.

I'm not a big fan of Apple but realize the many benefits of having Apple put up stakes here in New Haven.

Forgot to mention in my first post:
Thanks for posting the architectural drawings, NHI.

I realize there is a diverse demographic in New Haven, and that an Apple store caters to people in and around New Haven. My original post was a response to some of the comments that were incorrectly stating that this store is somehow good for everyone and that not only does Apple reach across a broad demographic of people, but that it is good that low-income people have access to these goods.
I support this project and I mostly support Yale's ability to encourage retailers that serve their community to come to the city. However, I'm not so sure I buy into the idea that this only has a positive impact on the city, I think there are positives and negatives that come with this. So let's not fool ourselves into thinking that this is good for everybody.

Ben,
If you re-read my original post, you'll notice that I said "Is it really a good thing that low-income residents are spending money on personal cell phones, lap tops, or designer clothes before or in lieu of providing basic needs for children?" I said "personal". Access to computers and the internet is important, but that is a job served by public libraries in the city and by some churches (like the computer drop-in center that I volunteered at to help kids learn Microsoft Word, Excel and Powerpoint at my church on Davenport Avenue). Taxes pay for internet and computers at public libraries, it doesn't make sense for many low-income households to pay enormously high property taxes and then also go buy Apple products - it's a double payment that supports a cycle of poverty, dependence on credit and debt and also means less people using our public resources.

JH -... Why can't low-income people choose what to spend their money on themselves? Why don't you want to trust them to bring up their families as they see fit? They're already economically disadvantaged, so why do you now want to stop them from making the choices that better-off members of society make? No one would ever dare make an argument like that with respect to ethnic minorities. Why pick on the poor instead?

I cannot wait to see the traffic nightmare begin.

Will the University stop phasing out Apple computers in its offices?

Great to have Apple in town -- I just wish this energy infusion had gone to the Ninth Square, whose leaders had started the effort to bring the company here. The company's technical and marketing innovation isn't matched with a vision for community development & engagement -- just stating the obvious. I'll buy online.

Steve B whether or not you like Apple, this is certainly newsworthy, with a $5mm investment in construction and an anchor retail store downtown. And I know plenty of people who make the drive to the other Apple stores in Stamford, Danbury or Westfarms.

charlese,
Nothing I can do is going to stop this store from opening. The point I am trying to make is about whether or not we should dangle luxuries in the face of people living in poverty while not providing basic needs with the same level of investment that we attract Apple Stores with. It is an illusion that the consumer culture is providing valuable goods and services to all people; in reality it is bankrupting families by convincing them that they need the latest fashions and gizmos to attain social status.
There's nothing productive that an iPhone can do that the computers at the library can't also do. If people have the money to provide for basic needs and acquire life's luxuries, then good for them. Not everybody has that ability, and people who don't have that ability shouldn't be persuaded into buying those luxuries when it comes at the cost of not providing their family's basic needs or going into debt.
I am not against Apple opening a store, I am against the false idea that this store opening is good for everyone. No, it's good for the people who can afford Apple's goods without mortgaging their future.
I like pizza, therefore when a new pizza restaurant opens that means it's good for everyone - even people who are lactose intolerant, because me and many other people like pizza.
The point I'm making is very simple, and by trying to defend such an obvious and elemental point, I've probably just made it seem like a much more radical and complex opinion, when it isn't.

Charlese, I'm speaking for myself, but as for JH's post, I believe it comes from a concern for improving the quality of life for residents with "lower-income". People in this category should have the right to buy whatever they'd like, as it is with everyone else. Given their economic position though, the question of purchasing importance should be raised since most in this situation can often lack sufficient food, savings, or adequate and sanitary housing. In areas where these persist, especially with the housing, it's fair to say there's more of an emphasis on material items like clothing, jewelry, cash, shoes, or flashy vehicles in relation to housing, for example. Amongst youth, having swag or being hard can be praised and become substantial means for youth to relate... nothing else matters much. This is strengthened through the top-down way in which stars and rappers promote. This materialistic way is not necessarily bad, it's just that I feel it is done so at the costs of other beneficial investments. This materialism is easier to attain because it represents a present, short-term sense of identity while it's harder to invest in savings or the home because it takes time and effort. It makes perfect sense. If the awareness(about how to live and advance), motivation, and capability can increase to reach and assist more residents of a community, then it can shift concern from material items to an emphasize on the home and personal finance. Work done to the home can strengthen families through better living, reduce crime, increase education, and raise real estate values. All of this making a better neighborhood. We still hear about shootings and although it's often youth, it still symbolizes an issue with poverty and everything related to it.
Services offered by Apple products may be available for much less dollar cost at public libraries or churches. It's also mostly true that the largest, highest cost public venues are in cities where larger sizes of lower-income people live. So, as public spaces are generally funded through taxes, perhaps it would be wiser to save some money and get the same resources from a similar place while also using that money in a different way. It would be more of tax dollar waste if less people knew about their offerings.
The Apple store increases the presence of our consumer driven lifestyle which would remain strong even if it weren't going to be on Broadway. Though, if people recognize their own impact then perhaps business, done right, is an answer to societal problems.
I have an iphone and think it's fair to say Apple, despite its controversies, is a well-intentioned corporation who has a major, global impact among advancing technology. There can be potential negatives to all situations especially if held in the wrong hands, but technology has the ability to reach those in need, spread knowledge or different "ways of seeing", and other things (e.g. health related). Talking about and understanding issues is what best leads to solutions, whether they are just the first step or not. This website itself is effective (I suppose its effectiveness can increase or decrease depending on traffic and content) and amazing in its use of technology to bring communities together. Apple products can offer incredible and helpful features to it users. Yet they are also expensive and one needs to realize their intrusion upon our lives...for good or bad.
At time I've found myself thinking about what the right amount of tech use is for me. I sometimes try to avoid looking at screens for too long because I'd rather have real conversations/interactions with people. This kind of comes from a nostalgic sense of a Pre-tech world and comes up again when I'd rather write/take notes with paper/pencil opposed to on a computer. With that said, I love how I can learn and do so much from technology. I know others, mostly college-aged, who spend a lot of time on computers and think that's totally fine although a little questionable. And yes...Yale is involved so is it that bad they're "beating" the city with development and tax exemptions? It's an interesting relationship. Overall, I think this opening is much more so a benefit than detriment. It's all about the individual thinking about how to live and adapting to perhaps a more "in touch" personality.
A large amount of external forces have played a role in shaping lower-income communities such as globalization, immigration, and America's car-oriented suburban development which brought jobs away from cities at the expense of those living within them. It's really a sad situation. If people just think about how to live…it can go a long way in helping.

The people who post on this site are unbelievable. In some stories the same people who criticize Apple for being a bastion for yuppies to spend their money and attracting traffic to the city state that they are sick of John DeStefano raising taxes, etc...in other stories posted by the Independent. Get your opinions in order for God's sake. The only thing consistent with all these postings is constant negativity and bantering about the lack of this and the lack of that. Be happy this city is actually finally attracting a major retailer who actually attracts a broad spectrum of consumers.

I am neither a student or wealthy but I will tell you I use an Apple and I have driven to Hartford three times in the last 2 years specifically to go to Apple and each time I spent money on an apple product that I use for business. They work, they are easy to use, and, yes, they look good. Oh, and I don't have to spend money each year for, what's that software called??? Anti virus??? While in Hartford I also, btw, spent money at a couple restaurants, ended up buying a pair of shoes at the mall, and also filled up my car with gas.

Wouldn't you rather we attract all those people to our city who will also, most likely, take in a meal, pay for parking, and get to see the beauty of our city and, perhaps, come back for other reasons than sit on your antiquated PC and grip because you having no life!?

I still miss the Co-op and wish that was going back in. Yale killed the co-op along with all the other Mom & Pops on Broadway.

Hopefully this is my last post on this article, but I've thought of a better way of explaining my argument.

I find it disappointing that $5 million dollars can be invested in attracting an Apple Store before that same money can be used to help start locally-owned small businesses. In the same way, I find it disappointing that many children in this city have easier access to guns than they do to books ($200 can get you a gun in this city in less time than it takes to go to the library, sign up for a card and find a book to take out). In other words, it is disappointing that people have access to things they don't need before they have access to things they need.

Person #1:
"I use Apple products, and so do my friends, so I'm glad an Apple store is opening near me."
-Great, that makes perfect sense.

Person #2:
"I don't use Apple products, and with the opening of this store many of my neighbors will have access to Apple products before they have access to decent employment, so I wish that money could have been invested elsewhere."
That point also makes sense.

Person #3:
"Apple opening a store makes me happy, therefore it's good for the entire city."
Nope, that don't make no kinda sense.

Person #4:
"I don't use Apple products, so they should not be allowed to open a store and attend to consumers that do use Apple products."
That also makes no sense.

The only reason I commented in the first place on this article, was because I saw a couple people making the claim that I illustrate in the "Person #3" example.

This is great news! People who use computers know that PC's are a scam designed to take as much money they can from the consumer. Apple is the highest quality and the industry standard for most forms of media. The people of New Haven deserve to have access to the best.

There is person #4: "I don't like Apple and the capitalism that it represents, I deplore the culture the company promotes and I am ashamed that the store is coming to New Haven."

I know this person is in the minority and that most people do not think of the environmental, economic and cultural damage that a company like Apple causes. And sure almost any other company behaves just like Apple does, but Apple is at the top and those on top make the easiest targets.

JH: you wrote

"Is it really a good thing that low-income residents are spending money on personal cell phones, lap tops, or designer clothes before or in lieu of providing basic needs for children?"

I doubt you've got any evidence that poor people in New Haven are neglecting their children in the way they spend their money. You're implying that poor people aren't responsible enough to bring up children. Your point is only "obvious" and "simple" insofar as it is obviously and simply patronizing and offensive.

Ah, if only they sold apples at the apple store...wait, less than a mile away is the new Stop and Shop, Edge of the Woods and the Wooster Square farmers market. Also, if you really want to help with access to computers for those without them, let's insist on opening neighborhood libraries on weekends and evenings for kids to do school projects and people to look for jobs. Many New Haven public schools also offer free computers and training through Concepts For Adaptive Learning Basic Facebook/Information
Founded
2001
About
This is a non-profit organization, based in New Haven that has been serving urban communities since 2001, by giving educational technology services to families and schools. Our goal is to improve the academic achievement of students in public schools
Company Overview
Concepts for Adaptive Learning has adopted a holistic framework for improving educational outcomes that includes projects and programs for students, educators, parents and the community. We install computers and computer related equipment, integrate educational software in the classrooms and homes, and train teachers and parents.

Concepts for Adaptive Learning, Inc.
P.O. Box 8265
New Haven, Connecticut 06530

Phone: (203) 410-3679

Fax: (203) 272-8451

Email: [email protected]


BOARD OF... (read more)
Mission
To improve public school education in urban communities by integrating computer technology in schools and homes, and equipping teachers and parents with the skills to employ this technology

Concepts for Adaptive Learning's strategy is to measurably improve children's academic achievement, by implementing a holistic framework of technology programs and projects for Students, Teachers, Parents and the Community.
Website
http://eachchildlearns.org/


How 'bout them apples?

Charlese,

I'm sure there are many examples of good parenting amongst lower-class families which is made even more remarkable given their circumstances. Yet on the whole, I'd say there is a relationship between social-class and good parenting. Perhaps there's other evidence contradicting this, but I did a simple google search on the subject and have this link which discusses the issue (page 127 and 128 is enough):

http://books.google.com/books?id=cof5cRzjO1EC&pg=PA128&lpg=PA128&dq=child neglect among classes&source=bl&ots=oSyhR3HxF9&sig=4U8kayqm9D8-dBo-AP5LG9uRENw&hl=en&ei=Z4a7TavqIcqTtweRg9HFBQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0CEYQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q&f;=false

Are there not areas in New Haven that have lower educational levels and more crime? This can relate to upbringing to varying extents.

Y'all may not like consumer culture, but it's what we've got. And the new store will provide jobs -- first construction then retail -- and sorely needed tax revenue for the city.

charlese,
I am merely speaking from personal experience. I know people who can't afford to feed their kids in the morning or send them to school with a lunch, yet they have chrome rims for their SUV, cell phone plans with unlimited texting, designer sunglasses and clothes, and the latest game consoles. This is partially due to poor parenting skills, but it also has a lot to do with what we prioritize in our local zoning ordinance, tax structure, economic development strategy, as well as what is prioritized at Yale.
Chain retailing that can re-use standardized floor plans and parking standards is inherently preferred for development in the design of the zoning ordinance. Subsidies are overwhelmingly provided for large retailers and national brand names as the city's preferred economic development strategy to attract business to the city. These stores promote bad diets and a general lifestyle of consumption in ways that other stores (which are not incentivized to open in the city) do not.
When the choices for people are overwhelmingly backed by a corporate agenda, that's not really a choice at all. If we promoted fresh produce, taking transit/walking/biking, and civic engagement in public forums with as much enthusiasm and funding as we promote junk food, car ownership, and using electronics to talk to people then there would be a lot more money available to people to use to uplift themselves from poverty and a lot more free time to spend promoting beneficial public policy.

If your point is that poor people should have access to the same goods and services as wealthier people, than I completely agree. Where I think our views differ, is in the way that these goods and services can be accessed. I think that it impoverishes people more to convince them that it's necessary to waste their limited income of useless crap, when those goods can be accessed at public libraries, which they actually already pay for with taxes. And saving the money that would have been spent on Apple products for a few years can instead be invested in actually bringing families out of poverty and allow them to buy the goods once they can afford it without putting it on a credit card, rather than sinking them further into debt.

What we can all agree is good news is that the decades late, dead on arrival postmodern blue portico will be given a proper burial and we can all finally move on....straight into the 1990s.