39 Chattanooga (Image Source: Save39Chattanooga.org)
A reader almost reaches the end of his rope while pursuing the listing for 39 Chattanooga (“a historic Victorian fixer”) and writes, “Whatever is Victorian about this…BOX…escapes me !!” We feel your pain.
As it turns out, however, the house was built in 1900 (according to Zillow) and anything built during the reign of Queen Victoria (1837-1901) is considered Victorian. Ah, the subtle loopholes nuances of classifying architectural styles.
And did we mention that Zillow also estimates that 39 Chattanooga is worth $998,117? Either this is one heck of a bargain, or Zillow is off by about $250K (33%). We’ll let you decide.
MAJOR UPDATE: Thanks to the great comment from “bats” we now know that 39 Chattanooga just might date back to the 1860’s, could possibly be the oldest house in Noe Valley, and at the very least is “a very old building.” (Damn you Zillow, you’re 0-2 on this one!) Oh, and thanks to Henry for reminding us about that post-earthquake firestorm and pretty much ensuring that we don’t sleep soundly for the next couple of weeks…
∙ Listing: 39 Chattanooga (2/1) – $749,000 [Zephyr]
Profile: 39 Chattanooga [Zillow]
Not Such Trivial Knowledge [SocketSite]
Save 39 Chattanooga Street! [save39chattanooga.org]

Recent Articles

Comments from “Plugged-In” Readers

  1. Posted by bats

    More about 39 Chattanooga (“Noe Valley’s ‘Little House on the Prairie”) here:
    http://www.noevalleyvoice.com/2004/May/Chat.html
    http://www.save39chattanooga.org/heritagearticle.pdf
    http://www.save39chattanooga.org/

  2. Posted by Osho

    Carbon dating the foundation might help …

  3. Posted by Henry

    Don’t forget that all records burned in the firestorm after the 1906 earthquake. 1900 is the default year if the records were lost….

  4. Posted by Sean

    According to Save 39 Chattanooga, the building is likely to have been built between 1857 and 1869. Compare this building to the Tanforan Cottages at 214-220 Dolores between 15th/16th (at Alert), which were built between 1851-1853, and you’ll see the architectural similarities. Decidedly Victorian, though certainly not as gingerbreaded up as the Italianate, Stick and Queen Anne versions.

  5. Posted by kdaves

    I lived in that house when it was taken out from under us by a contractor who intended to tear it down and replace with, almost definitely, a three-unit complex, as that is what the lot is zoned for.
    The neighbors to the left did not want that kind of structure/obstruction, so the foundation, underground since re-grading for the nearby MUNI tracks, is barely significant. I would like to know when the upper part of the house was completed.
    Anyway, I wish someone had taken better care of the yard/garden. It was my first, and lots of fun to work on.
    It’s an amazing location, and a cute house with unbearably small rooms. Forget a full-size sofa.

  6. Posted by SocketSite

    kdaves – do you have any pictures of the yard/garden from when you were there? Would love to share.

Add a Comment

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