Local zoning · Chico

Chico — Design Review

Design Review under the Chico local zoning and planning code, with the controlling citations.

Last reviewed: July 1, 2026

Overview

Design review in Chico is administered through the City’s Site Design and Architectural Review chapter and applies citywide to most projects that require building permits, with specific rules for ministerial infill projects, planned developments, and airport-area projects. The Architectural Review and Historic Preservation Board (ARHPB), the Director, or the Planning Commission carry out reviews depending on the type and discretion level of the proposal. Key authorities and exemptions are in Chapter 19.18 of the Chico Municipal Code (site design and architectural review). § 19.18.010–§ 19.18.070 explain purpose, applicability, review authorities, findings, and infill rules.

Note: this page focuses strictly on what Chico’s zoning/planning ordinance says about design/site/architectural review (Chapter 19.18 and closely related sections). For building-code requirements see the California Building Standards Code (/us/california/building-codes). This page links to related Chico topic pages where the ordinance references them, for practical cross-checking.

How Chico’s design-review system works (key ordinance provisions)

Applicability: Most projects that require a building permit must obtain site plan and architectural design review prior to permit issuance unless an express exemption applies. See § 19.18.020.
Review authority: Site plan and architectural design review for projects requiring only a building permit are carried out by the Architectural Review and Historic Preservation Board (ARHPB) or the Director; projects that also need discretionary permits are reviewed by the ARHPB or Director prior to Planning Commission or City Council consideration. See § 19.18.024.
Minor projects and director review: The Director can approve minor projects (examples listed in the code) without ARHPB review; the Director may also refer a minor project to ARHPB if aesthetic implications warrant. See § 19.18.030.
Exemptions: Site design and architectural review is expressly not required for most single‑family dwellings and accessory structures — with important exceptions (infill flag lots, projects subject to planned development permits, and certain other circumstances). See § 19.18.040.
Application timing & procedure: Applicants must apply for project review with or before a building-permit application; the review authority compares plans to the city’s development standards, design guidelines, and other ordinances and can approve, condition, or deny. See § 19.18.050.
Findings: For non-infill projects, approval requires findings about consistency with the General Plan, design guidelines, neighborhood compatibility, landscape, and other design elements. See § 19.18.060.
Streamlined infill process: Multi‑unit infill residential projects that meet objective criteria (parcel is legal, at least two units, 75% of perimeter adjoins developed urban uses, etc.) may qualify for a ministerial (objective) approval process if they meet all objective standards. See § 19.18.070.
Appeals and final authority: Architectural/design review decisions by ARHPB or the Director are subject to appeal routes established in the review-authority table (Table 2-1); specific appeal paths depend on whether the decision is administrative or tied to a discretionary permit. See § 19.12.020 Table 2‑1.

Related Chico topic cross-links (first natural mentions in the text): the code routinely cross-references development standards, parking, overlay districts, landscaping and screening, ADUs, historic preservation, and the state California Building Standards Code when evaluating projects.

District-by-district breakdown (where the ordinance calls out special rules)

Below are Chico districts and zone types where the zoning code specifically attaches or modifies design-review requirements. Each subsection states the ordinance trigger/purpose, typical uses, development standards that control design review outcomes, and where the district applies (as stated or implied in the code).

Airport zoning districts — A, AP, AM, AC

Purpose & trigger: Projects in airport zoning districts must obtain site design and architectural review before any building permit is issued; review must comply with Chapter 19.18 and with the Chico Municipal Airport and Industrial Park Development Plan and the City of Chico Design Guidelines Manual. See § 19.48.070(A)–(D).
Typical uses: Aeronautical, airport support, light industrial and industrial park uses (per airport development plan and zone tables elsewhere in Division IV). See § 19.48.010 and related airport-zone text.
Key standards that drive design review: compatibility with adjacent properties, retention of natural features, parking and loading relationships, landscape and screening of service areas, lighting locations to avoid aviation interference, and other airport-plan-specific requirements. See § 19.48.070(D).
Where it applies: The airport zoning chapter covers designated airport zones referenced in § 19.40.010 and is distinct from general industrial zones; refer to Chapter 19.48 for precise mapping.

Planned Development overlay — -PD

Purpose & trigger: Properties rezoned to add the -PD overlay are developed under an approved Planned Development Permit; such applications are reviewed for design and forwarded to ARHPB or Director as part of project review in compliance with Chapter 19.18. See § 19.28.040–§ 19.28.050.
Typical uses: Customized mixed-use or single-use developments approved by PDP; PDs may deviate from standard setbacks, heights, parking, and open-space rules subject to the approved development plan. See § 19.28.040(A)–(D).
Key dimensional standards that matter for design review: Setbacks, height, parking counts and configurations, open space requirements (25% minimum unless modified in the PDP); ARHPB/Commission reviews site layout, materials, landscaping, circulation. See § 19.28.040 and § 19.28.050.
Where it applies: Any property rezoned to include the -PD suffix; PDs are noted on zoning maps when adopted. See § 19.28.010–.040.

Traditional Neighborhood Development (TND) designations — NE, NG, NC, CORE, SD

Purpose & trigger: TND designations come with frontage and height rules intended to shape the public realm; design-review references for TND projects are in Chapter 19.84 and related TND tables and require conformance with the adopted regulating plans and design standards—design-review authorities follow Chapter 19.18. See § 19.84.010–.020 and Table 6‑2.
Typical uses: Transect-based mixed uses, residential densities and frontages per TND regulating plan; specific allowable uses depend on the TND designation and regulating plan. See Chapter 19.84 and related TND chapters.
Key dimensional standards: Maximum building heights by TND designation (e.g., NE up to 2 stories/35 ft, CORE up to 4 stories/65 ft as in Table 6‑2); allowed frontage types are specified by TND designation and guide design-review expectations. See Table 6‑2 and § 19.84.020–.030.
Where it applies: Properties mapped with TND designations in Division VI/Chapter 19.84 and on official regulating plans.

Residential districts — R‑1, R‑2, RS (and infill/residential exceptions)

Purpose & trigger: The ordinance generally exempts single‑family dwellings (including manufactured homes) and accessory structures from site design and architectural review, but contains important exceptions: infill residential flag lots and projects requiring a planned development permit remain subject to review. See § 19.18.040(A) and § 19.18.070 (infill residential criteria).
Typical uses: Single‑family homes, duplex/triplex/multi‑family where allowed; multi‑family developments remain subject to design review unless they qualify for the infill ministerial pathway. See § 19.18.040 and § 19.18.070.
Key dimensional standards that affect review: lot coverage, setbacks, height limits, and in some infill situations special setback/height rules (see Table 5‑14 for infill flag-lot setback rules) — these standards are applied during the design-review comparison to adopted guidelines. See § 19.18.050, § 19.18.070, and Table 5‑14.
Where it applies: All residentially zoned parcels, with the exemptions above. Confirm parcel status and any overlay zones. Verify with the jurisdiction for parcel-specific applicability.

Manufacturing / Industrial and Special Purpose Zones (e.g., IOMU, DN, SPA, PQ)

Purpose & trigger: Industrial and special-purpose zones have performance and design standards (noise, glare, screening, landscaping) and refer projects back to the site design/architectural review process where applicable; airport-area industrial sites have separate airport design-review provisions (see above). See Chapter 19.46 and Chapter 19.50.
Typical uses: Industrial, manufacturing, public/quasi-public, and SPA mixed-use as mapped. See relevant zone chapters.
Key standards that drive design review: landscaping and screening minimums (see Chapter 19.68), performance standards on emissions and screening (Chapter 19.46), and zone-specific design manuals or development plans. See § 19.46.040 and § 19.68.030–.040.

Quick reference table — decision-relevant design-review triggers and authorities

Decision-relevant item	When it triggers design review / who decides	Code Reference
Site plan & architectural design review required for building permits (general rule)	Applies to projects requiring building permits unless exempt; ARHPB, Planning Commission or Director depending on project	§ 19.18.020, § 19.18.024
Exemptions — single-family dwellings & accessory structures (with exceptions)	Single-family homes exempt except infill flag-lot units or projects under PD permit	§ 19.18.040
Minor projects (Director may approve)	Director may approve minor projects (listed examples: signs, accessory units, small additions, duplex/triplex meeting standards)	§ 19.18.030
Application & comparison to standards/design guidelines	Applicant files project review with/ before building permit; plans compared to standards and City Design Guidelines	§ 19.18.050, § 19.18.030(C)
Infill residential ministerial process	Multi‑unit infill meeting objective criteria → streamlined/ministerial approval if all objective standards met	§ 19.18.070
Airport-area projects	No building permit until site design & architectural review under Chapter 19.18 and Airport Development Plan/Design Guidelines	§ 19.48.070
Appeals and review authority ladder	Appeals and decision authority listed in Table 2‑1; ARHPB/Director decisions have specified appeal paths	§ 19.12.020 Table 2‑1

Checklist — what an applicant must provide or satisfy for a Chico design-review application

Submit a complete project review application with or before the building‑permit application in accordance with § 19.18.050.
Provide site plans, elevations, materials and color samples, landscape plan (conceptual landscape plan required with land use entitlements per § 19.68.030), parking layout and circulation diagrams, and any lighting/screening details — the review authority compares these to development standards and City design guidelines (§ 19.18.050; § 19.68.030–.040).
Demonstrate consistency with objective development standards (setbacks, heights, lot coverage, parking) and with any applicable PD, TND, or airport development plan standards; supply special studies if required (e.g., grading, traffic) per project type (§ 19.28.050; § 19.84.020; § 19.48.070).
If seeking infill ministerial approval, provide documentation demonstrating satisfaction of all infill criteria in § 19.18.070 (site is legal parcel, perimeter development percentage, objective compliance, etc.).
If your project is minor and you intend Director review, confirm the project meets the minor-project examples list in § 19.18.030 or be prepared for a Director referral to ARHPB.
Expect written findings or conditions with any approval or denial; appeals follow the paths in § 19.12.020 Table 2‑1.

Risks & Ambiguities

Issue	Why it matters	What to verify
Does a proposed single‑family project need design review?	The code exempts single‑family dwellings but makes exceptions (infill flag lots, PD projects); misreading leads to delays or extra hearings	Verify whether the parcel is an infill flag lot, within a PD, or subject to other overlays; see § 19.18.040 and § 19.18.070.
Who decides — Director vs ARHPB vs Commission?	Decision body affects timeline, public hearing requirement, and appeal path	Confirm whether the proposal is “minor” per § 19.18.030, or requires a discretionary permit (see § 19.18.024). If in doubt, request a preliminary design concept review.
Design Guidelines content and mandatory vs advisory treatment	The code references a City Design Guidelines Manual; reliance on subjective guidelines can create uncertainty	The Design Guidelines Manual is referenced in multiple sections (e.g., § 19.18.030(C)) but the manual text was not included in the retrieved materials — obtain the manual and confirm whether guidelines are advisory or adopted as mandatory standards. Not found in retrieved materials.
Exact thresholds for “minor” projects	The code lists examples but leaves room for Director discretion; disagreement may escalate to ARHPB	Verify early with Planning staff and, if helpful, request a preliminary design concept review under § 19.18.030 and § 19.18.050(D).
Parcel-specific overlays or TND/regulating plan requirements	Overlays and TND regulations can supersede or add to review criteria	Check current zoning map for -PD, TND, airport, Historic Overlay, or other overlays and read the relevant Chapter (e.g., 19.28 for PD, 19.84 for TND).

Plain-English Summary

If you’re planning new construction or an exterior change in Chico, expect the city to compare your plans against its design standards and adopted design guidelines before issuing a building permit — the ARHPB, the Director, or the Planning Commission will review depending on project type; single‑family homes are generally exempt but there are common exceptions (infill flag lots, planned developments), and airport-area, PD, and TND projects have special design-review rules. See § 19.18.020–§ 19.18.070 and the airport and PD chapters for specifics.

Source References

Chico Municipal Code — Chapter 19.18 (Site Design and Architectural Review): § 19.18.010 – § 19.18.070.
Chico Municipal Code — Review Authority: § 19.18.024 (review authority) and § 19.18.030 (minor projects).
Chico Municipal Code — Application requirements & procedures: § 19.18.050 (application procedures; factors considered).
Chico Municipal Code — Findings for non-infill projects: § 19.18.060.
Chico Municipal Code — Infill residential projects (ministerial path): § 19.18.070 and related infill setback table (Table 5‑14).
Chico Municipal Code — Airport zones and site design/architectural review for airport projects: § 19.48.070.
Chico Municipal Code — Planned Development chapter (permit requirements, review): § 19.28.040 – § 19.28.060.
Chico Municipal Code — Appeal subjects and jurisdiction (Table 2‑1): § 19.12.020.
Chico Municipal Code — Landscape plan requirements and landscape installation relevant to design review: § 19.68.030 – § 19.68.040.

(Design Guidelines Manual referenced repeatedly in the code but the manual text was not included in the retrieved ordinance excerpts — obtain the manual from the City for guideline language and illustrations. Not found in retrieved materials.)

Sources

Retrieved passages

Chico Zoning Code (§2) High relevance
Chico Zoning Code (Chapter 19.18) High relevance
Chico Zoning Code (Chapter 19.28) High relevance
Chico Zoning Code (§13) High relevance
Chico Zoning Code (Section 19.60.090) High relevance
Chico Zoning Code (§30) Medium relevance
Chico Zoning Code (Chapter 19.18) Medium relevance
Chico Zoning Code (§390) Medium relevance

Cited sections

Official Chico code library

Frequently asked questions

Do I need design review in Chico for a remodel of my single‑family house?

Most ordinary single‑family dwelling repairs and accessory structures are exempt from site design and architectural review, but there are important exceptions — notably if the house is on an infill residential flag lot or the project is part of a planned development. Check § 19.18.040 and the infill rules in § 19.18.070 and confirm with Planning staff if your parcel is an infill flag lot or within a PD overlay.

What triggers design review for commercial or multi‑family projects?

Any commercial or multi‑family project that requires a building permit typically triggers site plan and architectural design review unless specifically exempted; the review authority compares plans against development standards and the City’s adopted design guidelines and may be ARHPB, Director, or Planning Commission depending on whether the project is discretionary. See § 19.18.020, § 19.18.024, and § 19.18.050.

What is the “infill residential” ministerial pathway?

A multi‑unit residential infill project that meets objective criteria (two or more units, legal parcel, at least 75% of the site perimeter adjoins developed urban uses, and full compliance with objective standards) can be processed ministerially (streamlined) rather than through discretionary design review. The criteria and process are in § 19.18.070.

Who makes the final decision on design review and how do appeals work?

For projects requiring only building permits, the ARHPB or Director is the final approval authority; for projects tied to discretionary permits, ARHPB or Director review is provided before the Planning Commission or Council takes final action. Appeal paths are set in Table 2‑1 (see § 19.12.020).

What special rules apply if my property is in the airport zone?

No building permit for airport-zone projects may be issued until the project has obtained site design and architectural review complying with Chapter 19.18 and the Chico Municipal Airport and Industrial Park Development Plan and City Design Guidelines Manual; airport review has additional factors like aviation-safe lighting and retaining natural features (see § 19.48.070).

Does the City provide guidelines I must follow during design review?

Yes — the ARHPB, Commission and Director refer to the City of Chico Design Guidelines Manual in applying design review; the code specifically requires reference to adopted design guidelines in § 19.18.030(C). The design guidelines manual itself should be obtained from the City for the details (the manual text was not included in the retrieved materials).

What landscape or parking documentation is required with a design‑review application?

Any land‑use entitlement requiring new landscaping must submit a conceptual landscape plan with the application and a final landscape package for the building permit; parking layouts and compliance with Chapter 19.70 (parking standards) will be reviewed as part of site design and architectural review. See § 19.68.030–.040 and § 19.18.050.

If the Director denies a “minor” project, can I appeal?

Yes — Director decisions on minor design-review items may be appealed to the Architectural Review and Historic Preservation Board; ARHPB decisions in certain circumstances are appealable as provided in Table 2‑1 (§ 19.12.020).

Will design review protect me from seeing a new taller building nearby?

Design review requires findings about compatibility of scale, massing, and character with surrounding development; however, the code allows exceptions through PDs or discretionary approvals where findings are made. Compatibility findings are part of § 19.18.060. Verify specifics with the Planning Department if view protection is a concern.

Where do I start — application intake or preliminary review?

Start with a preliminary design concept review (optional) to get early guidance on applicable standards, design guidelines, and whether your project will be considered minor or discretionary; the preliminary consultation procedure is noted in § 19.18.050(D). ---

Ask about any Chico property

Get a cited, plain-English answer on Chico zoning, setbacks, FAR, ADUs and permits — for any address.

Start Free Trial