Newsgroup: it.comp.macintosh
Titolo: Jobs vuol demolire costruzione storica del 1920

Mica lo sapevo che Jobs avesse vissuto in una vecchia ed enorme casa
del 1920... ora che non la usa più da tempo la vuole demolire :(
copio-incollo un articolo inusuale su quest vicenda.
Gabriele
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The tale of Steve Jobs' house demolishing plans
SAN FRANCISCO (MarketWatch) -- This is a story that normally wouldn't
get a lot of attention here, but this yarn involving a high-powered
tech chieftain, a kowtowing Silicon Valley township, an old house and
a clash of wills is worth telling.
The house is a 1920s-era mansion. On one side of the clash is a group
of historical preservationists who want to keep the house for
posterity. The chieftain? None other than Apple Inc.'s Steve Jobs.
More than four years ago, the town of Woodside -- a bucolic Silicon
Valley enclave known to occasionally toady to the region's high-tech
billionaire s -- approved an application by the Apple co-founder and
chief executive to tear down his Spanish Colonial Revival estate.
But the sprawling 1925 home remains standing today because a group of
preservationists intervened, and after a lawsuit and appeal, Jobs
lost.
Now, Jobs is trying again to demolish the estate, which he purchased
in the early 1980s and lived in for about 10 years. Known to be
obsessive about the design of Apple's products, Jobs wants to build a
smaller, brand new single-family house on the site of the once-elegant
estate. (No doubt one of those sleek numbers with clean white spaces a
nd free of any buttons. Sort of like a giant iPod or Mac cube?)
A new application will be heard on Tuesday evening, in what may be a
lively and contentious meeting. No decisions are expected Tuesday, but
based on their past actions and some documents on their Web site, the
town of Woodside seems all but ready to grant Jobs another demo
permit.
"The question now is whether the evidence he is submitting will let
them legally permit the demolition," said Brian Turner, an attorney
for the western office of the National Trust for Historic
Preservation, a non-profit created by Congress in 1949 to promote the
public participation of the preservation of historic resources in the
U.S.
(Full disclosure: I've watched this episode with interest because I'm
a member of this preservation group and I've also written a book on
San Francisco architecture.)
The house Jobs wants to destroy has been deemed historic for both its
architectural style, as well as for its former tenant.
The 17,250-square-foot estate was designed by archite ct George
Washington Smith, renowned among architectural historians as an early
and notable purveyor of the Spanish Colonial Revival style in Southern
California. The house, designed for copper magnate Daniel Jackling, is
one of Smith's rare works in Northern California and is replete with
unique copper fixtures, evocative of his client's occupation at the
time.
Jobs has been making an effort to give his house away, a condition
specified in the original 2004 demolition permit.
The Apple chief is required by the town to market the estate at his
own expense. He then could donate the house to anyone who ha d the
financial wherewithal to relocate and restore it, which has sat empty
and unoccupied for more than a decade.
Jobs would donate a "reasonable amount, as determined by the town
manager, to the cost of moving the massive house to a new location."
It is not clear what Susan George, Woodside's town manager, has deemed
"reasonable." George did not respond to a request for comment.
Howard Ellman, Jobs' attorney, said in a memo to the town of Woodside
in September that after spending more than 100 hours to market the
Jackling house, "there are no persons or entities of which we are
aware seriously consid ering the possibility of moving and restoring
the Jackling Estate." He added that two financially strong parties are
still considering the matter but that they had yet to present any
proposal in writing.
When reached by phone, though, Ellman said all the relevant documents
were on the town's Web site and he had nothing further to say. He then
hung up.
Maybe he was anticipating a question about Jobs' health, about which
many investors remain anxious. Last week during Apple's earnings
conference call, executives said they look forward to his return to
Apple in June after a leave of absence to deal with so me health
issues. Jobs' attorney has typically shown up at Woodside meetings in
the past and Jobs is not expected to attend on Tuesday evening.
His other new argument for allowing demolition is that according to
contractors he hired, the cost of building a new residence would be
approximately $8.2 million, while modernizing and restoring the
Jackling house would cost $13.3 million.
But Uphold Our Heritage, a non-profit founded to save the Jackling
house, thinks the firm hired by Jobs may be overstating the extent of
its damage. The town of Woodside hired a San Francisco firm with an
expertise in architec tural restoration, Architectural Resources
Group, which gave an analysis of the property and of the relocation,
and came up with a more economical method of moving the house.
Woodside does not have a good precedent of preserving its own history.
According to a letter written to the town by Wendy McCaw, a fan of
Smith's architecture who owns three of his buildings, when she was
growing up in nearby Portola Valley, she witnessed the destruction of
many great estate homes and buildings.
I must confess, I have to hope this small but wealthy community can
recognize the need to preserve some of its heritage a nd it won't be
so quick to grant Jobs another demolition permit. But the fact that
Jobs has not simply sold the house, which he has called poorly
designed, shows his iron will. (Some have argued that he is purposely
letting the house deteriorate).
Yet the episode offers a glimpse of how an influential tech titan can
impose his will on a small township, and how old values can conflict
with new demands.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 del 1920... ora che non la usa più da tempo la vuole demolire :(
vecchia di sicuro, storica e' ancora da vedere.
Ciao Jack

 potremmo più costruire nulla.
Questa perla di saggezza è tua o te l'hanno suggerita?
G.


| |___|_|_  |_  |___| | 
|        ___|___|     | *Audi famam illius


                        ^^^^^^^^^^
-- 
U_g_o__M
"Mi ami o non mi ami?"
"... non mi stai sul cazzo, � gi� un buon inizio..."
http://www.ugomazzotta.com

                         ^^^^^^^^^^
Sì, il tutto è iniziato anni fa, ma il mio copia-incolla è nuovo di
zecca :)
Il fatto è che "Jobs has been making an effort to give his house away,
a condition specified in the original 2004 demolition permit.", solo
che pare non riesca a venderla e vuole disfarsene.
Gabriele

 tenere tutto.
Purtroppo � cos�... non c'� distinzione tra storico e, semplicemente, 
"vecchio". Io mi interessai anni fa della ristrutturazione di una casa ormai 
in rovina appartenente a mio suocero. Facemmo un po' di studi con un 
geometra e risultava che era "storica" o tipica della zona o sarcazzo cosa 
(tipica? una casa a schiera in mezzo ad altre due pi� moderne?). Alla fine, 
non si poteva alzarla (il pavimento era una trentina di cm sotto il cortile, 
visto che nel tempo era stato riportato del materiale), non si poteva far 
questo, non si poteva far l'altro.
Gi� allora era sorretta da puntelli interni e con cedimenti sui solai, ora, 
vista l'impossibilit� di cavarci qualcosa di decente a quelle condizioni, 
ovviamente nessuno si � interessato, � crollato il tetto e buona parte dei 
solai. Alla faccia della preservazione dell'edificio "storico"..
-- 
Les
Leva...ti per rispondere in email
http://a-traves.blogspot.com
Happy Mac owner since 2008-11-14