Apple's Jobs Fights Preservationists Who Want to Save His House

[shugah]

Apple's Jobs Fights Preservationists Who Want to Save His House
Feb. 27 (Bloomberg)

~snip~

At stake is a 17,250-square-foot (1,550-square-meter) mansion set on six acres in the small town of Woodside, about 30 miles (50 kilometers) south of San Francisco. Preservationists call it a prized example of Spanish Colonial Revival style.

Jobs says he never liked the 30-room Jackling House, which he bought 21 years ago. He wants to tear it down so he can build a smaller one, which he told Woodside would be designed better and possibly merit historic status itself some day.

``You may not think it is of historic significance, Mr. Jobs, but it is,'' said Frank Sanchis, former vice president of the Washington, D.C.-based National Trust for Historic Preservation. ``Communities have a quality that is given to them by the architecture that is represented there, and if you remove it, it chips away at architecture in America and in the end communities become more generic.''

~snip~

Jobs is in the process of filing an appeal to challenge the Jan. 26 order revoking his permit, his attorney Howard Ellman said last week. Jobs declined requests for an interview.

The Jackling House, built in 1925, was designed by architect George Washington Smith, famous for the Andalusian-inspired homes he created in Montecito, north of Los Angeles. The two-story stucco building has exposed-beam ceilings, built-in cabinets, ornate ironwork including balconies and railings, and a pipe organ. It's also peppered with copper fixtures, including a mailbox that Jobs has said he would save, in a nod to Jackling, who lived in the home until his death in 1956.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000103&sid=aRRh.VFMUViA&refer=us

[meegbear]

1. "Jobs says he never liked the 30-room Jackling House" ...

then why'd yah buy it? Dinkweed.

[Tesha]

3. Maybe he liked the site? The view? The commute to Infinite Loop Drive?

> "Jobs says he never liked the 30-room Jackling House" ...
> then why'd yah buy it? Dinkweed.

Maybe he liked the site? The view? The commute to Infinite
Loop Drive?

So-called "teardowns" aren't that rare that you haven't
heard of them, are they? You know, where someone buys a
property with the specific intent of tearing down what's
there and building anew?

Tesha

[meegbear]

5. I've seen beautiful property myself ...

but if the place sucks, you don't buy it.

[Tesha]

6. This may be true for you, but it's not true for everyone. (NT)

[meegbear]

7. I guess if you can afford to tear down a historic home, then yes ...

as someone who cares about historic buildings, this bothers me, especially from someone as deep blue is Jobs is.

[Dutch]

46. Apparently Jobs simply regards historic architecture as a block to his

planned indulgences...He wanted one particular place, he wanted one aprticular house--and if there was already a historic house in his way, then it had to go as nothing should stand in the way of the spoiled plutocrat. What's truly surprising and depressing is how many people here seem to sympathise with him.

[xxqqqzme]

51. Hey it's on SIX acres

build your 'little' house in a corner of one of the acres.

[Catch22Dem]

4. Perhaps he liked the property, terrain, and location a lot. (n/t)

[Eurobabe]

2. As an architectural historian, I am offended

that he would want to destroy this house. No more iTunes for me, until you change YOUR tune Mr. Jobs.

[wordpix]

34. as a preservationist, I'm offended, too---maybe I won't buy that new Apple

but stay with a PC next year.

[Ninga]

8. The misguided perception among those who do not understand

the relationship of the built environment to history is not surprising.

Most people think that if the building/house/barn/apartment house/store front/bridge/roadway/ doesn't have "victorian" characteristics....it must not be "historic."

Preservationist have been working for decades to educate those who on the brink of demolishing fail to understand the history of our built environment.

In a landlocked community with little to no green space left anywhere, an entire block of homes were slated to be demolished in order to accommodate an expanded parking lot for a church.

It was a battle for the ages.

The preservationist prevailed but the important part of this story was the church found an alternative that turned out to be more than successful.


I am sure that with a terrific architect Mr. Jobs can find an alternative solution called adaptive reuse. It may not be perfect but then he always has the option of moving.

[AndyA]

9. Jobs has come to the realization he doesn't like the house after 21 years?

OK...wonder what took him so long to figure that out? If you don't like a house, you don't buy it. Let someone else who will love it have the opportunity.

No doubt he wants to build a black glass thing that will really blend in with the terrain... :eyes:

The man has more money than good sense. No more products or purchases that will profit this man from me.

[Thtwudbeme]

10. Why doesn't he build a smaller place on the back three,

and donate the big house for the local preservation society to use as offices?

Smaller house; big ass tax write off....

[Robeson]

11. I was wondering the same.

[FlaGranny]

12. Interesting,

the rights of a property owner to do what he wishes with his property pitted against the wishes of what others want him to do with his property. Maybe they should use eminent domain for the good of the community.

Food for thought, isn't it?

[Robb]

14. B-b-but he's RICH!

:rofl:

Here's my thing: 1925?!? That's historic?

We've got stuff in my town that was built before the century turned that is so far gone it would take a half mil to even make them worth $200K.

Anyone want to tell me I can't push it over to make a house someone could live in? (if I had a bulldozer, more than $30, etc.)

[QC]

16. Historic doesn't just mean old.

It's quite a bit more complicated than that.

[QC]

17. self-delete

.

[Whoa_Nelly]

18. It's historic because of the architect

The Jackling House preservation group
Friends of the Jackling House
http://www.friendsofthejacklinghouse.org/

Much like preserving houses and buildings designed by Frank Lloyd Wright http://www.franklloydwright.org/
the Greene brothers http://www.sonic.net/~mityam/greenes/
and Josias Joesler (http://parentseyes.arizona.edu/josiasjoesler/ )

[Robb]

47. Whois puts the site to Clotilde Luce

...a Miami Beach resident whose family owned the Jackling house in the 1970s.

She's been at this an entire year.

Her family was willing to take money for it, but not to preserve it themselves? :shrug: And don't tell me about hardship before you look at the size of the house! :D

Edited to add: here's more on Clotilde. She styles herself among "more conservative people with money, who have pushed real estate here, (not) a crowd that comes over and behaves like it's spring break all the time."

[bobbieinok]

75. Frank Lloyd Wright had plans for buildings in Baghdad...murder of

king of Iraq ended these projects

http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/1469/flw_iraq.html

[FlaGranny]

19. It's always interesting when the

shoe is on the other foot. Any person here would be upset if they were in the same boat. Old house, not serving your purpose well, but you want to stay right where you are, and it would be cheaper to tear it down and start over than refurbish. The truth is, no matter what we think, a deed doesn't mean much - we don't truly own the property (only the right to live on it) because the federal government, the state government, the county, the city, and your neighbors ALL have rights regarding your real estate. It used to be that we had the right to privacy on our own property, but even that is eroding quickly.

[QC]

20. Property rights have never been absolute.

I cannot, for example, start up a nuclear waste storage facility or a hog farm in my back yard.

Jobs is simply acting like any other entitled plutocrat here. He thinks that since he's rich, he should be able to do whatever he wants.

[alfredo]

49. He has offered them the house. All they need to do is move it

from the property. Expensive, but doable.

[semillama]

22. Fact of the matter is

If Jobs wants to tear down his house, nothing can stop him. Listing on the National Register of Historic Places or being noted as worthy of preservation by any group has no bearing on what private property owners can do on their property.

It's why prehistoric indian mounds still get bulldozed today.

The National Trust can raise a stink and try to change Jobs' mind all it wants, and I hope they succeed, but in the end, it's up to Jobs to preserve or destroy his house.

on edit: what's ironic about this is that it's almost certain that at some point, historic preservationists will try to nominate Jobs' boyhood home as a historic site (if it's still standing).

[guruoo]

28. I say too bad. Jobs should have thought of that before...

he bought the property.
Your neighbors have a perfect right to stop you
from turning your shortsightedness into
their problem.

[boilinmad]

23. Nothing will be historic.....

If it isnt given a chance to become old. This whole topic is amazing. Jobs could buy a house on a plot of land ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD.!!!!Americans, as a rule, have no respect for architecture, and would prefer to see something "NEW" built, no matter how cheap and disgusting it looks. You cant even find building materials like the ones in a 1925 house anymore.I guess theres no use trying to educate people about the importance of its old buildings when most Americans look at a new stucco and cardboard box parading as a home, and say how "New and clean it is!!!!!!"

[susanna]

65. Tell me about it...

...We live in a good area of Detroit, the urban wastezone of popular thought. Our house was built in 1928 with absolutely amazing materials (all-brick construction, hardwood floors, 12" mahogany baseboards and solid maple doors, plaster all through, leaded glass) and do you know something? We are not able to get replacement value for home insurance. Why? Because the materials used in our size home (2400 sq. ft.), in today's market, would cost in upwards of $350,000. Seriously. So if our home goes, on the insurance industry's clout, we will have to replace it with CRAP. Yay us!

Meanwhile, Mr. Jobs is trying to erase a history he really will not be able to replicate fully, regardless of his exuberant optimism and/or bank account. Interesting AND sad.

[Coexist]

15. How many of this architect's house are still in existence

I know there is still art of his around.

If there are still several, I could care less if he tears it down.

If he bought it with clear knowledge that it was a historic site, then he would be of the understanding that it couldn't be bulldozed, but that doesn't appear to be the case.

Its his property, and I would be very interested to see what he plans to put up in its place.

[guruoo]

26. In other words, when in doubt, default ...

to the lowest common denominator.
:shrug:
If the reality were that simple then
we could do away with all zoning laws,
sign ordinances, and hasmat restrictions.

[Coventina]

13. C'mon Jobs, don't be a dick

It's not like the man doesn't have options.

:eyes:

[Tight_rope]

21. It's his house...his land...let him do want he wants with it!

How many God Damn historical houses do we need is this damn country. Hell, I think of all the homeless people and think, it's a fucking shame we have these huge empty houses with no one living in them. And it's just for show. It's just shows the typical greed of mankind.

Now I'm all for people taking historical house and reviving them to live in...But I refuse to pay to go into a home that is just for show. Now one lives there. Houses were built to be lived in, not just for show.

[TriMetFan]

24. Amen to that.

[Dutch]

44. So how about instead of knocking down this historic building,

Jobs himself forks out to help the helpless with some of the money he'd pour into his new designer mansion? Seriously, if you really want to wrap up philistinism and property-rights fanaticism in such a self-righteous cloak, you're gonna have to try harder than that.

[boilinmad]

78. AMEN......

TO THAT !!!!!!!!!!!

[MisterP]

50. I somehow doubt the homeless problem is caused by historic

preservation...

[shanti]

25. simple answer - SELL IT

jeez, with all of his bucks, i'm sure he can find a terrific site to build his dream home. this one sounds too special to demolish.

[truthisfreedom]

27. i've got a 1927 house that was converted from a cabin and i'd be extremely

pissed if someone told me i couldn't tear it down for any reason whatsoever. this isn't really anything other than a local issue.

[kwassa]

29. Here are pictures of the place

[gardenista]

32. Meh.

The house is rather unremarkable, and Jobs bought it for the land, always intending to get rid of the house.

I don't think most people understand the value of land vs. the house on the land in California.

The Woodside historic preservation people are flexing their muscles because they can. I doubt the house is even visible from the road. AND, it is not that old.

[kwassa]

33. A 1925 house is very old for California.

Particularly a large one indicating wealth.

The only really old structures are the missions, and a few ranch houses. There are some Victorians in the older cities, but for California it is old.

[wordpix]

35. lovely place, don't know why he doesn't like it.

[northzax]

39. he says he wants something smaller

in the article at least. That's a lot of house for one man.

[wordpix2]

68. "a lot of house for one man"--so, maybe he could adopt some orphans & give

them a home

[burrowowl]

37. Is unremarkable

There is a lot to salvage in the way of wood and tile maybe.

[xchrom]

48. beautiful house. sell it to someone who

has some sensibility for saving architectural heritage for the future.

[NashVegas]

54. He Tried Giving It Away

And no one took it.

[Javaman]

30. The line from L.A. Story...

Where Steve Martin says to his lady friend, "some of these buildings are 20 years old!"

It's his house and his land. period.

It's a shame that and old house gets torn down, but time marches on.

[earth mom]

31. Why doesn't he sell it and let some one who appreciates it have it?

I think the house is gorgeous and well worth saving.

I love my Mac, but this crap makes me not want to buy another apple product ever.

IMO, It is this kind of yuppie rich boy gotta have a mega mansion crap that is ruining this country! :banghead:

[wordpix]

36. there is no historic preservation district in this town? We have one in

mine and it's saved the town from becoming just another Parking Lot Mall Nightmare.

[DS1]

38. To hell with "old". If it's not built in brick or stone and used

to function as a castle or some such figure of importance then rip it down and put something efficient up.

Yes, take the 'green' option for once in your lives.

Go Jobs!

[Tyler Durden]

40. So let's go waste FALLING WATER...

Or TALIESIN. FUCK Wright, and Kahn, and the whole lot of them. FUCK historic architecture.

"I mean, REAAALY Stevie! Muffie, Buffie, Tad and I think it's so GAUCHE that these "House Huggers" won't let you put in "THE PLAYBOY MANSION, WEST" and knock down that drafty ol' thing."

Oh give me a break. If Jobs doesn't like his historic house, then sell it. He needs to catch a little of the new "Bill And Melinda Gates Philanthropic Virus."

He's as fucking rich as Croesus. Go build your new "manse" somewhere else.

And for the cretins who can't appreciate interesting historic architecture, stay away from Chicago, New York, Detroit, Indianapolis...'scuse me while I PISS on what YOU find aesthetic.

It's the only thing left in metropolitan areas that makes them worthwhile.

[xchrom]

41. ding! ding! ding! winner!

you said that beautifully.

[Dutch]

42. Very well said

I'm amazed at some of the philistines in this thread.

[NashVegas]

53. You Can't Compare FLW To This

For one thing, Falling water was specifically designed for the land it went on.

The Jackling House? Somehow I don't think so.

"Preservationists call it a prized example of Spanish Colonial Revival style."

Revival. Not particularly original.

From the article:

In June 2004, Woodside granted Jobs a conditional demolition permit, asking that he spend at least a year trying to give the house to someone willing to move and restore it. The project was pegged at $6 million, not including restoration work or the cost of land.

...

After placing advertisements in the New York Times and other publications for the free mansion, Jobs received about 100 inquiries, of which in``six or seven'' initially were deemed serious, Ellman said.

"None of them actually came up with a final proposal that made any sense," Ellman said, and the offer expired in June. "Some were financial issues, some on investigation didn't really have the capability of doing it."

Finally, this is a private, not a public, building. It adds nothing to the civic nature of the area if it's not a part of civic life in anyway.

[hullbert]

59. What kind of backward logic is that?

So are you saying that if the word "revival" occurs in the description then it is not historic, and therefore not worthy of anyone's interest? Does that mean that "Greek Revival" style (prevalent in America from 1820 to around 1860) is just junk architecture that we would all be better off without?

Also, where on earth did you get the idea that the Jackling House was not designed for the land it was built on? Do you think that the architect just got these plans out of a magazine somewhere? When you call in an architect to design a house of this size I guarantee you that they are taking into account the land that it is to be built on.

[NashVegas]

60. Oh Please

Also, where on earth did you get the idea that the Jackling House was not designed for the land it was built on? Do you think that the architect just got these plans out of a magazine somewhere?

Falling Water was specifically designed to co-exist and be a part of the ground it was built on. Jobs' mansion is an example of grandiosity imposing itself on nature and showing itself superior.

So are you saying that if the word "revival" occurs in the description then it is not historic, and therefore not worthy of anyone's interest?

I used that to point out the ridiculousness of the argument that a revivalist mansion should be compared to one of the most stunning examples, ever, of architectural genius.

If there are people interested in preserving the Jackling Mansion, fine. Let them pony up the dollars to move it out of its present location, restore it, and make it a public building, or another use of their choosing.

[hullbert]

63. Matters of taste do not a sound argument make.....

"Jobs' mansion is an example of grandiosity imposing itself on nature and showing itself superior."

To use an old saying, what does that have to do with the price of tea in China? Have you ever seen the Biltmore Estate? If you want to talk about a place exemplifying "grandiosity" and "imposing itself on nature", take a look at that baronial mansion. Does that mean that it is automatically inferior to Falling Water or the Robie House? Should the Vanderbilt's be allowed to demolish it if they want to? Is Frank Lloyd Wright a better architect than Richard Hunt or George Smith because he had a different architectural philosophy? Frankly, your argument seems to revolve around the fact that Jobs' Mansion is not to your particular taste, which is fine, it's not particularly to my taste either-but that does NOT mean that it is less deserving of preservation or respect than Falling Concrete...I mean Water.

Also, on an interesting side note, the owners of Falling Water donated the property to the Western Pennsylvania Conservancy, there's a thought fer old Jobs...

[Tyler Durden]

69. Obviously you know NOTHING of Falling Water.

Wright re-routed a stream to get his effect, and he had to re-design his foundations mid-build as they were starting to crack.

That doesn't make it any less a work of art. Same with the Jackling house, except that it hasn't had to be propped up no less than 5 times. Wright was a genius; an engineer he wasn't.

Don't be one of these dopes that says "I don't know if it's art, but I know what I like."

[NashVegas]

71. Enjoy Insulting People Who Disagree With You That Much?

Ohmygod! FLW re-routed a stream! It's not like he completely re-routed it to a place it had never been, is it? The waterfall was already there where they built, was it not?

You can call me fifteen kinds of stupid if it makes you feel good. That does not erase the fact that equating these these two structures in architectural and civic value is a joke.


Don't be one of these dopes that says "I don't know if it's art, but I know what I like."

If either of us are making that kind of statement, it's you.

[hullbert]

73. Some could be insulted by your calling their taste a joke....

"That does not erase the fact that equating these these two structures in architectural and civic value is a joke."

I'm sorry to disappoint you, but it is not a "fact" that equating these two structures is a joke. It is your personal opinion. If you think Jobs should be allowed to demolish it because it is his property, then fine, go ahead and say so, but it is disingenuous to argue that anything that's not Falling Water (or as it's original owners dubbed it "Rising Mildew") is not worthy of consideration for historic preservation. Yes, Falling Water is widely considered a masterpiece of American architecture, but do you really think it's a joke that others may feel just as strongly about the Jackling House because you don't personally like its style?

[NashVegas]

77. I Did Not Call Your Taste a Joke

I called your argument a joke.

Architecture is a discipline that's value can be objectively measured by its civic and cultural impact.

If you want to try and tell me again that the two structures are equal in value, I'll still laugh.

I think that Jobs *legally* should be allowed to destroy the building, hands down. Now sit down. I also believe that what Jobs should do, ethically, is allow someone to buy and move the house at their expense. If there are no legitimate takers, it's fair game.

because you don't personally like its style?

Nowhere in this thread have I made any comment regarding my *personal* feelings on the style of this house. I have noted that the style was unoriginal, I did not say it was an aesthetic eyesore or anything of the kind.

[gardenista]

56. This is no Falling Water.

It is not a particularly interesting structure, and in my opinion it is not worth saving.

Whatever Jobs builds will probably be so in the future.

[Tyler Durden]

70. No offense, but we all know about "opinions"....

...need I remind you of the "opinions" of the current administration..?

Just to be fair, I showed pictures of the Jackling House to my wife, the NURSE.

She loved it. "When do we move in?"

[gardenista]

74. All you need to do is buy it for like, $1

move it to a new site

and move on in!

[FyurFly]

43. It's his house

He should dynamite it before some house hugging wackos intervene! Now that would rock!

[Texacrat]

45. So much for personal property rights

I wonder if the people who were appalled, as I was, by the SCOTUS Eminent Domain opinion, support some society deciding what a homeowner should do with his house.

[JusticeForAll]

66. I'm glad someone finally said it!

Hurray for private landowners. BTW this house is an ugly piece of crap... The defenses for saving it are totally amusing.

[Gormy Cuss]

52. Woodside is one of the most expensive little towns in the country

There's not much there there, but multimillion dollar estates abound. The Jackling house may be the only thing of any historic significance in this small, wealthy town. Larry Ellison of ORACLE lives there too, and after the lovely but idiosyncratic redo he completed on his Atherton estate I'll bet some peeps in Woodside are bracing for another "interesting" renovation at Larry's place too.

[gardenista]

57. Oh, it's been interesting...

That is all I will say on that subject...

[Gormy Cuss]

64. ...

;-)

[pimpbot]

55. Breaking news: Apple fanboys support Steve Jobs at all costs

Now, I know some people here have brought up property rights and other decent arguments. However when you buy something "historic", you're gonna have problems since there are laws that protect such structures.

Take for example, the law allowing anyone to attach a satellite dish to their house. There is a provision that states if the house is historic, you might not be allowed to attach the dish.

Maybe he wants to build a big white metal box with only left clic ...err.. left handed doorknobs. :)

[minkyboodle]

58. not a surprise

Jobs may be blue... but he is a blue ego-maniacal dick. He has done
well with helping Apple back to its feet but the real heart and soul of
that company was Woz anyway. If you do any reading on Jobs and his part
in the whole thing you will see right away he is a bit of an ass. Also
why someone would want to tear that beautiful place down blows my mind.

[QC]

61. If Bill Gates were doing this,

I suspect the response here would be unanimously negative. But this is Steve Jobs, many people's favorite egomaniacal, entitled plutocrat, so excuses must be made.

[JCMach1]

62. Exactly, Jobs is being an arrogant, spoiled, rich prick on this one

He should just sell out and build his 'dream' the way he wants it...

[mod mom]

67. Before becoming a political activist, I was a preservation activist. I

was responsible for our city council adding a demolition moratorium until requirements could be passed. It is now difficult to demolish a house in the suburb that I live. Not only does it have to pass an architectural review board, but they must hire an historic preservationist to comment on the significance of the property. I had to come out of retirement(usually too busy w election reform) last summer to fight for a property. Someone spent $1.4 million (in Ohio thats a lot of $)to buy a house to tear it down to build another McMansion. I was able to gather public opposition and the family backed away from the demolition, I am happy to say.

[goforit]

72. Well, if it was over 100 yrs. I would say yah but it is not.

Let him do what he wants.

[bobbieinok]

76. endangered sites across the country

http://www.international.icomos.org/risk/2002/usa2002.htm

there are Indian sites, nature sites companies want to mine or whatever

the last problem listed

....

Teardowns in Historic Neighborhoods, Nationwide

Across the nation, a teardown epidemic is wiping out historic neighborhoods one house at a time. As older homes are demolished and replaced with dramatically larger, out-of-scale new structures, the historic character of the existing neighborhood is lost. Neighborhood liveability is diminished as trees are removed, backyards are eliminated, and sunlight is blocked by towering new structures built up to the property lines. Community economic and social diversity is reduced as new mansions replace affordable homes. House by house, neighborhoods are losing a part of their historic fabric and much of their character.

The teardown trend is spreading like wildfire through historic urban and close-in suburban neighborhoods across the nation. Attractive, convenient and stable historic neighborhoods are in great demand, but the availability of large homes in these areas is sometimes limited. As a result, many homebuyers are purchasing smaller houses and replacing them with much larger structures that are not compatible with the historic character of the neighborhood. The challenge is to manage new investment so that it respects the character and distinctiveness that made these neighborhoods so desirable in the first place.

The National Trust has documented more than 100 communities in 20 States that are experiencing significant numbers of teardowns, and that number is climbing fast. From 1995 to 2000, the number of demolitions increased 45% in Bergen County, NJ. Just outside of downtown Dallas, Texas, more than 1000 historic early 20th-century houses have been purchased, bulldozed and sent to the dump. In Denver, Colorado, some 200 houses were demolished last year. In Ocean City, NJ, entire neighborhood blocks have been lost as the result of more than 300 recent demolitions. In the Chicago suburb of Winnetka, a rare pre-Civil War house was levelled. In Rancho Mirage, California, a museum-quality, 5000 square-foot home designed in 1962 by famed architect Richard Neutra was demolished without warning. Even the work of Frank Lloyd Wright is at risk. In the close-in Chicago suburb of Bannockburn, a spacious house designed by Wright in 1956 was purchased last year by an owner who planned to demolish it, but due to public outcry sold it to a preservation-minded buyer.

Neighborhood groups are clamoring for protection as homes are demolished in record numbers. First and most importantly, residents must develop a vision for the future - including where and how to accommodate growth and change - and then put in place mechanisms to ensure that their vision is not compromised. Communities can use a variety of planning and preservation tools to implement their vision and tame teardowns. Several of these tools aim to protect existing structures, in part by requiring the review of proposed demolitions and by limiting the scale of new construction. Other tools are designed to guide sensitive additions to existing homes and to ensure that new construction fits in with a neighborhood's historic character, rather than damaging it.

In neighborhoods where teardowns have already reached a crisis point, it may be necessary to provide a 'cooling-off' period, through a temporary moratorium on demolition, which can prevent the loss of significant structures and allow time to develop alternatives. Communities can also manage teardowns through designating historic districts, establishing conservation districts, and zoning overlays, in addition to negotiating voluntary easements to ensure that the architectural character is permanently protected. Education and historic real-estate programs can be a way to inform realtors and new residents about the history of older neighborhoods and provide guidance in rehabilitating historic houses and building compatible additions. Financial incentives and technical assistance, such as tax abatements and low-interest loans and referrals to qualified contractors, help residents acquire and rehabilitate historic houses.