Berkeley council allows ADUs to be sold as condos, with tenant debate

What Berkeley approved and why

Berkeley’s City Council approved an ordinance that allows property owners to sell accessory dwelling units, including backyard cottages and other ADUs, as condominiums. The change was approved Tuesday night and is intended to create more opportunities for people to own a home in Berkeley’s expensive housing market.

Councilmember Brent Blackaby said the council was trying to expand housing inventory that would be available for less than $1 million—“and hopefully substantially less than $1 million,” according to remarks at the meeting. The story says Berkeley’s median price for a single-family home hovers around $1.4 million, and that almost no new condos have been built for decades.

State and local laws had long prevented homeowners from splitting accessory units off their main home and selling them as a separate property. That authority shifted after a 2023 state law, AB 1033, gave cities the ability to allow those sales, and San Jose became the first California city to do so last year, the story reports.

How ADU-to-condo sales would work

Under the ordinance approved by Berkeley’s City Council, property owners would typically be able to get fast-tracked approval to convert ADUs into condos. The AP story says the process would not require a public hearing or appeals process, and it would also waive the fee the city typically charges to convert rental apartments into condos.

The ordinance would require homeowners to submit a map to the city showing how they plan to split up their property. It also gives tenants in certain older ADUs covered by rent control a three-month window to make the first offer to buy their units.

The AP story describes ADUs as a major source of new housing in Berkeley, used by homeowners for rental income or for space for family members such as aging parents or people struggling with housing costs. It says the city has issued just over 100 building permits for ADUs on average each year since 2018.

Recusals and the tenant-protection fight

The story reports that two councilmembers recused themselves from Tuesday’s discussion of the sale proposal because of personal ties to ADUs. It says Rashi Kesarwani left the dais because she owns a home with an accessory unit, and it says Igor Tregub rents one.

Councilmembers supported the basic idea of expanding homeownership, but they were divided over tenant protections. Councilmember Cecilia Lunaparra proposed amendments aimed at ensuring ADU tenants are not forced out when ADUs go up for sale.

Lunaparra proposed barring property owners who evict ADU tenants with a “no-fault” eviction from converting the unit into a condo for five years. She also proposed imposing the city’s Affordable Housing Mitigation Fee on ADU-to-condo conversions unless the owner agrees to subject the unit to rent control if the owner rents it out.

In remarks included in the story, Lunaparra said: “The fundamental question right now is how to balance the stability of ADU tenants and the opportunities for potential future ADU homeowners.” She also said she would like to buy a condo home in Berkeley and start a family there, and she opposed displacing current young tenants in ADUs.

The AP story says the amendments were backed at the meeting by members of Berkeley’s Rent Stabilization Board, several UC Berkeley students, and a representative from the “Yes-In-My-Backyard” organization East Bay for Everyone. The story also says Berkeley has generally limited tenant protections for accessory units, particularly those built in homeowners’ backyards, which are not subject to rent control or limits on no-fault evictions.

Why some councilmembers opposed the changes

Most councilmembers opposed Lunaparra’s most substantial tenant-protection amendments, according to the story, saying the regulations and potential new fees could discourage property owners from converting ADUs into condos or building them in the first place. The story also says the Berkeley Property Owners Association, a landlord advocacy group, opposed Lunaparra’s proposal.

Councilmember Terry Taplin said he was committed to increasing pathways and opportunities for homeownership, and he described condo conversion as a useful tool while warning against creating impediments that could chill ADU production.

Narrowed amendment fails; ordinance passes 6-1

After the limited support for her broader amendments, Lunaparra pared back her proposal to a single change requiring a three-month “right of first refusal” period for all ADU tenants, not only tenants covered by rent control. The story says that revised amendment narrowly failed: Lunaparra, councilmembers Ben Bartlett and Shoshana O’Keefe, and Mayor Adena Ishii voted in favor, leaving it one vote short of the five needed to pass.

According to the story’s vote breakdown, the amendment was opposed by Taplin, Blackaby, and Mark Humbert. The council then voted 6-1 to approve the ordinance changes without Lunaparra’s amendments, with Lunaparra casting the lone no vote.