apartment therapy changing the world, one room at a time

I would not say that "the couple decided to salvage and restore many of the house's original Victorian components ". A window here and a light fixture there really isn't salvaging much. I think the place is very pretty but it's got little to do with what the house was like before it was renovated.

Makes me a little sad to see that most of the Victorian elements are gone.

I agree with the criticism. It's a lovely home but, in a way, this renovation doesn't sound any more respectful of the original bones of the house than the "hippie boardinghouse" it was before.

Given the state of the economy, maybe the shoulda left it as a hippie boarding house . . .

OMG if the article didn't mention that it was a Victorian I would have thought it was one those SOMA lofts.

Very sad indeed.

Boring.

The hippie boarding house would have been more interesting to me.

I don't get living in a SF Victorian and making it look like an IKEA model home. If that is the look you want move into a warehouse and leave the Victorians to folks who like dark wood, many smaller rooms, lots of doors and lush detail oriented decor.

i'm with the owners for updating their home to their liking. afterall, the comtemporary look is in synch with their professions.

it's not like a victorian in sf is hard to find, and, let's face it, the style, while characteristic of of sf, isn't exactly on the world heritage preservation list. save the facade maybe, like they do with pre-war buildings in europe, but the interior....?

anecdote:

recently i asked the doorman at sf famous fairmont hotel what the building in front the hotel was and he bellowed back that it was the pacific club and that 'it's over one hundred and fifty years old!'

i wanted to ask if he thought that was really old...because, like, you know, there are pubs in london 3-4 times older...and i bet the libraries in berkeley had books older than the state of california...

--------
i think the owners did a nice job with the house ;)

I used to work for a woman who was an interior designer and completely redesigned a Victorian by making it loft-like; exposed beams, torn down walls etc. Nothing original was left. From the outside, it obviously still had the bones of the Victorian, and the minute you stepped inside you felt like you were in a downtown loft. I found it kind of sad, too. There are so many loft's available, why not just live in one if you like that style and keep the Victorian to be a beautiful piece of history. That said, I think some remodeling is okay and often necessary.

the sense i got from the article was that they didn't exactly buy a cohesive "victorian" - it had been renovated many times over the years, and in a haphazard way. so they probably weren't pulling out/tearing down victorian interiors, they were pulling out/tearing down a mish-mash of stuff from the 40's through the 90's. it sounds like they put some effort into keeping what victorian elements remained in the house. and then they chose to make something new from the bones that were left, rather than recreating a victorian. i have no problem with that (it's a totally different situation than someone who moves into a nearly intact victorian in good shape, or even one that needs some work, and guts the thing for no good reason).

I have mixed feelings about renovation. I hate it when new additions are ugly irrelevant add-on's to attractive architecture (like the red brick "ranch style" addition I once saw attached to a limestone Queen Anne building -- they really fought.)

But interiors (to my mind) can be different from the exteriors. If a Victorian had pristine original details, it would be a shame to rip them out -- although the room sizes in Victorians can be uncomfortable for modern residents. But if the interior has been trashed, and has to be replaced anyhow, why not go for the surprise of contemporary inside? I like the dichotomy.

Oh Please - Victorians in this town are a dime-a-dozen.

Many of them here are big, ugly, drafty, ramshackle eyesores that were long-ago stripped of trim and detail for the sake of "Modernism" back in the 40's and 50's - covered in stucco and asbestos siding, divided up into apartments, and ground-floor storefronts, etc.

It's not like these folks were starting with a perfectly restored and consecrated house off the Historical Register...

I am glad to see I am not the only one saddened by this renovation.

I'm with Emmers on this one, it seems like there wasn't much left of the original history, but the owners have done all they can to retain what was left. They're not living in a museum, so why should we expect them to reinstate some horrible neo-Victorian faux historic interior?

Meanwhile, I'm loving the grey and red/orange throw on the bed. Want!

I like that they left some of the original items in the home, so BEAUTIFULLY done.


Jen Ramos
'100% Recycled DESIGNER Cards & More'
www.madebygirl.com
madebygirl.blogspot.com

I was lucky enough to see this house as the owners are friends of a friend. I must say that it is even more gorgeous in real life than in pictures, and also that I think people who are criticizing the loss of Victorian elements don't realize is the amazing job that Casper and Lexie did in restoring the Victorian exterior. I'm not sure why the article didn't cover this as I think it's one of the more remarkable aspects of the renovation. They removed the stucco that had been applied to the entire front exterior and found gorgeous carved floral elements that they painstakingly restored and repainted. The transition from Victorian exterior, partially Victorian entryway and mostly modern interior is really dramatic and beautifully done.

These two seemed very conscious of preserving historical aspects while making a home that is livable for a family (which, as several people have noted, required a lot of damage control on what previous tenants had done to the place). I understand differences of style, but I'm kind of saddened by the overall negative tone of many commentors who haven't seen the place in person or apparently even read the accompanying article. They did a great job of restoring a home that was previously not Victorian or well remodeled. It took a lot more work and thought than just doing paint touch-ups on an already classic Victorian home and I don't think they removed any existing Victorian features.

I live in one of the Victorian/former hippy boarding homes in the same neighborhood as this house.

These houses are cold and dark and the rooms are tiny. Our neighborhood has a lot of light and sun, but it can't penitrate into the home because of the Victorian floor-plans. And the hippy boarding home "design period" was one of adding lots of doors and walls in places they don't belong - making it even stranger and darker and colder.

I think this remodel is an incredible design in that it actually allows the sun and light to flow through the space and into all the rooms of the house. Also, keeping elements like the original, exposed fireplace in the master/attic, and the stained glass and the antique door knobs and plates are the most interesting parts of these old homes. And the unfinished banister rails that they added are really sweet. The Times slideshow shows a lot more of the interesting ways they mixed new and old details.

I love the look of the Haight Victorians. But once you live in one, you spend a lot of time thinking about how you'd like to have thicker walls and windows and heating and light systems that actually work.

This design is warm and fresh and sunny. If any of you who believe the redesign is wrong want to experience a freezing San Francisco summer in my Victorian apartment - you are welcome to! I'll take the remodel and then we can compare notes.

Also makes me a little sad to see that most of the Victorian elements are gone.

Cheap Auto Insurance Quotes