MacDailyNews - Where Mac news comes first

It would probably look like an imac. Could be interesting!

Heh, looks like Steve is now seeing the dark side of the libbie politicians and radical leftist SF area groups that he usually so heavily supports. Serves him right...

Ooooh, stick a label on people!

Radical leftist - gimme a break.

A radical leftist is the Baader-Meinhof Gang, or the Brigate Rosso. Not people who believe in preserving old houses.

Unless you're slightly to the right of Atilla The Hun, in which case anyone who believes in the preservation of the environment, genuine democracy, civil liberties or scientific progress is of course a threat to the state.

Sometimes I wonder where Americans get their ideas, and then when I find out I tend to wish I hadn't bothered.

Agreed, MDN. Jobs wants to move the house and interested parties exist to receive it. That would seem to offer the most comprising solution. Bottom line, though, it's his house, on his property the last 20 years -- if he wanted to tear it down, then it's his right (although unless it's totally uninhabitable I'd hate to see it torn down). Moving it to another property would cost a pretty penny also, I bet.

Sorry MDN -- "compromising" instead of "comprising" ...

MCCFR I agree, I am really starting to despise the US Presidential election. I'm sick of having to put up with discussions always going off topic and turning into big political debate where people start acting like children and start name calling. The sooner the election is over the better, this childish behaviour is really uncalled for in a mac related forum.

Anyway back on topic, I agree with historic preservation but I also emphasise with Steve. Living in a hertitage listed house can be a real pain in the arse, especially when you want to renovate. Hopefully they will come to an agreement.

"Moving it to another property would cost a pretty penny also, I bet."

It's gotta be cheaper than the $10 mill it would cost to restore.

By the way, does the National Register of Historic Places financially help out restoration projects. Otherwise $10 million is a bit steep.

Have you guys seen the house. Spanish Revival: it looks like crap. Even if it was in good condition it would still look pretty bad. Still must be some piece of land or else why would you bother.
Refreshing (or bad depends on your outlook) that no matter how much money Jobs has he still has problems with his local council like the rest of us. In Aussie here its the same with all-powerful councils.

Picture of Job's house:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/object.cgi?object=/chronicle/pictures/2004/10/17/ba_jobshouse02.jpg&paper=chronicle&file=MNG379BCOC1.DTL&directory;=/c/a/2004/10/17&type=news

Refreshing (or bad depends on your outlook) that no matter how much money Jobs has he still has problems with his local council like the rest of us. In Aussie here its the same with all-powerful councils.

Yeah except if your a member of the council or parliment. Council can be real pricks.

California

Home of vicious gangs, drug barons, and porno pushers who distort history and culture.

... and then, there's the rest of the troubles outside of the the movie studio crowd....

Sounds to me like an overgrown "Homeowners Association". Steve Jobs owns the property, so it seems fair that Steve Jobs has the final say-so over what he does with it. It's not like he is going to put a bunch of trashed-out beaters in the South fourty!

Sara, Thanks for the link to that photo of Steve's house. From my perspective, I can see why he wants to get rid of it. I also find myself wondering just how anyone will be able to move that pile of stucco. The movers will most likely have to cut the structure into several modules that will fit onto the trailers they use. It won't be possible to move it in a single piece.

Chainsaws anyone???

>>Heh, looks like Steve is now seeing the dark side of the libbie politicians and radical leftist SF area groups that he usually so heavily supports. Serves him right...<<

Yeah... but it only serves him right if he wakes up and realizes who he supports.

>>Ooooh, stick a label on people!<<

HMM... Sounds like you are from the blinded "Can't Label Me" Kerry camp. Sad truth is, you *can* label people.


>>Steve Jobs owns the property, so it seems fair that Steve Jobs has the final say-so over what he does with it.<<

Yeah, I agree. And the house is a dump from the picture. $10 million isn't cheap! Especially to renovate a home you don't like. Screw what the preservationists say... it isn't like he's going to build something ugly in place of it. Destroying an old dump of a house isn't destroying history... it's progress!

The owner of PRIVATE PROPERTY should be FREE TO CHOOSE what he/she wants to do as long as it does not endanger the health, safety or interests of others. This is still America, isn't it?
I'm all for the preservation of our 'cultural heritage", but not at this price. If the significance of the property is the architecture it will be just as significant nearby on another lot. Anyone without the desire/means/willingness to buy the house and move it should shut up and move on.

MCCR: Talk about putting labels on people? Sheesh! I'm an American (a label that covers a *huge* variety of people), but how do you know where and how I come up with my ideas???

Atilla the Hun rocks!!

Let him build the new house. In 78 years preservationists will want to save that one. Only this time, it will be worth saving.
I won't be around in 78 years so I'll say it now, "told you so!"

It always amazes me what is called historic in the US of A. So the house was constructed by a guy who built another house that's on somebody's list.
Colonial revival, my ass. It's a tasteless job (no pun here) of a fake Rancho. Next thing, they'll put the plastic castles in Disneyland on the list of historic sites.

Has nothing to do with Liberal or Leftish, Steve just wants a modern efficient stylish new house.
Here in Europe 78 yrs is not that old ! If he gives it to the one that want to "preserve it" why not ?

who cares.

who cares x2

looking at the picture I see no point in preserving *that*.

If it is not from at least few centuries ago there is no point in preserving it. I mean, a 78 yo house, it's just a pile of bricks from yesterday.

OK, I am biased.

Sorry, not the right full message: When we talk about preserving historical monuments, houses, etc. it concerns constructions old way more than few centuries ago: it is couple thousands years rather.

Few centuries old house are just that, houses from the last week (rather then the 78 yo *yesterday*).

Ahh, the perspectives of a young country

slow news day, uh?

I just hope any house Jonathan Ive designs doesn't feature a beautiful facade and a depth of only two inches.

I previously noticed an anomaly with Steve's house, more bathrooms than bedrooms, in the article someone says the house is built more like a motel then a family home. Presumably Jackling primarily used it to entertain, you could see how that layout would appeal to a 20 something Steve Jobs batchelor tech millionaire.

Then the description of some of the features, we would call them bugs not features. Floors deliberately not level, unnecessary steps between rooms, access to some rooms only from the exterior, rooms twice as long as they are wide - it's all crap. Get your Feng Shui guys in and they would say knock it down too.

So there's Steve with his ease of use principle driving design and he owns a badly designed building that's unsuitable for it's purpose, no wonder he's pissed.


"Smith, he said, is "revered" for his neo-European designs and wanted the homes to appear upon construction as if they had been expanded over the generations. He used multiple roof lines and nonfunctioning chimneys and varied the iron work adorning windows. Inside, he designed corner fireplaces, tile floors that rose slightly higher in the center of the room and rooms twice as long as they were wide with coffers, beam work and painted medallions in the ceilings to create an intimate feel, Kolb said.

Smith also liked to surprise homeowners with steps going up or down into a room simply for artistic purposes and indoor-outdoor walkways that would force residents to go outside to get to their bedrooms or other rooms in the house."

After reading the description: knock it down already.

I prefer the older homes myself. Wooden floors and all.

Is the door knob going to be a click wheel?

Moving it is fine...the Faimount Hotel was moved in San Antonio marking it the largest building ever moved in San Antonio all for the name of preservation. It's still beautiful.

While my opinion of the building is that it's nasty and likely not wroth preserving, saying that it's not worth preserving a 78year old building because it's not old enough to be worth preserving is a little twisted.

In 200 years, will there be no 278 year old buildings left because they never got a chance to get old enough to be worth saving ?

There are plenty of young buildings that are worth preserving, though quite obviously only significant and important examples deserve to be saved. Just because something is designed/built by a certain architect, doesn't mean it's worth keeping if it was his shittiest work, possibly unduly influenced by an overbearing tasteless client.

My house is also from 1926 and is in a conservation area. It didn't stop the previous owners from putting in the wrong windows or using the wrongs bricks for an extension, but I wish it had.

I also think some people are mistaking freedom, where people abide by agreed rules and laws, and anarchy, where anyone can do whatever the hell they like.

Often people here will say something like "Well if you don't like it there, move to America". In this case, I think if Jobs doesn't like the rules there, then hw should simply move and build somewhere else. I really don't see why, if someone want the building, they can't just move it.

I Denmark we moved an airport terminal from one end of airport to the other.
http://www.cph.dk/CPH/UK/PRESS/Fact+Sheets/Kopi+af+Relocation+of+the+VL-terminal.htm
Expensive too. Around $15 Mill i think.

Thanks for the long-ass links that screw up page viewing. Learn how to submit an embedded link, please.

I'd be willing to gc the building of his new house! I'm sure there'd be enough profit to make it worth the move!

My house is on a historic list. The regulations make it a major pain, and we're on a list that's only concerned about exterior. We're looking at $150/storm window. I wouldn't be so worried if we lived someplace without a winter, but that's a lot of $$ just to lower the amount of wind that gets into the house. I could replace the entire unit with a significantly more energy efficient window system that would last much longer for the same money and most people wouldn't notice the difference in appearance.

I think the old place looks pretty cool. But unfortunately, me saying that probably has helped the terrorists.

AntiRadicalLeftwinger:

Well, I can stick a label on you if you like…

How about myopic?

Or reactionary?

My point was that calling someone who is interested in architectural preservation a 'radical' is just a bit of an over-reaction – as is your somewhat defensive post.

It's rather like discovering Liechtenstein has an X-ray machine, and invading because they obviously have the knowledge and the materials to create a 'dirty' bomb.

Or having somebody throw a rock at you, so you shoot them with a Tek-9.

Historical preservationists are a fine and dandy lot, when they are dealing with preserving a public piece of property. But here in America, personal property rights are supposed to be inviolate. Steve needs to contact the Institute for Justice (http://www.ij.org), who would probably get a kick out of helping him. If they can get a verdict from the Michigan Supreme Court in County of Wayne v Hathcock (which overruled the Poletown decision), then surely the IJ can take on these fools and get a verdict on SJ's favor...

Those pictures of Jobs house are hilarious! Jobs himself looks like a "dump" in those pictures. Funny stuff. I peed myself.

As an architect who has worked on 18 building relocations I can say that moving this house would not be a finacially practical project. It would serve them better to restore it and sell the property to the city. Steve should know the No. 1 rule of real estate: Never get sentimental about the property.

Thats why I've Always called him Steve "the slob" Jobs

>>Well, I can stick a label on you if you like… How about myopic? Or reactionary?<<

There you go - I knew you could do it. See, people are easily labeled, and they oft fit into the labels that are placed on them, however unfortunate or unbecoming.

>>Or having somebody throw a rock at you, so you shoot them with a Tek-9.<<

YOU BEST NOT BE THROWING A ROCK AT ME!

Oh, and TEAR THE HOUSE DOWN! NOW! Don't waste the money to even move it. You might end up making the uneven floors accidently even.

What a dump!

I agree with AntiRadical; tear it down, right now. It's easier and cheaper to apologize to preservation fascists after the fact than it is to ask their permission beforehand to do something with your own property that they don't like. Like it's any of their business anyway... what can they do, sue him for tearing down his own house? Even California judges would find THAT to be preposterous...

"We don't need no water, let the M*&#^$%@~!er burn!!!"

What a dump! It looks like something that belongs in a Clint Eastwood western or something.

It doesn't matter that its ugly(though I think it'll pretty nice once restored)its the history behing the house.You people need to see that.Steveo is nowhere near perfect and you don't have to agree with him,which most here seem to do,no offense.
Honestly,I'd ask him to restore it too.We need to know our past to move on in the future.

Thats my 2 cents.

FYI on the hardwood floors:
Steve had them put in about 20 yrs ago

(and yes it is a very nice piece of land, a scale model of it (sans house)was made around the time that the floors were put in )

<HREF="http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/object.cgi?object=/chronicle/pictures/2004/10/17/ba_jobshouse02.jpg&paper=chronicle&file=MNG379BCOC1.DTL&directory;=/c/a/2004/10/17&type=news">click here</A>