Historic preservationists vs. Steve Jobs.

For nearly a decade, Steve Jobs has been fighting preservationists over his plans to demolish his Woodside, California home. Built 86 years ago, the 30-room Spanish Colonial Revival home was designed by architect George Washington Smith for copper baron Daniel Jackling. Jobs lived in it for a while, and then left it vacant as he pursued permits to destroy the house and build something smaller. Eleven years of neglect later, the home was determined to be beyond repair and the town granted the demotion permit. Two days ago, it was torn down. What do you think, should the buyer of a historically significant home be responsible for its legacy, or is it theirs to keep or destroy as they please?

Comments

[Mike (Somerville, MA)]

I think everyone should remove Steve Jobs from the equation and think about it in abstract. Once a piece of property is purchased- it is the owner's to do as they please. If a group thinks that something should be preserved then it is the group's prerogative to purchase the property if the owner will sell. History alone is no reason to keep something around.

[Theodore Thomas]

Let's see...A McMansion honoring Spanish imperialism that was built for an American strip-mining robber baron that is less than 100 years old. This place didn't deserve to be built in the first place.

[Andrew Yang]

Historical significance is relative. One view might be that the purported significance of the property should have been considered prior to the purchase, so the intent to purchase would be complicit with the intent to maintain. Given that the municipality did not deem the home to be historically significant enough to warrant special protection, then it seems demolition is fair game. In the end, I would wager Mr. Jobs' reconstruction will be more significant than the original home.

[Ken]

Well the unfortunate thing about this is that Steve will not be around long enough to justify tearing down the old house. If he was going to live for another decade or so I could understand it, but boys and girls... the cancer he has has almost zero long-term survival rate.. therefore he probably won't be around to see it's completion. If the house then transfers owners.. perhaps the house could have been saved?

[Agata]

it is interesting to note that we all seem to appreciate other places that provide us a sense of history or sense of style.

[Erik]

Certainly it's Jobs' right to do it, it's his house. However, I think it's a shame, and incredibly short-sighted for a man that has shown such vision in other arenas.

This house was certainly NOT a "McMansion" (whatever that is). It was an exceptional example of the Spanish Colonial by a master architect. Bummer.