AAPL Stock: 117.81 ( -0.22 )

Printed from

Jobs wins battle to demolish Jackling House

updated 11:35 am EDT, Thu August 19, 2010

Preservationist group gives up on appeal

A preservationist group, Uphold Our Heritage, has given up a long-running battle to save a house in Woodside, California owned by Apple CEO Steve Jobs, says a local publication. The home was originally built for a copper baron, Daniel Jackling, and designed in the Spanish Colonial Revival style by architect George Washington Smith. Since 2001 however, Jobs has fought to have the home demolished and replaced with something smaller and modern.

The Almanac notes that on July 19th and without fanfare, Uphold Our Heritage actually dropped an appeal of a March 2010 ruling in Jobs' favor. An attorney for the group, Doug Carstens, remarks that the group ultimately gave up after Jobs didn't respond to a proposal from Woodside inhabitants Jason and Magalli Yoho, who offered to dismantle Jackling House and move it from 460 Mountain Home Road to 215 Lindenbrook Road, just two miles away. The Yohos were willing to pay "a very large part of the relocation and restoration costs," according to Carstens.

If the plan had gone through, the idea was for the Yohos to live in the home and open it up to the public once a year, according to UOH spokeswoman and former Jackling resident Clotilde Luce. According to Woodside town manager Susan George, however, the plan was never formally presented, and included "many unilateral stipulations," such as requiring the town to pay for relocation should other parties not do so. Carstens comments that those stipulations were later removed, and that the proposal could potentially have gone forward with an unsolicited offer of mediation within the state appellate court, in connection with UOH's appeal.

"The town's involvement," adds George, "was limited to attempting to process an application from the Yohos that would have allowed them to prepare their site for the Jackling house and [for] moving the house to the site. The application was never deemed complete and the Yohos dropped it after a point, so that was that."

More recently, Woodside has hired architectural historian Michael Corbett to run an inventory of historically significant elements in the house. So far these include things like an organ, a 50-foot flagpole and decorative tiles and woodwork. Jobs' demolition permit is contingent on preserving the artifacts, which should be given to the town of Woodside as first priority, but also potentially the San Mateo County Historical Association, and the George Washington Smith collection at the art museum of the University of California at Santa Barbara. Still be completed is the photography all of the objects, and the handover to an expert in removing such items safely.

by MacNN Staff



  1. Saint_Stryfe

    Joined: Dec 1969


    Speaking as a Conservation Professional...

    ... not every single house needs to be saved because it's old or was built by a rich guy. In fact, we have lots of examples of this architecture all ready saved. It's fine to let this one go. Unfortunate, but hey, it's private property.

  1. facebook_Sean

    Via Facebook

    Joined: Aug 2010


    Why not the Yohos proposal...

    It strikes me as odd that the Yohos proposal was not accepted. Jobs has been waiting awhile anyway, why would it be such a problem to have the building removed? No slack off his back...he gets his open space, and the city gets to keep their "historically significant" house. I've seen the organ in the house, which is kinda cool, but I am not necessarily convinced the rest of the house is terribly significant.

  1. dliup

    Joined: Dec 1969



    Jobs' condition is that the house is sold for $1 and buyer pays for all moving expenses.

    The Yohos proposal didn't want to pay for whole cost of moving the place, plus it had other problems.

  1. Madison, as in James

    Joined: Dec 1969


    Realizing your rights costs a fortune, who are we

    The preservationists are really good at telling other people what to do and how to do it, yet refuse to put their own cash into the equation. It is an outrage that they can delay the private use of a property at a private expense. Having fought over a property in an historic district, it is an almost bullying mentality replete with unspoken rules. The state groups establishing the historic districts love to say that such designations are honorary only. They neglect to mention that is until the historic district ordinance is overlayed which comes along as part two rather quickly. The good news, and unfair to Mr. Jobbs, is that at least he could afford to fight the battle. Most folks have no choice but to accept the beat down while their property rights are stripped from them. So much for the constitution.

Login Here

Not a member of the MacNN forums? Register now for free.


Network Headlines

Follow us on Facebook


Most Popular


Recent Reviews

Ultimate Ears Megaboom Bluetooth Speaker

Ultimate Ears (now owned by Logitech) has found great success in the marketplace with its "Boom" series of Bluetooth speakers, a mod ...

Kinivo URBN Premium Bluetooth Headphones

We love music, and we're willing to bet that you do, too. If you're like us, you probably spend a good portion of your time wearing ...

Jamstik+ MIDI Controller

For a long time the MIDI world has been dominated by keyboard-inspired controllers. Times are changing however, and we are slowly star ...


Most Commented