Built as a beach retreat in 1905 by a San Francisco Fire Chief who perished in the great quake of 1906, the “cottage” at 1984 Great Highway has served as a church for the better part of the past century .
Plans to raze the property and build bigger anew prompted the National Trust for Historic Preservation to list it as “threatened.” Today, the listed property is back on the market and asking $1,575,000.
In one-time church related news, 601 Dolores has once again been withdrawn from the market without a sale.
∙ Listing: 1984 Great Highway (4,520 sqft) – $1,575,000 [MLS]
∙ Fire Chief’s Cottage: 1984 Great Highway [outsidelands.org]
∙ One Hell Heck Of A Bedroom Overlooking Dolores Park… [SocketSite]
And rightly so! We must ensure that architectural treasures such as this are preserved for future generations. One of the reasons that tourists from around the world flock to SF is to see global wonders such as this police chief’s bungalow or whatever it was. I would imagine that, in highbrow circles, masterpieces such as this are often mentioned in the same breath with the Forum Romanum, or maybe even the Space Needle.
Besides, we all know what would happen if they razed it: somebody would just build a “banal and boxy” multi-unit building that would draw the ire of hidebound Victorian-dwellers because it would resemble a Uzbekistanian rendering plant, or whatever the misplaced metaphor du jour is. Plus it would block light and air. And nobody wants that.
New construction is all horrible and ugly, and only serves one purpose: housing people. And that’s not what architecture is supposed to be about anyway. So leaving this rotting and vacant really is a win-win for all.
One wonders about whether the threat to be concerned about here is a developer razing the building or a tsunami obliterating the entire block.
thanks for the snark LD. But this is one of those things that can still delight a tourist, a long term SF resident exploring the city or a just someone who likes serendipity. Lose this and a bit of the interest of SF. Just a shame to lose another unique and perhaps less than higest useage property
Bummer. The lot is slightly bigger than 4 normal lots in this area, even though it’s only zoned RH-2. Could have been a nice beach condo building if it wasn’t for hysterical preservation of something unworthy. Nothing interesting or important happened here; no one actually famous lived here (seriously? the fire chief took vacations here?); and the building is nothing worth saving. It’s just old.
Cart it off and put it in a museum instead of blocking prime land. That’s what we should generally do with these inane ideas hysterical preservations have. We should find some land in the Inland East Bay, cart all this crap there, and call it the San Francisco Hysterical Preservation Museum.
Also, Legacy Dude, I think it’s Uzbek rendering plant, although Uzbekistani would also be acceptable. 🙂
601 Dolores is going to be very very difficult to sell. I’m not sure what the current owner was thinking when they purchased it. The market for that “home” must be miniscule.
This ‘church’ is a perfect example of why churches and beaches just don’t go together. It has no parking. And while not as bad as much of the rest of the City, parking along the Great Hwy has become a bitch as City has allowed way too many of those ‘ugly giant multi-unit house boxes.’ Couple that with a sunny day and church services on a Sunday morning and you’ve got Disaster Traffic Day At The Beach.
I have no idea who would buy 601 Dolores as a house. A very ill conceived idea, unless you like the idea living in San Franciso’s Xanadu (minus the 20 foot high fireplace).
Lets face it. Historic (Hystrionic) Preservation is just the new NIMBY excuse. As a previous commenter said, this building is not historic, its just old. And lets face it, a lot of old is just crap. This is just an excuse to stop the feared-of change. The historic preservation movement is intellectually bankrupt. And SF Architectural Heritage wonders why no one takes them seriously.
I keep saying the same thing. Completely agree with you.
With only one photo to go on it’s hard to judge.
but in that one picture
the existing building radiates charm, (to me)
Why anyone would want to tear it down is beyond me.
There we go hearing that “charm” emotion again.
Go buy yourself a snuggie instead.
Tear the damn thing down. It’s not important.
Charm is not an emotion. It is
1. The power or quality of pleasing or delighting; attractiveness: a breezy tropical setting of great charm.
2. A particular quality that attracts; a delightful characteristic: A mischievous grin was among the child’s many charms.
3. A small ornament, such as one worn on a bracelet.
4. An item worn for its supposed magical benefit, as in warding off evil; an amulet.
5. An action or formula thought to have magical power.
6. The chanting of a magic word or verse; incantation.
7. Physics A quantum property of the charm quark whose conservation explains the absence of certain strange-particle decay modes and that accounts for the longevity of the J particle.
v. charmed, charm·ing, charms
v.tr.
1. To attract or delight greatly: the simple elegance of the meal charmed the guests.
2. To induce by using strong personal attractiveness: charmed the guard into admitting them without invitation
Descriptions an architect should know.
I have to tell ya, most architects I know and myself included would throw up if someone called our work “charming”.
“Charming” is a Thomas Kinkade painting depicting a snow covered cottage with candles in the window and hot chocolate brewing, about to be thrown into the fire.
Now THAT’S charming!
The building has charm. So you don’t like the word. So what + get real.
thanks fluj, but you don’t know what you’re talking about.
you need to make up your mind as to what name to post as.:)
have a wonderful day!
Charm is in the eye of the beholder. We live in the second-most expensive city in the nation, which coincidentally happens to have one of the worst real estate utilization rates:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/ontheblock/detail?entry_id=86027
Obvious pragmatism trumps perceived charm. This ain’t the Acropolis – cue the dozers.
I do know what I’m talking about. If people think it has charm, then charm it has. You don’t dictate lexicon. My name is a constant, and great call on giving that downright hilarious green and yellow a thumbs up, you arbiter of all things “architecturual taste,” you.
“Obvious pragmatism trumps perceived charm. This ain’t the Acropolis – cue the dozers.”
That’s another argument.
LOL. if your name is a constant then why did you answer to fluj?
You actually have many names here, we all know that honey.:)
You should write a book
heh. Same name for a long while, after a bit of fun with some different names, all pretty obvious and of a theme. Geoff the Realtor being particularly awesome. That f–j moniker was put to rest for a reason. It was so that crabs like you would talk about real things instead of me. However, thanks for not blasting my typo of architectural Dr. Wordsmith.
I for one hope that either realtormang or recordhawk comes back.
And Satchel/LMRiM for that matter.
Recordhawk?
Not sure if that was on SocketSite or The Front Steps. Why is Geoff the Realtor so awesome?
I miss the real fluj. He had the most outrageous comments that riled up a lot of people.
I don’t know? It just looked funny I guess. I’m basing “Geoff the Realtor”‘s mindblowing awesomeness on the fact that it cracked a few people up. So perhaps that was an exaggeration. Parsing posse, please note that. Anyway Recordhawk was definitely somebody else.
Here Today The historics sites project of the Junior League – published in 1968 as a reaction the wholesale destruction of important buildings in the western additon in the name of redevelopment. The book notes buildings worth saving. One page 141 1984 Great Highway, of particaular architectural note, a rambling beach house. It has a nice photo, too.
Maybe the Junior League should buy it if they’re so concerned. Between their members, they probably have the money. Alternatively, they can move it to my proposed museum of hysterical preservation in the inland East Bay.
Thomas Kincaide is to charming what McDonalds is to Cuisine. Kincaide’s art is kitsch, at best – which is would be the kindest thing you can call his “work”.
And that bungalow would look great in the marshland near 101 hanging off the bay by the bay bridge.
Great Idea. Let’s move it.
anyone who wants to put up “nice beach condos” there can take a flying leap. this street is completely contaminated with cheaply built, boxey looking crappy apartments and condos. what it needs is more single family homes and some more interesting architecture. 75% of the places in the sunset came out of the same friggin box. leave this one alone. bottom-feeding, quick-turn developers are not welcome here.
The list price for 1984 Great Highway has been reduced by $25,000, now asking $1,550,000.
The list price for 1984 Great Highway has been reduced by $5,000 (0.3%), now asking $1,545,000.
The list price for 1984 Great Highway has been reduced by $20,000 (1%), now asking $1,525,000.
The list price for 1984 Great Highway has been reduced by another $26,000 (1%), now asking $1,499,000.
The list price for 1984 Great Highway has been reduced by another $100,000 (7%), now asking $1,399,000.
The list price for 1984 Great Highway has been reduced to $1,350,000.
The list price for 1984 Great Highway has been reduced for the ninth time over the past 111 days, now asking $1,299,000.
The list price for 1984 Great Highway has been reduced for the thirteenth time since being listed 236 days ago, this time by another $5,000 (0.4%) and now asking $1,240,000.
– huge double-wide-street-to-street-lot – check
– first line on GH, across from the Pacific – check
– professional range kitchen (not the fancy show-off kind, but the type that a real cook has to actually work with) – check
– could be made suitable for a private bowling alley – check
– price of a high-end condo 1/3 its size – check
– historical character and a very recognizable home at the same time – check
– will make you quickly learn “no, it’s not a church anymore” in Korean – check
What gives? All this place needs is someone who will accept the place as it is (you can’t tear it down, obviously).
– solidly in the Pacific tsunami zone – check
Hmmm… maybe that’s an advantage for someone who sees value only if the parcel can be developed to the bulk of its neighbors. Wait for the tsunami to demo the historic building.
Good point, MoD. But 1 ) who knows if you will not be mandated to rebuild in its as-is condition? With up-to-code foundation and structure, that is. Ask SoCal how easy it is to rebuild a 1950s home to the 2011 code after a wildfire… You’d better get your coverage up to the actual rebuilding value and I am not even talking about earthquake insurance. And 2 ) if you are avoiding a purchase due to tsunami risks, you should also do the same for the similarly probable earthquake risk elsewhere in the City.
Yet another “let’s keep this listing fresh” trim. Asking 1.235M.
Following 18 price reductions over the past two years, the sale of the old Fire Chief’s cottage and current church at 1984 Great Highway closed escrow last week with a reported contract price of $1,180,000.
While 25 percent under its original list price of $1,575,000, having last been listed for $1,220,000, the sale will be recorded at 3 percent under asking according to industry and agent stats.