Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Campus 2 Site to Include Preserved Historic Barn
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Not such an existential question. Historic buildings are relocated all the time, often involving deconstruction and reconstruction. Standards in historic preservation practice cover how it should be done properly.
The real irony here is that the barn is considered to be historic though the rest of the ranch buildings, including the home, are long gone. The barn is a fragment of the ranch's history at best.
----------
The basic standard for a building being potentially historic, at least per the National Register of Historic Places, is 50 years. Buildings of less age can also be designated but they require special findings. The barn would not be considered historic simply because it's old, however.
I wish when they'd come to take it apart they'd discovered that it was all fixed together using glue and special screws and all the fittings were soldered-in
#paybacktime
#paybacktime
Now "1916" is being considered as "historic"?
Is it AD or BC 1916 ?
Sure 1916 is historic. Buildings will never last to be 500 or more years old if they are not looked after now.
Now "1916" is being considered as "historic"?
Is it AD or BC 1916 ?
Thinking the same thing our house is 100 years older We must almost be living in a prehistoric house!
Dude, I agree. They need to paint it red when it is reconstituted. Barn Red! Not a car cherry red!
Yes i know the quote, but dont need the two points, thanks
What is wrong with the one they already have?
https://www.macrumors.com/2014/10/02/apple-benefits-program/
Isn't a building historic by virtue not only of its design but due to its geographic location? Moving the barn means removing half of what it signified. If you can't say "this is where it stood" then what's the point?
Here, you cannot relocate a historic building for that specific reason. Otherwise, you might as well take a picture, recreate the blueprints and tear it down.
Here, you cannot relocate a historic building for that specific reason. Otherwise, you might as well take a picture, recreate the blueprints and tear it down.
When you say here, could you be more specific? I ask because in my here, you can relocate historic buildings. So clearly your here does not equal my here.
That depends very much on why it is considered to be historic. If it was historic entirely for its design, moving it to another location might arguably not reduce that significance. In some cases a relocation can actually benefit the interpretation of the historic use of the building. For example, a building that is significant for of its association with agriculture but is now in an urban area could benefit by relocation to a location that recreates its historic setting.
----------
When you say here, could you be more specific? I ask because in my here, you can relocate historic buildings. So clearly your here does not equal my here.
I doubt any place in the country with a mature historic preservation program outright prohibits relocations. Standards for when this is appropriate and how it to do it properly have existed for decades.
I applaud this effort by Apple.
If I disassemble a bicycle, ship it, and then reassemble it, is it the same bicycle? Or are you just splitting a very fine hair?
My first thought too... ouch!
If I disassemble a bicycle, ship it, and then reassemble it, is it the same bicycle? Or are you just splitting a very fine hair?
My first thought too... ouch!
Ha! I saw that old barn on some Google Earth images of the new Apple HQ. At the time, even though much construction had already happened the Google earth images were older. I was wondering what that barn was, it stuck out.
See the barn, back when tear-down of the site was just starting:
If you check out the site with Google Earth today, the same old pictures of the site and the barn are still there.
====
[Mod Note from Weaselboy]
I fixed your images. See this thread for the fix.
See the barn, back when tear-down of the site was just starting:
If you check out the site with Google Earth today, the same old pictures of the site and the barn are still there.
====
[Mod Note from Weaselboy]
I fixed your images. See this thread for the fix.
Last edited by a moderator:
I like this idea. Then they will also need to be a medical administrator, right? RIGHT?
Most buildings are historic due to their function or residency. Some are for their style and, rarely, reason for construction.
This isn't true, either. In general a building can be historic for its association with historic events, historically significant people, or for its design or method of construction. Association with events (e.g., a period of community development), is the broadest category and tends to capture the most potential significance connections.
I didn't know about this; thanks!
I have a degree in healthcare management as well; back off! Haha, kidding... I guess I'll share.
We said the same thing with different words. In "function", I mean how they were used be it a historic event or some sort of establishment activity.
----------
Dude, I agree. They need to paint it red when it is reconstituted. Barn Red! Not a car cherry red!
Yes i know the quote, but dont need the two points, thanks
Red barns some from an old tradition of painting it red to signify that mortgage for the farm has been paid off. You mostly see this in the mid-west and back east. Protestant churches also paint their doors red to signify the mortgage on the church is paid off as many church communities started off in barns for Sunday service.