# Those San Franciscan houses
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/those-san-franciscan-houses/499181
**Category:** Factual Questions
**Created:** [June 9, 2009, 2:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/those-san-franciscan-houses/499181 "2009-06-09T02:56:15Z")
**Posts on this page:** 15
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@Unintentionally\_Blank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Unintentionally_Blank)
#### Post date: [June 9, 2009, 2:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/those-san-franciscan-houses/499181/1 "2009-06-09T02:56:15Z")
You know the ones.
Here: [http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2009/06/wwdc-2009-keynote-1176-rm-eng.jpg](http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2009/06/wwdc-2009-keynote-1176-rm-eng.jpg)
Also seen on Full House, and any movie that has San Francisco, but not Lombard Street.
What’s the story behind these houses? How incredibly expensive would it be to own? Do they get crazy amounts of lookie lou traffic?
---
### Author:  [@troubledwater](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/troubledwater)
#### Post date: [June 9, 2009, 2:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/those-san-franciscan-houses/499181/2 "2009-06-09T02:59:32Z")
a.k.a. the [Painted Ladies](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Painted_Ladies).
---
### Author:  [@Unintentionally\_Blank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Unintentionally_Blank)
#### Post date: [June 9, 2009, 3:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/those-san-franciscan-houses/499181/3 "2009-06-09T03:03:14Z")
3 minutes. Damn. I LOVE THIS PLACE!
---
### Author:  [@Tapioca\_Dextrin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tapioca_Dextrin)
#### Post date: [June 9, 2009, 5:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/those-san-franciscan-houses/499181/4 "2009-06-09T05:26:17Z")
Pricewise, you’re looking at [$1,500,000](http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/02/01/RE7U15ISEC.DTL)
> [@](#):
>
> With a past as colorful as its ornate facade, the 120-year-old Victorian at 908 Steiner St. - which recently came on the market for $1.6 million - exudes a surprising mix of refinement and irreverence: like a sophisticated, elderly aunt delivering the punch line to an off-color joke with obvious relish and gusto.
>
> “It’s really one of a kind of a rare gem that comes on the market in San Francisco once every five or 10 years,” says Jamie Howell. “It’s a good example of pre-earthquake, 19th century San Francisco Victorian, untouched by fire.”
---
### Author:  [@Unintentionally\_Blank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Unintentionally_Blank)
#### Post date: [June 9, 2009, 11:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/those-san-franciscan-houses/499181/5 "2009-06-09T11:28:48Z")
That’s surprisingly ‘not bad’, considering californias usual housing market, and what a high-rise loft can go for.
I’m on my iPhone, or I’d post a link to zillow, the houses are larger than expected…5 br, 2 ba, 3000 sq ft.
ETA:Linky here: [http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/720-Steiner-St-San-Francisco-CA-94117/15078281\_zpid/](http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/720-Steiner-St-San-Francisco-CA-94117/15078281_zpid/)
---
### Author:  [@Unintentionally\_Blank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Unintentionally_Blank)
#### Post date: [June 9, 2009, 11:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/those-san-franciscan-houses/499181/6 "2009-06-09T11:30:44Z")
(dupe)
---
### Author:  [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)
#### Post date: [June 9, 2009, 1:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/those-san-franciscan-houses/499181/7 "2009-06-09T13:30:24Z")
> [@Unintentionally\_Blank](#):
>
> (dupe)
Completely and totally off topic, but I could not let the singularly apposite username/post combination here go without noting it. 🙂
---
### Author:  [@Unintentionally\_Blank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Unintentionally_Blank)
#### Post date: [June 9, 2009, 2:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/those-san-franciscan-houses/499181/8 "2009-06-09T14:00:49Z")
alas, its a frequent occurrence. (hence the name)
---
### Author:  [@SanibelMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SanibelMan)
#### Post date: [June 9, 2009, 4:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/those-san-franciscan-houses/499181/9 "2009-06-09T16:20:53Z")
> [@Tapioca\_Dextrin](#):
>
> Pricewise, you’re looking at [$1,500,000](http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/02/01/RE7U15ISEC.DTL)
Holy crap, that’s an ugly house. I’m sure it’s fairly authentic to the period (well, maybe not the painted bathroom floor), but just looking at the pictures made me claustrophobic.
---
### Author:  [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)
#### Post date: [June 9, 2009, 4:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/those-san-franciscan-houses/499181/10 "2009-06-09T16:25:07Z")
When it reopens [the Archbishop’s Mansion](http://www.sanfrancisco.com/archmansion/) is just around the corner from Alamo Park, which is where the photos of the Painted Ladies are taken from. We went there once for my birthday, wonderful place.
It’s as close as you can get to living in one without shelling out $2 million or so.
---
### Author:  [@zweisamkeit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/zweisamkeit)
#### Post date: [June 9, 2009, 5:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/those-san-franciscan-houses/499181/11 "2009-06-09T17:01:53Z")
> [@SanibelMan](#):
>
> Holy crap, that’s an ugly house. I’m sure it’s fairly authentic to the period (well, maybe not the painted bathroom floor), but just looking at the pictures made me claustrophobic.
Funny, 'cause I’d adore to have a house like that. The wallpaper sure is ugly, but that’s part of what I love about them!
---
### Author:  [@dolphinboy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dolphinboy)
#### Post date: [June 9, 2009, 6:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/those-san-franciscan-houses/499181/12 "2009-06-09T18:31:15Z")
A friend of mine recently purchased a nice victorian in SF for $1.2M that needed a fair amount of work. What struck me was how it was chopped up into lots of small rooms, which was typical of that period, but not particularly functional. There’s an entry, parlor, formal dining room and living room, and a few small bathrooms scattered here and there. The ceilings are tall and it echos when you walk through it. It’s also very cold since it has an archaic heating system.
By contrast I just designed and built a house with a large great room that includes a kitchen, family room and dining room with no walls separating the various areas. It works much better for my family and is easier to maintain and keep clean than separate rooms. In my previous house I had a formal living room and dining room that rarely got used. It was wasted space as far as I was concerned.
---
### Author:  [@zweisamkeit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/zweisamkeit)
#### Post date: [June 9, 2009, 9:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/those-san-franciscan-houses/499181/13 "2009-06-09T21:12:15Z")
> [@dolphinboy](#):
>
> A friend of mine recently purchased a nice victorian in SF for $1.2M that needed a fair amount of work. What struck me was how it was chopped up into lots of small rooms, which was typical of that period, but not particularly functional. There’s an entry, parlor, formal dining room and living room, and a few small bathrooms scattered here and there. The ceilings are tall and it echos when you walk through it. It’s also very cold since it has an archaic heating system.
>
> By contrast I just designed and built a house with a large great room that includes a kitchen, family room and dining room with no walls separating the various areas. It works much better for my family and is easier to maintain and keep clean than separate rooms. In my previous house I had a formal living room and dining room that rarely got used. It was wasted space as far as I was concerned.
It’s functional for what they wanted at the time. Now, we prefer big open spaces. Back then it was more seen as separate parts of the house are completely different and thus should be separated from view. The parlor is where you first entertain visitors. If they were close, they may be invited to your less formal (and more personal) family/living room. People _never_ hung out in kitchens like they do today. Compartmentalizing was important.
---
### Author:  [@gigi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gigi)
#### Post date: [June 9, 2009, 9:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/those-san-franciscan-houses/499181/14 "2009-06-09T21:34:26Z")
> [@zweisamkeit](#):
>
> It’s functional for what they wanted at the time. Now, we prefer big open spaces. Back then it was more seen as separate parts of the house are completely different and thus should be separated from view. The parlor is where you first entertain visitors. If they were close, they may be invited to your less formal (and more personal) family/living room. People _never_ hung out in kitchens like they do today. Compartmentalizing was important.
Was it also because then they could heat one room at a time (fireplaces) and the heat would remain close?
---
### Author:  [@rocking\_chair](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rocking_chair)
#### Post date: [June 9, 2009, 9:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/those-san-franciscan-houses/499181/15 "2009-06-09T21:50:18Z")
smaller rooms are easier to heat (esp. with the high 9 foot plus ceilings), and many older houses have rod holders on the door ways to hang curtains that helped keep out drafts.