MacDailyNews - Where Mac news comes first

Apr 27, 09 - 12:23 pm Comment from: Cubert

So, is he camping out back in a sleeping bag?

I'll take the house if I don't have to move it.

Apr 27, 09 - 12:23 pm Comment from: HMCIV

Solution: Chain a couple of PC batteries together on the ground floor. Plug the Laptops into a router to make this look legit.

Warn the fire department and claim it was "research".

I don't care if it was built yesterday, I wouldn't want to live there.

Great set for a Japanese-style horror flick though!

Apr 27, 09 - 12:30 pm Comment from: blah blah blah...

oops, some how it caught fire.

Apr 27, 09 - 12:31 pm Comment from: Derek in Milan

I looked at the pictures.
The place isnt even attractive - it looks like an old factory.
This is about local officials getting way beyond themselves and trying to preserve something that needs to be pulled down.
Save the pipe organ and the letter box, the rest is rubble.

Apr 27, 09 - 12:35 pm Comment from: Swing Geezer

Sometimes old poop is just old poop!

It's his property. If he hates and it wants to tear it down, then so be it.

He tried to give the fracking thing away to anyone who'd move it. No one took him up on it - too bad.

Apr 27, 09 - 12:54 pm Comment from: mike_in_helsinki

Who cares. If they don't let him tear it down, he will let it rot to the ground.

Salvage what you can, bulldoze it, let a talented new generation of architects have their shot at the title.

Apr 27, 09 - 12:56 pm Comment from: mike_in_helsinki

.... and while you are at it, come to Helsinki and bulldoze the Alvar Aalto StoreEnso abomination. And do it the makaratalo while you are at it.

Greedy city council wants to keep all shitty architecture, won't let a new generation of architects have their chance at beauty.

Apr 27, 09 - 01:08 pm Comment from: mike_in_helsinki

... one more thing.

I'm all for disallowing the tearing down of a private property deemed to be too architecturally important for the generations. Imagine if someone were able to buy, and then tear down, Falling Water, the most beautiful house ever built, by Frank Lloyd Wright ... http://www.fallingwater.org/

But this case has gone too far, though that's an opinion and better decided by competent authorities.

Apr 27, 09 - 01:30 pm Comment from: ericdano

We should let him tear it down, and build a house that will kick Bill Gates' house........something that will be remembered for a good 100 years or so

My mom once bought a house that had some 19th century building techniques applied to the interior that are seldom found anymore.

Our first architect wanted to preserve them.

Except that those things are not in use anymore for a reason. It's crap, and not livable. My mom's house was supposed to be a modern house to live in, not a living museum.

So I'm with Steve on this one.

Apr 27, 09 - 01:54 pm Comment from: Gregg Thurman

<<I'm all for disallowing the tearing down of a private property deemed to be too architecturally important for the generations. Imagine if someone were able to buy, and then tear down, Falling Water, the most beautiful house ever built, by Frank Lloyd Wright>>

Wrong. The most beautiful house ever built is in Spokane, Washington, and its mine.

Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder

I favor keeping old architecture. My home is 102 years old and on the National Historic Register, but when nobody is willing to step forward and save "old", then government should not use its coercive power to stop its destruction.

Before they tear down anything, they need to call in an organ restoration firm. That could be worth almost as much as the house itself. They need to pull everything out. Pipes, windchests, relays, blower..everything! If he want's to keep it, it will need significant restoration work or he can sell it on the Organ Clearinghouse website.

Film Saw VII there... Then, use the proceeds to fix it up.

There is a good discussion as well as plenty of picture links about this same topic on MDN here

http://macdailynews.com/index.php/weblog/comments/20919/

Once people see how nice other George Washington Smith houses look after renovation and their HUGE selling prices they might think differently. How quaint.

See the link.

Steve Jobs let his house fall into disrepair.

He did that ON PURPOSE as to attempt to better his hand for a complete tear down of a historical structure.

Steve Jobs should be ASHAMED OF HIMSELF!!!

He has NO TASTE FOR OTHER ARTISTS WORK EXCEPT HIS OWN!!


Look at other George Washington Smith houses here:

http://www.luxist.com/2006/02/14/montecito-home-estate-of-the-day/

http://www.architect.com/Publish/GWS.html

http://www.sothebyshomes.com/socal/sales/0112960

http://www.sbestatehomes.com/listings/755eb.shtml


And yes, when you buy a historical house you should know you come under more stringent rules than a normal house. If your can't adhere to saving the historical value of structure, you shouldn't buy it!!

What is especially disturbing is Steve has the money a thousand times over to renovate his house to look just as nice as the other historical GWS houses on the links above.

Steve Jobs automatically thinks his artistic tastes is everybody's, and it shows in his products (glossy screens, mighty mouse etc), he has a unfortunate life lesson to learn.

People have different tastes, they want to experience different places. Even rich people "slum it" in some cabin with handmade wooden furniture from the local woods just to experience something different.

Fix up the house and/or sell it Steve and wash your hands of the whole affair.

Apr 27, 09 - 02:33 pm Comment from: Crabs

This is like a friend of mine, who had a house that was part of the Utah Historic Society, and he couldn't make any changes to it whatsoever. It was actually a very nice house, so he didn't want to tear it down, but he wanted to put in a pool. No go.

Or Ogden High School, another Utah Historic Monument, can't put in air conditioning. Really, the Californians aren't that bad. At least they're willing to let him fix it up, rather than making him leave it as is, because it's historic that way or some asinine BS.

He bought it 25 years ago. He should be able to do with the property what he wants to.

Jackling's legacy will live on regardless on whether his old house is torn down or not.

Mine_in_helsinki writes, "Imagine if someone were able to buy, and then tear down, Falling Water, the most beautiful house ever built, by Frank Lloyd Wright." They wouldn't DARE!

I considered going into architecture long ago, but my artistic talent is, shall we say, a bit challenged. I agree though, it is perhaps the most beautiful house every built, and its harmony with its surroundings is an inherent part of its beauty. The Jackling House, while historic, isn't in that league.

But the dispute raises an issue I repeatedly brought up in my old government career: the distinction between authority and responsibility, and the problems that result when they don't go together.

In this case, the city council claims authority to decide the fate of the old house, but levees responsibility for its upkeep and restoration on its owner. So it's no wonder they've been at loggerheads for years. If the city council insists on enforcing its authority, it needs to take responsibility as well. They should buy the property and take responsibility for its restoration, along with the cost, or let Jobs do with it as he wishes.

I am a 26-year Mac user, a eight-year stockholder and a huge fan of Steve Jobs.

And I think he should be ashamed.

He has deliberately failed to maintain this property - demolition by neglect - in order to bolster his case to tear it down. For all you folks who think property rights come first, how would you feel if your next door neighbor treated their house this way? What do you think it would do to your property values?

Just as local government has the power to force somebody to maintain their property, I don't have any problem with the city governing whether this landmark-quality home can be demolished simply on the whim of its owner.

Steve Jobs should either use a very tiny fraction of his wealth to restore this house, or offer it for sale to a purchaser who would treat it with the care and respect it deserves.

Apr 27, 09 - 03:19 pm Comment from: Macintosher

Steve Jobs has neglected this house but there must be many like it, and it does look very depressing from the photos. Any damage done by refitting it would make it seem odd and that means that I'm with keeping the few nice relics and integrating them into a new property. Just make sure Jony Ive designs it because Steve himself seems not to have any artistic taste.

If my neighbor's house was in disrepair for any reason and Steve Jobs offered to build something new, and, no doubt, spectacular, in its place, you bet I'd be cheering him on. Think what that would do to property values in the neighborhood! Believe it, Steve is not planning on replacing his old mansion with a 3-bedroom rancher and a carport.

It isn't even very old, and who cares....tear it down and build something else. If the neighbors or Blah Blah want it...tell them to come up with the money.

If the city council insists on enforcing its authority, it needs to take responsibility as well. They should buy the property and take responsibility for its restoration, along with the cost, or let Jobs do with it as he wishes.

What liberal twisted planet do you come from that you think a city has a money machine in it's basement that it can buy anything it wants?

The millions required to buy the property and the ten million needed to renovate it comes from the people living in the city.

Wouldn't you scream bloody murder if you got a bill from the city in your mail for several hundred thousand dollars?

Come on dude. Really. Shesh!

Apr 27, 09 - 03:58 pm Comment from: AAPLguy

@Ralph M

He has already offered to give the house to anyone who would pay to move it. It seems that would be far less money than to buy it and the land it is on.

Some lady from North Carolina offered to take the house.

She would live in it an disassemble it herself supposedly.

read the pdfs from the Friends of Jackling House website. Funny sh*t.

Steve should move to Australia, we love him here, and theres plenty of spare land!

BTW the Woodside City Council had nothing to do with it. They sided with Jobs, and were sued along with him by some jackass lady and a group that calls themselves http://www.friendsofthejacklinghouse.org/

In fact the liberal courts even sided with this lame group so much so that they even demanded that Woodside and Jobs pay their attorney's fees.

The jackling house was architecturally compromised in 1931 with some additions by another architect that fundamentally changed the design of the house. It is no longer original therefore not worth saving.

I tend to agree with Ralph M. If you buy an old house that's on the historic registry by a famous architect in a ritzy neighborhood, then you get a hair up your ass and don't like it, then just sell it, Steve. You can build a whole subdivision of modern mansions anywhere else you want. This is very tacky behavior.