CFAH

Purchased for $1.2 million in April of 2014, the 989-square-foot, two-bedroom unit #808 in the Linea development at 8 Buchanan, a south facing unit with “soaring views,” separated bedrooms, ample closet space and two bathrooms, returned to the market listed for $1.295 million in February of 2020 and was briefly in contract but failed to close.

Listed anew for $1.095 million this past September, despite the fact that the frequently misreported Case-Shiller index for “San Francisco” condo values was “up over 50 percent” over the same period of time, the resale of 8 Buchanan Street #808 has now closed escrow with a contract price of $989,000, down $211,000 or 17.6 percent on an apples-to-apples basis.

At the same time, the resale of 8 Buchanan Street #808 was officially “at asking” according to all industry stats and aggregate reports as its list price was reduced to $989,000 a few days before this listing’s status was changed to pending.

Keep in mind that two-bedroom units at 8 Buchanan were being flipped for six figures more than their original contract prices mere months after the building opened, which isn’t uncommon when values are actually going up versus down.

Comments from Plugged-In Readers

  1. Posted by jimbo

    ouch.

  2. Posted by Dr Jones

    “… frequently misreported Case-Shiller index … ” – Case-Shiller index is computed based on matching transactions over a large number of units – do you think there is a problem with the methodology of computing the index? While any single transaction may not follow the broader index trend on average the numbers should be similar – do you think this is not happening in practice in SF?

  3. Posted by Maurice

    that building has such nice renderings, and turned out so unpleasant.

    • Posted by two beers

      Masses of cold, dark, opaque glass will do that. What a sleazy headfake. The funky old ’76 station was much more appealing than this block killer.

  4. Posted by MyOddCommentHandle

    it’d be nicer if there weren’t so many homeless all around there

    • Posted by Metroliner

      It’s not the homeless, it’s the building. Chock full of renters who don’t care for their building as an owner would (noise, trash, etc.), negligent management, and shoddy design. Most of the units are without AC and face East/South which leaves them in the blazing sun most of the day with no shade. Go by there on a warm or even moderately cool day and every window is open, many with the little portable AC duct sticking out.

      • Posted by two beers

        The pieces of white cardboard some of the renters cram in their windows as reflectors is a subtle, intriguing design touch.

      • Posted by Booger

        You mean south and west. I own an east facing unit. The Sun has already passed overhead by 9am and my unit gets no direct sunlight. All the south and west facing units are completely F’d.

      • Posted by inthemarket

        I looked at this unit before. Yep, above was exactly the issue. The Unit was bought by Chinese investors (based on names of the seller). The unit was used as a rental (and renter obviously had a very large dog), the floors are all scratched up, and carpets are nasty. Mired in lawsuits regarding the air condition situation, where they stated in the lawsuits it was unlivable because it was so hot. I run away as soon as fast I could.

        • Posted by SocketSite

          As a plugged-in reader previously revealed, the lawsuit has been settled and air conditioning, which most units in San Francisco don’t feature, is being installed.

        • Posted by Brahma (incensed renter)

          Well, most lawsuits around condominium buildings get settled. Hopefully, if the units really are unlivable without air conditioning, the architect (Bernardo Fort Brescia, founder of the firm Arquitectonica) learned something from this (mitigated) failure.

          The 1,098 ft.² unit at #300 is currently on the market asking $1.3 million; presumably it doesn’t have the same “soaring views” as this unit, so it’ll be interesting to see what that sells for. If mainland Chinese investors are starting to sell their S.F. real estate holdings en masse and having to take substantial haircuts, maybe that will help reduce the U.S. trade deficit in some small way.

          • Posted by SanFranSeeYa

            What do real estate transactions have to do with the trade deficit?

          • Posted by Brahma (incensed renter)

            The same thing that pursuing a higher education has to do with the trade deficit.

    • Posted by Chad Dinkerton

      It would be nicer if it didn’t resemble an office building! Cold frontage on Market St. side. Really enlivens the neighborhood.

  5. Posted by CR

    …but also, good? do we expect (or desire) housing prices to go up forever? << I know the answer most might give to this, but perpetual rising prices would seem to contribute to the unaffordability of housing, right?

  6. Posted by Jake T

    Didn’t know the incensed rental was also casually racist. In any case, even if every property transacted in the city annually was sold to Chinese investors, the trade deficit wouldn’t go back to 2020 levels. And that’s assuming trade deficits even matter.

Comments are closed.

Recent Articles