I think the house is amazing and beautiful. I would happily live there, and I don't believe it would take $13 million to restore. maybe to restore it to Job's taste which is aluminium and glass. does he really want his house to reflect his computers? i bet he has special glossy windows to make his garden more vibrant.
I don't think we are talking about the same thing. Municipalities having certain zoning bylaws is one thing, but the things I've read about these homeowners associations goes far beyond that, and is a full extra layer of arbitrary regulation. Stuff like specific color or style dictations, rules about christmas ornaments, whether you can have a garden or not, etc. All things that are nobody's business.
How do they have any authority beyond what the municipality already has in their by-laws?
Homeowners associations generally only care about what you can see from the street. You cannot see any of this house from the street. It sits at the end of a Cul-De-Sac at the end of a long meandering street, the house sits off the property line pretty far, with a lane that goes back to the house, the vegetation is grown up too much to even see the house.
Anyone who buys a property in the neighborhood agrees to the restrictions. The regulations
are a part of the deed on the property.
Please don't assume there are deed restrictions if you have not seen it yourself, this is not about the neighborhood association telling you what color to paint your mailbox, the people pushing for this do not live in the area.
Something he touched on though, is wondering how such an association starts. In some ways, setting one up like that sounds like signing a commune contract, but somehow doesn't have the same stigma.
Oddly, I've heard that many of the suburbs around the big cities in Texas are overrun with them, you almost have to settle for being in one to live anywhere near the city and finding one that isn't too bitchy is a chore.
Just FYI - Homeowners Associations are usually set up on inception of a new subdivision or development. Not only is it very hard to put into place private property restrictions where there have previously been none, if an individual who resides in an area which a Homeowners Association (HOA) is trying to be formed, that individual can not be forced to join nor place his/her property under the prospective restrictions/protective covenants without consent in writing.
And Quinney, there is a very real and huge difference in deed restrictions and HOA covenants/restrictions
HOA's are usually headed up by the most diminutive of characters with the biggest of egos.
It is a crime if Steve Jobs tears down this MAGNIFICENT house! As someone who has restored a number of historic properties, I cannot believe that he would tear down this piece of history to put up some modern piece of garbage! It is more than possible to make this a home with all the modern conveniences of today yet keep the history of yesterday. I accomplished it on a 1926 Argentinian home, a 1926 English Tudor and a 1924 English Tudor. What a shame it was sold to someone who has such a disdain for history! I hope to hell they keep this travesty from happening!!!!
It is a crime if Steve Jobs tears down this MAGNIFICENT house! As someone who has restored a number of historic properties, I cannot believe that he would tear down this piece of history to put up some modern piece of garbage! It is more than possible to make this a home with all the modern conveniences of today yet keep the history of yesterday. I accomplished it on a 1926 Argentinian home, a 1926 English Tudor and a 1924 English Tudor. What a shame it was sold to someone who has such a disdain for history! I hope to hell they keep this travesty from happening!!!!
agreed.
and good on you for joining just to make this comment. well worth it.
Build an earthship. We can help you with you multi-year dilema... then build an earthship, live in modern comfort with no fossil fuels... www.earthship.net ;-)
Then we can build a systems network for the home... a smart read out like in a prius... see where your power is coming from and going, your water, etc...
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
Apple chief executive Steve Jobs stayed home last night to catch up on some much needed rest while his attorney made another go at convincing a local review board that he should be free to demolish a historic but abandoned mansion -- seen in these rare photos -- that has fallen into a state of disrepair.
Jobs has been petitioning for the right to raze the 14-room, 17,250-square-foot structure in California's Woodside woods for eight years so that he can erect a smaller, contemporary style home for his family.
The Jackling House, so it's called, was built back in 1925 for copper mining mogul Daniel Jackling. Preservationists have opposed Jobs' efforts, arguing that it represents one of the few remaining examples of a Spanish Colonial Revival style home and is therefore too historic to destroy. They also allege that Jobs, who reportedly lived in the house sometime between the 80's and 90's, intentionally let the house fall apart so that it would be easier to justify a case for tearing it down.
"I don't think he would be strong enough if we were here until 1 a.m., and I think there's a strong possibility of that," Jobs' attorney Howard Ellman told the Woodside Town Council on Tuesday, referring to the health issues that have forced the Apple co-founder into a temporary leave from his leadership role at the company through June.
Indeed, reports the Palo Alto Daily News, the review board was still hearing arguments at 10:30 in the evening from both preservationists like the Uphold Our Heritage organization, that has once overturned Jobs' permit to demolish the structure, as well as locals who side with his property rights.
As part of his latest effort to persuade the council on Jobs' behalf, Ellman presented a detailed cost analysis showing that it would take $13.3 million to restore the mansion, or more than $5 million more than it would cost Jobs to simply get rid of it and build a new one. An appeals board had previously suggested such a sum would be sufficient grounds for Jobs to move forward.
Still, preservationists and former residents maintained Tuesday that all resources to preserve the house haven't been exhausted. They're now proposing that Woodside commission an independent firm to draw up the costs of carefully dismantling the dilapidated structure so it can be relocated and then resurrected. A decision on the matter is expected at a later meeting.
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. Below are a series of rare, and at times spooky, photos of the moldering mansion, which has now been abandoned for over a decade.*
Build an earthship. We can help you with you multi-year dilema... then build an earthship, live in modern comfort with no fossil fuels... www.earthship.net ;-)
Then we can build a systems network for the home... a smart read out like in a prius... see where your power is coming from and going, your water, etc...
It is a crime if Steve Jobs tears down this MAGNIFICENT house! As someone who has restored a number of historic properties, I cannot believe that he would tear down this piece of history to put up some modern piece of garbage! It is more than possible to make this a home with all the modern conveniences of today yet keep the history of yesterday. I accomplished it on a 1926 Argentinian home, a 1926 English Tudor and a 1924 English Tudor. What a shame it was sold to someone who has such a disdain for history! I hope to hell they keep this travesty from happening!!!!
Something isn't historic just because it's old. It's also not historic if it's just a pastiche reproduction of an old architectural style.
The Tudor style is of its time (1485-1603, incidentally) so anything built in this style would have to be outstanding for me to want to preserve it. In England Tudor revival is two-a-penny and most of it is horrible.
You should feel lucky in the US that you don't have thousands of years of history preventing development and the introduction/evolution of new architectural styles. I love history and historic buildings but I disapprove of the movement that says that everything that is old is good merely because it's old.
This house is ugly, has virtually no architectural merit, as far as I can see, and is a pretty hum-drum pastiche of a style that's well represented elsewhere in the US. Let Jobs get rid of it and build a new 21st century classic that will be featured in architecture books for years to come.
He's right- that is an ugly-ass house! "Spanish Revivalism?" So some rich dude in the 20s built a house to look like a Spanish house- in California? It's not like JP Morgan guilt it in Massachusetts or something- it truly looks like shit. Let him demo the thing!
What an aweful looking how - demolishing the damn thing would be improve the surroundings house values.
There is nothing of any significant artistic or historic merit to the place - boohoo, former owner was a rich guy who had no taste in architecture; cry me a river.
Yes, it's definitely incorrect, but, but I'm getting tired of seeing people threadcrap with grammar nitpickery. If you don't have something to add to the thread without derailing it, don't post it.
It seems to me that Steve really likes the location.
The preservationists want to save the building.
Deadlock.
So, why not dismantle the building and rebuild it somewhere the preservationists will be happy with . . . part of a theme park ghost ride maybe!
It might make some money there as "The House that Steve couldn't love".
After all, London Bridge was moved to America . . .
By moving the historic house it would leave a nice spot for Steve to build something that is actually cool. You'd figure that a great American visionary deserves to have some consideration
I just don't understand why the people who care about the place so much don't simply it off him? Is the geography of the location that good that he would rather destroy the building than sell it?
Heck if the previous owner sold it then he should have also given up complaining about it.
It is a crime if Steve Jobs tears down this MAGNIFICENT house! As someone who has restored a number of historic properties, I cannot believe that he would tear down this piece of history to put up some modern piece of garbage! It is more than possible to make this a home with all the modern conveniences of today yet keep the history of yesterday. I accomplished it on a 1926 Argentinian home, a 1926 English Tudor and a 1924 English Tudor. What a shame it was sold to someone who has such a disdain for history! I hope to hell they keep this travesty from happening!!!!
Were those restorations you did 17,000 square feet with structural problems in an Earthquake zone? Did those restorations cost in excess of 20 million dollars?
This house is ugly, has virtually no architectural merit, as far as I can see, and is a pretty hum-drum pastiche of a style that's well represented elsewhere in the US. Let Jobs get rid of it and build a new 21st century classic that will be featured in architecture books for years to come.
This brings up the question what the architecture of the new place would be like? Glass and metal like the Apple stores
Comments
I don't think we are talking about the same thing. Municipalities having certain zoning bylaws is one thing, but the things I've read about these homeowners associations goes far beyond that, and is a full extra layer of arbitrary regulation. Stuff like specific color or style dictations, rules about christmas ornaments, whether you can have a garden or not, etc. All things that are nobody's business.
How do they have any authority beyond what the municipality already has in their by-laws?
Homeowners associations generally only care about what you can see from the street. You cannot see any of this house from the street. It sits at the end of a Cul-De-Sac at the end of a long meandering street, the house sits off the property line pretty far, with a lane that goes back to the house, the vegetation is grown up too much to even see the house.
Anyone who buys a property in the neighborhood agrees to the restrictions. The regulations
are a part of the deed on the property.
Please don't assume there are deed restrictions if you have not seen it yourself, this is not about the neighborhood association telling you what color to paint your mailbox, the people pushing for this do not live in the area.
Something he touched on though, is wondering how such an association starts. In some ways, setting one up like that sounds like signing a commune contract, but somehow doesn't have the same stigma.
Oddly, I've heard that many of the suburbs around the big cities in Texas are overrun with them, you almost have to settle for being in one to live anywhere near the city and finding one that isn't too bitchy is a chore.
Just FYI - Homeowners Associations are usually set up on inception of a new subdivision or development. Not only is it very hard to put into place private property restrictions where there have previously been none, if an individual who resides in an area which a Homeowners Association (HOA) is trying to be formed, that individual can not be forced to join nor place his/her property under the prospective restrictions/protective covenants without consent in writing.
And Quinney, there is a very real and huge difference in deed restrictions and HOA covenants/restrictions
HOA's are usually headed up by the most diminutive of characters with the biggest of egos.
It is a crime if Steve Jobs tears down this MAGNIFICENT house! As someone who has restored a number of historic properties, I cannot believe that he would tear down this piece of history to put up some modern piece of garbage! It is more than possible to make this a home with all the modern conveniences of today yet keep the history of yesterday. I accomplished it on a 1926 Argentinian home, a 1926 English Tudor and a 1924 English Tudor. What a shame it was sold to someone who has such a disdain for history! I hope to hell they keep this travesty from happening!!!!
agreed.
and good on you for joining just to make this comment. well worth it.
Build an earthship. We can help you with you multi-year dilema... then build an earthship, live in modern comfort with no fossil fuels... www.earthship.net ;-)
Then we can build a systems network for the home... a smart read out like in a prius... see where your power is coming from and going, your water, etc...
Apple chief executive Steve Jobs stayed home last night to catch up on some much needed rest while his attorney made another go at convincing a local review board that he should be free to demolish a historic but abandoned mansion -- seen in these rare photos -- that has fallen into a state of disrepair.
Jobs has been petitioning for the right to raze the 14-room, 17,250-square-foot structure in California's Woodside woods for eight years so that he can erect a smaller, contemporary style home for his family.
The Jackling House, so it's called, was built back in 1925 for copper mining mogul Daniel Jackling. Preservationists have opposed Jobs' efforts, arguing that it represents one of the few remaining examples of a Spanish Colonial Revival style home and is therefore too historic to destroy. They also allege that Jobs, who reportedly lived in the house sometime between the 80's and 90's, intentionally let the house fall apart so that it would be easier to justify a case for tearing it down.
"I don't think he would be strong enough if we were here until 1 a.m., and I think there's a strong possibility of that," Jobs' attorney Howard Ellman told the Woodside Town Council on Tuesday, referring to the health issues that have forced the Apple co-founder into a temporary leave from his leadership role at the company through June.
Indeed, reports the Palo Alto Daily News, the review board was still hearing arguments at 10:30 in the evening from both preservationists like the Uphold Our Heritage organization, that has once overturned Jobs' permit to demolish the structure, as well as locals who side with his property rights.
As part of his latest effort to persuade the council on Jobs' behalf, Ellman presented a detailed cost analysis showing that it would take $13.3 million to restore the mansion, or more than $5 million more than it would cost Jobs to simply get rid of it and build a new one. An appeals board had previously suggested such a sum would be sufficient grounds for Jobs to move forward.
Still, preservationists and former residents maintained Tuesday that all resources to preserve the house haven't been exhausted. They're now proposing that Woodside commission an independent firm to draw up the costs of carefully dismantling the dilapidated structure so it can be relocated and then resurrected. A decision on the matter is expected at a later meeting.
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. Below are a series of rare, and at times spooky, photos of the moldering mansion, which has now been abandoned for over a decade.*
[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ]
Steve,
Build an earthship. We can help you with you multi-year dilema... then build an earthship, live in modern comfort with no fossil fuels... www.earthship.net ;-)
Then we can build a systems network for the home... a smart read out like in a prius... see where your power is coming from and going, your water, etc...
Nice quote. Entire article.
Pretty cool...
37°24'59.08"N
122°15'29.25"W
Bureaucratic stupidity at it's finest.
And grammatical stupidity at its finest.
It is a crime if Steve Jobs tears down this MAGNIFICENT house! As someone who has restored a number of historic properties, I cannot believe that he would tear down this piece of history to put up some modern piece of garbage! It is more than possible to make this a home with all the modern conveniences of today yet keep the history of yesterday. I accomplished it on a 1926 Argentinian home, a 1926 English Tudor and a 1924 English Tudor. What a shame it was sold to someone who has such a disdain for history! I hope to hell they keep this travesty from happening!!!!
Something isn't historic just because it's old. It's also not historic if it's just a pastiche reproduction of an old architectural style.
The Tudor style is of its time (1485-1603, incidentally) so anything built in this style would have to be outstanding for me to want to preserve it. In England Tudor revival is two-a-penny and most of it is horrible.
You should feel lucky in the US that you don't have thousands of years of history preventing development and the introduction/evolution of new architectural styles. I love history and historic buildings but I disapprove of the movement that says that everything that is old is good merely because it's old.
This house is ugly, has virtually no architectural merit, as far as I can see, and is a pretty hum-drum pastiche of a style that's well represented elsewhere in the US. Let Jobs get rid of it and build a new 21st century classic that will be featured in architecture books for years to come.
There is nothing of any significant artistic or historic merit to the place - boohoo, former owner was a rich guy who had no taste in architecture; cry me a river.
Is that Godfather tape his? I thought part 2 was roundly despised. Maybe that is his sense of humor, i.e. the movie fits the house.
And grammatical stupidity at its finest.
Yes, it's definitely incorrect, but, but I'm getting tired of seeing people threadcrap with grammar nitpickery. If you don't have something to add to the thread without derailing it, don't post it.
It seems to me that Steve really likes the location.
The preservationists want to save the building.
Deadlock.
So, why not dismantle the building and rebuild it somewhere the preservationists will be happy with . . . part of a theme park ghost ride maybe!
It might make some money there as "The House that Steve couldn't love".
After all, London Bridge was moved to America . . .
By moving the historic house it would leave a nice spot for Steve to build something that is actually cool. You'd figure that a great American visionary deserves to have some consideration
for all his endeavours.
Just a thought
[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ]
Heck if the previous owner sold it then he should have also given up complaining about it.
It is a crime if Steve Jobs tears down this MAGNIFICENT house! As someone who has restored a number of historic properties, I cannot believe that he would tear down this piece of history to put up some modern piece of garbage! It is more than possible to make this a home with all the modern conveniences of today yet keep the history of yesterday. I accomplished it on a 1926 Argentinian home, a 1926 English Tudor and a 1924 English Tudor. What a shame it was sold to someone who has such a disdain for history! I hope to hell they keep this travesty from happening!!!!
Were those restorations you did 17,000 square feet with structural problems in an Earthquake zone? Did those restorations cost in excess of 20 million dollars?
This house is ugly, has virtually no architectural merit, as far as I can see, and is a pretty hum-drum pastiche of a style that's well represented elsewhere in the US. Let Jobs get rid of it and build a new 21st century classic that will be featured in architecture books for years to come.
This brings up the question what the architecture of the new place would be like? Glass and metal like the Apple stores