Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing Adu topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Calistoga council pauses ADU ordinance after heated debate over fees, meters and height limits
Summary
Councilmembers and residents raised strong concerns about separate-meter requirements, possible new sewer laterals and an estimated connection fee of roughly 18,000 for new accessory dwelling units (ADUs); the council voted to continue the ordinance to give staff time to return with alternatives and clarifications.
Calistoga’s City Council on Monday paused consideration of an amended zoning ordinance for accessory dwelling units after substantial public comment and council scrutiny focused on connection fees, utility hookups and dimensional standards.
Planning Director Greg Desmond told the council the ordinance aims to align municipal code with state ADU rules and to clarify service‑connection fees and related public‑health safeguards. Public works Director Derek Rayner and other staff emphasized the goal is to prevent failing sewer laterals and to ensure customers pay their fair share of a finite water and wastewater system.
Residents and council members pushed back on several particulars. A member of the public described converting a garage to a JADU only because she could tap into existing infrastructure; others warned that new mandatory separate meters and laterals would make small ADU projects cost‑prohibitive. Rayner estimated a connection fee in many cases at “approximately 18,000” for a new detached ADU, which council members said could deter the kind of small infill the city wants to encourage.
Councilmembers also questioned an 18‑foot height limit for detached ADUs and asked for clarification about the definition of an “attachment” (whether a breezeway counts). Some members urged case‑by‑case exemptions; others sought a package of fee reductions or incentives that could offset upfront costs.
Given those concerns, Councilmember Gift moved — and Councilmember Cooper seconded — to continue the item so staff could return with clearer language and options (including possible phased payments, exemptions and incentives). The motion passed on roll call: Eisenberg, Cooper and Gift voted yes; Vice Mayor Lopez Ortega voted no; Mayor Williams voted yes.
The continuation means staff will work with the planning commission, the housing advisory committee and the new planning director to craft clearer exemptions and possible incentive packages before the council schedules a second reading.
