Grand Terrace — Design Review

Last reviewed: July 2, 2026

Overview

Grand Terrace's local code handles design review under a consolidated Site and Architectural Review framework (commonly called design review). The rules live primarily in Chapter 18.63 (Site and Architectural Review) and a complementary set of objective design standards for multifamily/mixed‑use in Chapter 18.64; both explain when review is required, the three review levels, findings required for approval, application contents, and appeals. See the city's zoning rules for how design review interacts with parking, setbacks and other standards. § 18.63.010, § 18.63.020, § 18.64.010 .

Note: this page interprets and synthesizes the local ordinance language; always verify with the Community Development Director for parcel‑specific questions.

How Grand Terrace organizes design (site & architectural) review

• The purpose and scope of the city's design review programme are in § 18.63.010 and § 18.63.030: the program reviews site planning (setbacks, parking, circulation, landscaping, grading, public safety, etc.) and architectural matters (style, materials, colors, massing, signage) to ensure consistency with the zoning title and General Plan. § 18.63.010, § 18.63.030 .

• There are three application/review tracks: land use application, administrative site and architectural review, and site and architectural review (public hearing). The code lists which projects fall into each track and gives examples of items that can be handled by staff versus the Site and Architectural Review Board. § 18.63.020 .

• Multifamily residential and mixed‑use with residential are also governed by an Objective Design Standards chapter; projects that meet those objective standards can qualify for a ministerial (non‑discretionary) path. Deviations from those objective standards trigger discretionary review under Chapter 18.63. § 18.64.010, § 18.64.020 .

• Typical submittal requirements, routing, and completeness review are set out in § 18.63.040; fees and additional submittal items are determined by the Director on a case‑by‑case basis. § 18.63.040 .

(For how design review ties into parking rules, see the city's parking chapter linked below; design review explicitly considers parking and circulation as part of its scope.) § 18.63.030 .

District‑by‑district breakdown (where and how design review applies)

Below are the Grand Terrace districts where the code explicitly ties to Chapter 18.63 and the most relevant local design requirements found in the retrieved ordinance. For each district I list the purpose of the district (as stated in the code or inferred from the code headings), the kinds of uses subject to design review, and the most decision‑relevant dimensional/development notes that appear in the ordinance excerpts we retrieved. Where a precise numeric standard was not available in the retrieved text, I flag that as an information gap.

• R-1 (Single‑Family Residential)

  • Purpose / typical uses: single‑family dwellings and accessory residential structures. The code treats modest residential additions and accessory structures as potentially approvable at the Director level but still ties many residential actions to the land‑use/architectural review framework. § 18.63.020.B .
  • Design review triggers: land use application is required for any new construction over 6 ft in height and for many renovations that change use, size, capacity, or access; certain small additions (< 500 sq ft in R‑1) can be approved administratively if materials match the existing building. § 18.63.020.B.1, § 18.63.020.B.2.d .
  • Key standards to watch: front/setback and other dimensional standards are governed by the applicable zoning district development standards (see the Development Standards chapter). Verify the exact numeric front, side, and rear setbacks with Chapter 18.10/development standards. Not all numeric setback tables appear in the retrieved excerpts. Verify with the jurisdiction.

• R-3 / R3‑24 Overlay (Multifamily / higher‑density option)

  • Purpose / typical uses: R-3 allows multifamily housing; the R3‑24 overlay offers an optional 20–24 units per acre density for affordable housing when the owner opts in. § 18.48.010, § 18.48.020 .
  • Design review triggers: multifamily developments are subject to the Objective Design Standards in Chapter 18.64; if a project complies with those objective standards and all zoning district regulations it may be eligible for ministerial review (no discretionary design hearing). If the applicant chooses deviations from the objective standards the project becomes discretionary and is reviewed under Chapter 18.63. § 18.64.010.C .
  • Key standards: Objective Design Standards require LEED‑equivalent sustainability targets for multifamily (including a LEED Platinum or equivalent requirement for multifamily projects), site design rules for at‑grade parking, setbacks to mitigate privacy impacts (including a 15‑foot setback in some adjacencies) and landscape privacy screening requirements (e.g., 10‑foot landscaped setback and 20 ft trees) — these are in § 18.64.040–060. § 18.64.040, § 18.64.060, § 18.64.050 .

• CM (Commercial / Mixed Commercial)

  • Purpose / typical uses: commercial/manufacturing‑commercial mix (nonresidential table references). The CM district explicitly requires site and architectural review under Chapter 18.63. § 18.36.090 .
  • Design review triggers: any development in CM is subject to Chapter 18.63; see § 18.63.030 for the scope (parking, circulation, landscaping, signage, loading, materials/colors). § 18.36.090, § 18.63.030 .
  • Key standards: off‑street parking must conform to Chapter 18.60; signage and screening are design considerations. (Exact lot/dimensional numbers for CM must be verified in the development standards chapter — not reproduced in the retrieved excerpts.)

• MR (Restricted Manufacturing)

  • Purpose / typical uses: low‑intensity, low‑impact light manufacturing and industrial uses designed to avoid nuisances. § 18.39.010–.020 .
  • Design review triggers: MR sites are processed with the site development standards and Chapter 18.63 procedures for significant projects. The MR site development standards table appears in the code and lists numeric lot minimums (for example, minimum lot area 20,000 sq ft, lot width 70 ft, lot depth 100 ft in § 18.39.050). § 18.39.050 .
  • Key standards: uses and conditional uses are listed in the nonresidential use table referenced by § 18.39.020–.030; design review will focus on screening, setbacks, and ensuring no nuisance. § 18.39.020–.030 .

• PUB (Public Facilities/Institutional)

  • Purpose / typical uses: public buildings, utilities, institutional uses. The PUB district explicitly calls out that the provisions of Chapter 18.63 apply. § 18.43.080 .
  • Design review triggers: any PUB district development is to follow Chapter 18.63. § 18.43.080 .
  • Key standards: public projects still must meet the findings of § 18.63.060 and may require public hearing notice under § 18.63.050. § 18.63.060, § 18.63.050 .

If a particular zoning district you care about is not listed above, verify by checking the district chapter for a cross‑reference to Chapter 18.63 (many district chapters include an explicit "Site and architectural review" subsection). Examples above show how the code repeats that pattern. See district references § 18.36.090, § 18.39.050, § 18.43.080, and § 18.48.040 for explicit cross‑references. .

Quick reference table — most decision‑relevant rules (excerpt)

Practical guidance and interpretation

• "Do I need design review?" — Start with the project's scope: if it is new construction > 6 ft in height, increases building size or changes use/intensity, or is a multifamily/mixed‑use project, the project will trigger at least a land use application and many will require administrative or formal site & architectural review. § 18.63.020.B.1 .

• Multifamily projects: design review is handled differently if the project meets objective standards in Chapter 18.64 — meeting those standards can enable a ministerial (non‑discretionary) route and potentially avoid a public hearing; choosing deviations will cause discretionary review. § 18.64.010.C .

• Staff vs. board: many accessory or modest residential alterations (sunrooms, some ground‑floor additions < 500 sq ft in R‑1, satellite dishes that are screened properly, playhouses meeting the criteria) can be approved by the Planning Director without the full board; larger projects go to the Site & Architectural Review Board or Commission. § 18.63.020.B.2, § 18.63.020.C .

• Findings and conditions: approval requires the seven findings in § 18.63.060, and approvals commonly include conditions to secure those findings (landscaping, materials, screening, maintenance of common areas). Expect conditions addressing circulation, parking, and landscaping. § 18.63.060 .

• Appeals and timeline: Site & Architectural Review Board decisions can be appealed to the City Council within 10 calendar days; administrative decisions can be appealed to the Planning Commission also within 10 days. Be mindful of appeal deadlines and mail/notice requirements in § 18.63.070. § 18.63.070 .

Practical cross‑references (first mention of related topics linked here): the design review process will require you to check the city's rules on parking, development standards, overlay districts, ADUs, landscaping and screening, and signage. For building code compliance you must still meet the California Building Standards Code.

Checklist (what an applicant must satisfy for a typical design review submittal)

• Determine review track: land use, administrative, or full Site & Architectural Review per § 18.63.020.
• Complete application form and pay fees as set by the Director / fee schedule (fees are assessed per project type) — see § 18.63.040.
• Provide site plan(s) showing building placement, setbacks, lot coverage, parking layout, driveways/ingress/egress, pedestrian routes and sidewalks — scope specified in § 18.63.030.
• Provide architectural elevations (materials, colors, fenestration) and sign locations per § 18.63.030.B.
• Landscaping plan (showing screening, trees, water‑efficient design where applicable) — Chapter 18.64 and Chapter 15.56 references apply for multifamily. § 18.63.030, § 18.64.040
• Any technical studies requested by the Director (traffic, drainage, stormwater management, biological/historic review, parking management plan) — Director may require per § 18.63.040 and § 18.64.020.D.
• For multifamily/mixed‑use, document compliance with objective ODS standards (or identify deviations) — § 18.64.010.C.
• If applicable, record affordable housing covenants for R3‑24 overlay projects before permits (§ 18.48.050).

Risks & Ambiguities

Plain‑English Summary

If you build or change anything that affects the look, placement, or intensity of use in Grand Terrace, Chapter 18.63 controls whether your project needs a staff review, administrative approval, or a public hearing; multifamily projects have extra objective standards where meeting those rules can speed approval. Check the specific district chapter to see how Chapter 18.63 is applied to your parcel and get the Director's checklist early. § 18.63.020, § 18.64.010 .

Source References

• Grand Terrace Municipal Code — Chapter 18.63 (Site and Architectural Review): § 18.63.010, § 18.63.020, § 18.63.030, § 18.63.040, § 18.63.050, § 18.63.060, § 18.63.070, § 18.63.080.
• Grand Terrace Municipal Code — Chapter 18.64 (Objective Design Standards for multifamily/mixed‑use): § 18.64.010–.080 (purpose, applicability, sustainability, site and building design).
• R3‑24 Overlay district: § 18.48.010–.060 (density, applicability, review procedures, affordable housing covenant).
• CM and MR district excerpts: § 18.36.090, § 18.39.010–.050 (application of site & architectural review and MR site standards).
• PUB district cross‑reference: § 18.43.080 (application of Chapter 18.63).

(These citations reference the retrieved Grand Terrace zoning code excerpts supplied for this research.)

Retrieved passages

• Grand Terrace Zoning Code (Chapter 18.63) High relevance show source text
• Grand Terrace Zoning Code (Title and) High relevance show source text
• CFC § 4 (Chapter may) High relevance show source text
• CFC § 5 (Chapter is) High relevance show source text
• Grand Terrace Zoning Code (§ 1) High relevance show source text
• Grand Terrace Zoning Code (Section 18.63.070.) High relevance show source text
• Grand Terrace Zoning Code (§ 1) High relevance show source text
• Grand Terrace Zoning Code (Chapter 18.63) High relevance show source text

Cited sections

• Grand Terrace Municipal Code — Chapter 18.63 (Site and Architectural Review): **§ 18.63.010**, **§ 18.63.020**, **§ 18.63.030**, **§ 18.63.040**, **§ 18.63.050**, **§ 18.63.060**, **§ 18.63.070**, **§ 18.63.080**. (Chapter 18.63)
• Grand Terrace Municipal Code — Chapter 18.64 (Objective Design Standards for multifamily/mixed‑use): **§ 18.64.010–.080** (purpose, applicability, sustainability, site and building design). (Chapter 18.64)
• R3‑24 Overlay district: **§ 18.48.010–.060** (density, applicability, review procedures, affordable housing covenant). (§ 18.48.010)
• CM and MR district excerpts: **§ 18.36.090**, **§ 18.39.010–.050** (application of site & architectural review and MR site standards). (§ 18.36.090)
• PUB district cross‑reference: **§ 18.43.080** (application of Chapter 18.63). (§ 18.43.080)
• GrandTerrace_ZoningCode.md

• Official Grand Terrace code library