2606 Jackson (SocketSite.com)

We’ve often wondered (albeit never out loud) about the Olle Lundberg designed manse at 2606 Jackson Street. Thankfully John King wonders (out loud) as well.

And while modern architecture isn’t everybody’s cup of tea, if it can happen here (amongst the Pacific Heights mansions) perhaps it can happen anywhere (without “denigrating” the character of the neighborhood).

17 thoughts on “Modern Wonderings In Pacific Heights (2606 Jackson)”
  1. Great architecture. It stands out, but it isn’t an eyesore. I’d like to see the inside. This is a must-see open house, if it ever hits the market. Anyone have any tips? I’ll start saving up in the meantime…

  2. I’m really curious how this thing got built. Demolishing two condos (originally built as condos!) to make room for a massive single family home violates practically every planning commission rule.

  3. With regard to those planning commission rules, this paragraph from John King’s piece had milk squirting out my nose:
    “The Pacific Heights Residents Association filed papers to force a full hearing at the Planning Commission. The legal hook was the loss of affordable housing — two units become one! — but the association president at the time got to the heart of the “problem” by telling the commission the modern design “is not appropriate for this neighborhood,” according to commission minutes.”

  4. I’m confused – where is the bay window??? This is in SF, right?
    I don’t know why such a liberal city has to be so architecturally conservative. As King says – this was built and not only did the world not end, the neighborhood is actually better for it. Too bad these are so few and far between.

  5. Some years past, Gordon Getty bought the house next to his on outer Broadway to put in a garage (he got a music room out of it too).
    Until then, he had to park on the street.

  6. I luv this house! Every time I drive or walk by this place it actually cheers me up and makes me feel that this city is still alive. I am suprised and sad to hear that this design was fought by NIMBY’s as it is better than what existed previously. Although this residence is modern, it has a sense of humor and a touch of art deco 30’s feel that should help it to age gracefully. How can you leave us hanging without interior photos? Has this home ever been published?
    [Editor’s Note: https://socketsite.com/archives/2007/02/inside_lundbergs_modern_manse_on_jackson.html ]

  7. I’m not big on modern, but I really like this property and the design. It actually does blend into the street well, and considering some of the ugly condos that face alta plaza from Steiner, this place is great. It’s got a wall of windows in the back and I commend the designers/owners for building the property for a mostly neutral design.
    Does anyone have any insight into what the place cost, or has it not hit the market since being built? Any guesses on what the market value of a property like this one would be?
    50×36= 1800sf, 2 floors = 3600sf, $2500psf for crazy prime pac height location/view; $13M?
    Anyone else venture a guess? $13M seems high for this place; so I’d go for a more realistic $9-10M.

  8. I think the house is ok… It’s a little weird and runs the risk of dating in the next 20 years, but it really is not totally off-putting. And I do think SF needs more architectural diversity. The back is pretty extraordinary and easily outshines Larry Ellison’s mod home. It’s also huge. I’d say it’s at least 5000 sqft.
    But the DUM thing sticks in my craw. There are tons of single family homes that were hacked to pieces 60 years ago, and trying to return them to their original status as SFHs is like the holy grail of remodeling. So, just how these people totally demolished two condos or houses (they were really ugly, but that’s not the point) is pretty suspect.

  9. We have enough bland looking Victorians in SF (and a few nice ones) so this design is refreshing.
    Which on is Larry Ellison’s house? Just want to compare. I know it’s supposed to be private but I’m sure many of you already know which one it is.

  10. This house decreased affordible housing in SF? What a joke. The two (not attractive) houses that made way for this were probably $3.5-$4 million dollars each.
    One of the women who protested this being built also said to me several times that she really resented that people were renovating large houses in Pacific Heights and the contractors were taking up parking. I asked her if it would be better if the houses simply decayed. She simply said that people didn’t need to have ‘fancy houses’.
    I like this house, the people who built it are philanthropic and friendly, and they and their house are a great addition to the neighborhood.

  11. I assure you the affordable housing issue is not a joke with the planning commission. The two houses that were destroyed could have been rented out or provided a home for two separate familes. Technically, a DUM will never be approved and a LOT merger is even more surpising. How did it pass the appeals process?

  12. What to you mean, how did it pass the appeal process? If you can afford a $10 million house, you can afford to make it pass! A nice contribution to an someone’s campaign or favorite cause goes a long way.

  13. Thanks for the pics of Ellison’s house and the modern Jackson Street house. Now THAT’s real estate porn! While I’m “in the mood”, can someone post some pics of Gordon Getty’s house, or Danielle Steele’s house?
    It’s getting hot in here…

  14. I love modern houses. I live in an Eichler in San Jose. The style of house was consider modern 50 years ago, but it still looks pretty cool even today. I would love to see more modern houses in South bay.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *