or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Inside Steve Jobs' abandoned Jackling mansion (photos)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Inside Steve Jobs' abandoned Jackling mansion (photos) - Page 2

post #41 of 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

...it represents one of the few remaining examples of a Spanish Colonial Revival style home...

Looking at the photos, I understand why. This house if fugly!
post #42 of 211
I agree that he should be able to tear it down and it looks like it probably needs to be (even though it is creepily cool). What I don't understand, however, is why he ever bought the house in the first place? Was there no property nearby or houses that he actually liked?
post #43 of 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magic_Al View Post

I hope that movie wasn't a rental.

well played sir
post #44 of 211
Mold everywhere. And mold is linked to all sorts of diseases. Best thing he could do is to hire an environmental health company and make sure he avoids mold and mites and chemicals, considering his health.


Quote:
Originally Posted by jpellino View Post

Alan Kay will take that pipe organ (I believe that's still his only professional affiliation).

There are plenty of people who would and could rehab that place. Steve just isn't one of them.

As for Plan B, good luck disassembling and reassembling a stucco / plaster house. I've lived in two. Close the door too hard and things fall off them.
post #45 of 211
Just makes you love the local government even more!
Apple had me at scrolling
Reply
Apple had me at scrolling
Reply
post #46 of 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mav5 View Post

If it were up to me, I'd restore it, but not for the purpose of preserving its history. I just think it's an awesome house!

I fully agree. But if he wants to throw it down, I wouldn't care. It doesn't look THAT important. Still, looks very cool! Reminds me of the house in Sunset Blvd. (the 1950's movie) for some reason.
post #47 of 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

A couple of years ago, photographer Jonathan Haeber stumbled upon the Jackling house to find its property gate ajar and the doors and broken windows to the house wide open.

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight ...

  Google Maps: ("Directions may be inaccurate, incomplete, dangerous, or prohibited.")

 

  MA497LL/A FB463LL/A MC572LL/A FC060LL/A MD481LL/A MD388LL/A ME344LL/A

Reply

  Google Maps: ("Directions may be inaccurate, incomplete, dangerous, or prohibited.")

 

  MA497LL/A FB463LL/A MC572LL/A FC060LL/A MD481LL/A MD388LL/A ME344LL/A

Reply
post #48 of 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by helmsb View Post

Not EVEN remotely the same thing. We are talking about private property that he rightly paid for. If they want to preserve it they should buy it from Jobs. Then they can do what ever they want with it.

I think the person was just humorously and delicately pointing out that your premise was faulty.

You don't, nor did you ever, have the right to "do what you want with your own property" in the USA or any other modern/western country that I ever heard of.

For a brief period of it's history, and in the "Wild West" only, *some* Americans had these kinds of rights over their land. However, this was engendered by the rather unusual situation of having a whole continent to rape and pillage and a desire to bend the established laws so as to encourage people to occupy that land.

Most of the time, there is no "right to property" or a "right to do what you want" with your own property. It just doesn't exist.
In Windows, a window can be a document, it can be an application, or it can be a window that contains other documents or applications. Theres just no consistency. Its just a big grab bag of monkey...
Reply
In Windows, a window can be a document, it can be an application, or it can be a window that contains other documents or applications. Theres just no consistency. Its just a big grab bag of monkey...
Reply
post #49 of 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maestro64 View Post

I just love these people who think it is there mission to tell you what you can and can not do with your property. Another example of others dictating what they think is important. It is his damn property let him do with it as he likes

Then you would have no objection to the guy next door to you raising pigs or dumping toxic waste in his back yard?
After all, it's his property, right?
post #50 of 211
13 or 8 million...that's like me deciding between a small or large coffee. Lame and cheap. The guy has billions...

/Mikael
post #51 of 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris_CA View Post

Then you would have no objection to the guy next door to you raising pigs or dumping toxic waste in his back yard?
After all, it's his property, right?

I'm pretty sure dumping toxic waste is against the law. Raising pigs would probably depend on the zoning.

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #52 of 211
As queazy as those Californians are, he should just hollar "Black Mold" - that will get the SOB torn down!

And who knows, he might get TARP funds to do it with!
OMG here we go again...
Reply
OMG here we go again...
Reply
post #53 of 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelcruncher View Post

Like Apple telling you not to jailbreak your iPhone?

That's screwed up dude!
post #54 of 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by rain View Post

Yah, and while we are at it, we should be able to put our parents down when they get too old.

Agreed.
post #55 of 211
1. The house is NOT on the National Registry of Historic Places, (Even if it were, that does not give it protected status)

2. The house is not famous because of the previous owner, it is famous because the architect is "notable" in that area, the design is "Spanish Revival" built in 1925, they claim the style defines the area even though the adjacent buildings are English Tudor, Post Modern, and Greek Revival.

3. Jobs went through the proper channels obtaining a demolition permit, so zoning has already been approved for removal.

4. There have been "offers" to move the building, but none of them were serious, one instance wanted Jobs to provide 15 million of the cost to move it (while the person moving it pays 1 million), another wanted him to guarantee financing to move it. They claim he can declare it on his taxes....so what, that doesn't mean he recoups all the cost.

5. The building, if restored woud have to meet the new California energy laws and other building codes that are in place, including upgrading ALL of the structure to meet the current earthquake codes. This is a 17,000 square foot building. No one has put a number on that yet.
post #56 of 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

I'm pretty sure dumping toxic waste is against the law. Raising pigs would probably depend on the zoning.

My point is, "so what"? It's the guy next door's property. Why would/should Maestro be concerned?
post #57 of 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by Virgil-TB2 View Post

I think the person was just humorously and delicately pointing out that your premise was faulty.

You don't, nor did you ever, have the right to "do what you want with your own property" in the USA or any other modern/western country that I ever heard of.

For a brief period of it's history, and in the "Wild West" only, *some* Americans had these kinds of rights over their land. However, this was engendered by the rather unusual situation of having a whole continent to rape and pillage and a desire to bend the established laws so as to encourage people to occupy that land.

Most of the time, there is no "right to property" or a "right to do what you want" with your own property. It just doesn't exist.

And you live where?

There are plenty of places in the USA that you can do any damn thing you want with your land except create a nuclear waste dump. And I am sure all you need to do to obtain that is grease the right palms.
OMG here we go again...
Reply
OMG here we go again...
Reply
post #58 of 211
Don't most historic preservation rules apply only to the exterior of buildings? In which case there would be little justification for preserving what really looks, from the outside, like a cheap motel. IMNSHO.

Ironically, were Jobs allowed to replace that white elephant with the house of his dreams, Woodside would likely end up with an architectural/environmental marvel. But nooooo...
Hey, this Kool-Aid is delicious, what do you put in it?!
Reply
Hey, this Kool-Aid is delicious, what do you put in it?!
Reply
post #59 of 211
Great home for a film.

The problem with Jobs, one of the many problems, is that Jobs is so used to get his way at Apple or with the S.E.C. that he believes that he can do as he pleases.

If you buy a historic mansion, you have to pay for the upkeep, maintenance and repairs. And if you don't want to do so, don't buy it!


post #60 of 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigdaddyp View Post

Right. Tearing down an old house equates forced euthanasia.

That house might be alive now.
post #61 of 211
I'm sorry, but... why do we care about this? Can we cover actual Apple related news?
post #62 of 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by lilgto64 View Post

There actually laws governing what you can and cannot do with your personal property - zoning laws, building codes, and such. And in condos or cluster homes there are home owners associations that limit your choices of exterior style and or color and mandate lawn care etc - of course in those cases you should know what you getting into before hand.

Since he got a legal permit to tear down that structure and build another one that should be the end of it. I had to laugh when I read that someone who once lived in that house was leading the charge against its destruction. It is these 11th hour folks who muck up the process - and are they really interested in saving that house or just getting free press for their cause.

I thought this country was founded on the belief that it is okay to have a difference of opinion and no one (or one group) can force its will on the population in general (ever heard of separation of church and state). But then of course we have bans on stem cell research and whatnot. I guess what we are best at now a days is preaching one thing and practicing another. A free market that is not free - separation of church and state that allows religious beliefs to dictate policy etc.

Actually, I believe there was never a ban on stem cell research (at least in the U.S) - it was government funding of stem cell research - or to be more specific, embryonic stem cell research. But either way I agree, he bought it, paid taxes on it, now he should be able to do with it what he wants.
post #63 of 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by roehlstation View Post

4. There have been "offers" to move the building, but none of them were serious, one instance wanted Jobs to provide 15 million of the cost to move it (while the person moving it pays 1 million), another wanted him to guarantee financing to move it. They claim he can declare it on his taxes....so what, that doesn't mean he recoups all the cost.

That's asinine, it sounds like someone got very confused about how deductions work . Like you suggest, a tax deduction on an expense usually doesn't mean the expense is free. A tax deduction if you're at a 30% tax rate still usually means you're out the other 70%.

Wanting Steve to guarantee the loan is likely just be a ruse to stick him with the cost.

Quote:
5. The building, if restored woud have to meet the new California energy laws and other building codes that are in place, including upgrading ALL of the structure to meet the current earthquake codes. This is a 17,000 square foot building. No one has put a number on that yet.

I'd think that the estimates given in the previous article have already factored that in to bolster the argument to tear down the old house.

Which, given the pics, would be a bit of a shame, but I'm not in any position to undertake anything like that either.
post #64 of 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

I'm pretty sure dumping toxic waste is against the law. Raising pigs would probably depend on the zoning.

Which reinforces the point against what Maestro64 was saying.
post #65 of 211
even if this thing was in pristine condition, it is a pretty ugly house, and it's not even anything truly unique or special in any way.

some rich guy in the 20s built it. beyond that who cares?
post #66 of 211
Mr. Jobs would be well advised to to buy another property to build on as he wishes, and renovate Jackling in a way that preserves and surpasses it's former glory. The mansion's bones are apparent from the revealing pics.

There are plenty of creative options for this two pronged approach, and the benefits should be obvious.
post #67 of 211
Posts like this that have no relevance on Apple as a company, its products, or rumors, prove to me yet again one thing:

Around here, Jobs is a god.
Go Linux, Choose a Flavor!
"I aim to misbehave"
Reply
Go Linux, Choose a Flavor!
"I aim to misbehave"
Reply
post #68 of 211
Steve and his legal team should have the house tested and any report of mold should be used to demolish the property. It is a serious health issue and "moving" the house to a new location would only cause the mold to be airborne.

We know Steve is not well. Did living in this house for 15 years cause any of his illness? I know the people in Texas that were almost killed by the mold in their house and the husband will never work again due to the brain damage that was caused.
post #69 of 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by ianhstewart View Post

Steve and his legal team should have the house tested and any report of mold should be used to demolish the property. It is a serious health issue and "moving" the house to a new location would only cause the mold to be airborne.

We know Steve is not well. Did living in this house for 15 years cause any of his illness? I know the people in Texas that were almost killed by the mold in their house and the husband will never work again due to the brain damage that was caused.

I don't think Steve has lived there in the past 20-odd years. I recall it was rented out in the 90's, then left unused and unmaintained for about a decade.
post #70 of 211
As Spanish Revival houses go, this one is really not that great. Some of the custom lighting fixtures and a few other furnishings are sale-able as architectural salvage, but as an historic example of the type, this isn't a good example at all. I don't know whether this was the fault of the architect or his wealthy client. It's usually the latter, as clients often think they know best. Even the tile is so-so. Los Angeles and Santa Barbara have hundreds of houses in this class that are eminently better examples from the period and style. And it's not like the family who owned it were all that important--politically or industrially I mean. I'm all for historic preservation of significant structures, but I am not convinced this is one. I like the idea of moving it if that makes people feel better. It's not in an historic district or zone so no damage there.
A.k.a. AppleHead on other forums.
Reply
A.k.a. AppleHead on other forums.
Reply
post #71 of 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magic_Al View Post

I hope that movie wasn't a rental.

Genius!
OK, can I have my matte Apple display, now?
Reply
OK, can I have my matte Apple display, now?
Reply
post #72 of 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by camroidv27 View Post

Around here, Jobs is a god.

I like Apple and Steve's doing a great job but methinks thou partaketh in too much koolaid.

post #73 of 211
That's a really creepy place. Hollywood should buy it to make horror movies. It looks like a motel from the outside.
post #74 of 211
post #75 of 211
The house looks kind of cool, but I don't think it should even have been allowed to challenge Jobs decision to tear it down in court, esp. not when he already had received a permit to do so. But I guess the only place someone ever does something in the US is sitting in the courts suing each others ... . Seems like if this trend is continuing, then Apple would be better off suing other companies than trying to create something ... . /Jerry
post #76 of 211
Not that this has anything to do with Apple (any more than this whole thread...)

I don't believe the whole "mold" thing that people are talking about. Mold is a naturally occurring organism. Its actually everywhere. A healthy immune system has no issues with so-called "toxic-mold".

Who does profit from this over-hyped sham are new-home builders and mold "remediation" experts who want you to spend untold thousands on duct-vacuuming etc.

But, especially the new-home builders, who try to convince you suckers that you need to buy a house built in the last 5 years in order to be safe from mold spores. They are trying to turn the real-estate market into the throw-away market that has become the norm for all other consumer goods...

So lets tear down all the houses from the 80's and earlier and all live in nice new constructions, eh?

Fricken' suburbanites...
post #77 of 211
I can see why he wants to get rid of it. There is no Mac, and no wifi router. I would not want to live there either.
post #78 of 211
good taste in movies, however i don't really care about steve jobs or his house...
MacBook 2.1Ghz
iPhone 3G 8GB Black
Reply
MacBook 2.1Ghz
iPhone 3G 8GB Black
Reply
post #79 of 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by fiddlin'man View Post

Not that this has anything to do with Apple (any more than this whole thread...)

I don't believe the whole "mold" thing that people are talking about. Mold is a naturally occurring organism. Its actually everywhere. A healthy immune system has no issues with so-called "toxic-mold".

Who does profit from this over-hyped sham are new-home builders and mold "remediation" experts who want you to spend untold thousands on duct-vacuuming etc.

But, especially the new-home builders, who try to convince you suckers that you need to buy a house built in the last 5 years in order to be safe from mold spores. They are trying to turn the real-estate market into the throw-away market that has become the norm for all other consumer goods...

So lets tear down all the houses from the 80's and earlier and all live in nice new constructions, eh?

Fricken' suburbanites...

If it is sold in the way that you suggest, yes that is a scam, but in the case where the house has been flooded, or left unmaintained in very high humidity, then it might not be. Mold is definitely common and naturally occuring, but it can be dangerous in very high concentrations.

I don't like the idea of needlessly tearing things down, but if bringing it up to code costs more than starting over, then that's a really hard sell. That can be required if it's a historic district, but from what I've heard, it's not.

BTW: I used to live in a house that predates the US Civil War. My parents are still living in it, though they aren't anywhere nearly as old as the house.
post #80 of 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by camroidv27 View Post

Posts like this that have no relevance on Apple as a company, its products, or rumors, prove to me yet again one thing:

Around here, Jobs is a god.

So what's your point?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Inside Steve Jobs' abandoned Jackling mansion (photos)