Right. Most of those progressive politicians and advertisements assume the SFH is being occupied by the owner and “advertise benefits” of an ADU as an addtl bit of income. They probably don’t have “convert SFH into MFH owned by investor via ADU” as their preferred use case. 
Not sure if MFH are actually that cool. Listed at 4.3 CAP and now sold with 3.8 CAP. You still won’t get cash flow with 35% down.
1 Like
Politicians and media can advertise all they want. The public will find a way to use the ADU law in whatever ways makes the most common sense - at least some of the use cases will be to convert SFH to MFH, thus increasing cash flow for the landlords.
That is feasible for an existing landlord - one who has owned the property for a while. It will be very expensive for someone who wants to buy a SFH with a fully permitted ADU today. In the nicer parts of Silicon Valley, such properties, if they can be found for sale, will probably cost $3M and up. Hard to see how that would be a good investment.
1 Like
What is the basis of this assertion?
A Single Family Home is meant to be lived in by what it says, a single family. Whether rented or owned.
Not a fan of AdU either but just curious if the owner can request additional mailbox, water & power meter for ADU?
Not true. It depends on one own strategy. Some invest and rent out SFH to aim for appreciation.
Yes, in most cities one can get a separate address and utilities for an ADU. It is considered a legally separate dwelling unit
1 Like
That’s a fair point. I guess it just seems like a bad strategy.