Local zoning · Paramount
Paramount — Design Review
Design Review under the Paramount local zoning and planning code, with the controlling citations.
Last reviewed: July 2, 2026
Overview
Paramount’s local rules place design review authority in two bodies: the Development Review Board (for many commercial, industrial, multi‑family, and specialty zones) and the Residential Review Board (for the city’s single‑family/low‑to‑medium residential zones). The code frames design review around compatibility with the zone, protection of adjacent properties, and exterior architectural, landscape, parking, and site‑planning factors (the controlling criteria are listed in § 17.60.040 and § 17.68.040) . For quick cross‑reference on how design decisions interact with technical standards, see Paramount’s guidance on development standards, parking, overlay districts, landscaping and screening, and ADUs. If you are preparing construction documents you will still need to coordinate with the California Building Standards Code (Title 24).
Who reviews what (core code anchors)
- The Development Review Board reviews projects proposed in R-2, R-M, PD-PS, C-3, C-M, M-1, M-2, the central business district, and any specific plan that requires Development Review Board review; see § 17.60.030 for the list and the administrative exceptions the Planning Director may apply .
- The Residential Review Board reviews single‑family residential projects in R-1, R-2, and R-M for compliance with the residential design findings listed in § 17.68.040 .
- ADUs that meet the Chapter 17.104 objective standards are processed ministerially without discretionary design review; see § 17.104.050 (60‑day ministerial timeline) .
- Planned Development / Performance Standards zones (PD‑PS) use a specific plan process and have their own submittal requirements and performance standards in § 17.72.050 and related PD provisions .
District-by-district design‑review focus
Note: the ordinance text sets the review authority and qualitative findings for each board; where detailed dimensional rules per district are not present in the retrieved materials we note that and point to where the code references those standards.
R-1 (One‑Family Residential)
- Purpose: preserve single‑family neighborhood character and conserve property values; Residential Review Board authority over residential structures is created to protect residential character § 17.68.010 and applied to R-1 by § 17.68.030 .
- Typical permitted uses: one‑family dwellings (definition of “dwelling” and “one‑family” present in Title 17) .
- Design review focus: exterior architectural compatibility, setbacks, height, landscaping, fences/walls, and impacts to neighboring properties per the Residential Review Board findings § 17.68.040 .
- Key dimensional standards: Not found in retrieved materials (verify with Chapter 17 residential district tables and development standards). Verify with the jurisdiction.
R-2 (Medium‑Density Residential)
- Purpose: medium‑density housing and multi‑unit compatibility; R-2 is explicitly referenced in ADU and objective design standard cross‑references (see Chapter 17.12 references in § 17.08.130) .
- Typical permitted uses: two‑family and multi‑family residential uses (see Title 17 definitions) .
- Design review focus: subject to either the Residential Review Board or Development Review Board depending on project type and scale; objective design standards in Chapter 17.12 apply for two‑unit/urban lot split projects per § 17.08.130 .
- Key dimensional standards: The ordinance references objective residential design standards at 17.12.080–120 but the specific numeric standards were not retrieved. Verify setbacks, height, lot coverage in Chapter 17.12 and development standards.
R‑M (Multiple‑Family Residential)
- Purpose: higher‑density housing and multi‑unit development; subject to Residential Review Board and Development Review Board depending on the proposal per § 17.68.030 and § 17.60.030 .
- Typical permitted uses: multi‑family dwellings, group dwellings; see Title 17 definitions for “dwelling, multiple” .
- Design review focus: massing, parking and circulation, ingress/egress, landscaping and services (findings list at § 17.60.040) .
- Key dimensional standards: Not found in retrieved materials. Verify Chapter 17 for numeric standards.
C-3 (General Commercial) and C‑M (Commercial‑Manufacturing)
- Purpose: commercial and mixed commercial/industrial uses; Development Review Board review applies to these zones before building permits are issued per § 17.60.030 .
- Typical permitted uses: general retail, services, commercial uses (specific permitted lists not included in retrieved snippets).
- Design review focus: architectural compatibility with surrounding uses, sign placement and design (note signage standards reference), parking and loading layout, landscaping buffers, site circulation § 17.60.040 .
- Key dimensional standards and permitted‑use lists: Not found in retrieved materials. Check district chapters and signage and parking.
M-1 (Light Manufacturing) and M‑2 (Heavy Manufacturing)
- Purpose: industrial uses where site planning and architectural screening are important for adjacent land uses; Development Review Board review is required for building permits in these zones § 17.60.030 .
- Typical permitted uses: manufacturing, warehouses, heavy industrial (exact lists not in retrieved snippets).
- Design review focus: screening of services, location of service areas, circulation for trucks, noise/vibration protection to adjacent uses as spelled out in the findings § 17.60.040 .
- Key dimensional standards: Not found in retrieved materials.
PD‑PS (Planned Development — Performance Standards)
- Purpose: use of a specific plan to achieve design quality beyond standard zoning; the PD‑PS process replaces or supplements standard Title 17 rules and requires a pre‑application conference and submittal of a general development plan § 17.72.010–050 .
- Typical permitted uses: those established by the specific PD ordinance; the PD's ordinance controls rather than generic zone tables § 17.72.010 .
- Design review focus / submittal: required architectural elevations, site plan showing circulation, landscaping, walls/fences, and maintenance methods are explicitly required for PD applications § 17.72.050 .
- Key dimensional standards: PD ordinance and recorded performance standards — verify the specific PD‑PS ordinance for numeric standards.
Central business district & Specific Plan areas
- Projects in the central business district and any specific plan that requires DRB review are subject to Development Review Board review before building permits are issued § 17.60.030 .
- Specific plans may set their own applicability and standards; see the PD and specific plan chapters for site‑specific rules.
Quick decision‑relevant standards (table)
| What the reviewer checks / triggers | Short rule or threshold | Code reference |
|---|---|---|
| Which zones require Development Review Board review | R‑2, R‑M, PD‑PS, C‑3, C‑M, M‑1, M‑2, central business district, or specific plan area-designated review | § 17.60.030 |
| Which zones use Residential Review Board | R‑1, R‑2, R‑M prior to building permit issuance | § 17.68.030 |
| Required findings for design/site approval (compatibility, protection from noise/vibration, setbacks, height, parking, landscaping, GFA) | Reviewer must find the project meets the findings in § 17.60.040 (DRB) or § 17.68.040 (Residential Review Board) | § 17.60.040, § 17.68.040 |
| ADUs — ministerial or discretionary? | ADU/JADU that meet Chapter 17.104 objective standards: ministerial approval within 60 days; otherwise denials must be accompanied by remedy list § 17.104.050 | § 17.104.050 |
| PD‑PS submittal requirements | General development plan, architectural elevations, landscape, parking, walls/fences, maintenance statements | § 17.72.050 |
| Specific technical items sometimes routed to DRB | Satellite dishes and roof/ground antenna installations require Development Review Board approval with scaled site plan/elevations | § 17.44.320 |
Checklist
- Confirm which review board will process the permit: Development Review Board or Residential Review Board per § 17.60.030 and § 17.68.030 .
- Complete site plan showing property lines, setbacks, building footprint, parking layout, vehicular/pedestrian ingress and egress, and service locations (these items are specifically called out in the findings and PD submittal lists) § 17.60.040, § 17.72.050 .
- Architectural elevations and material/finishes schedule (architectural appeal and compatibility is a required finding) § 17.60.040, § 17.68.040 .
- Landscape plan showing buffers, screening, and maintenance method (landscaping is an approval criterion and PD submittal requirement) § 17.60.040, § 17.72.050 .
- Parking and circulation calculations; coordinate with parking standards (first mention of parking linked) and cite § 17.60.040 for review emphasis .
- For ADUs, prepare evidence the unit meets Chapter 17.104 objective standards to preserve ministerial review and 60‑day timeline § 17.104.050 .
- If within a PD‑PS or specific plan area, include a general development plan and the documentation listed in § 17.72.050 .
- If project includes signage or special equipment (e.g., satellite dish), include sign details or antenna elevations per § 17.44.320 and signage guidance .
- Expect an appeal timeline: 10 days from Residential Review Board decisions to Planning Commission and 30 days for DRB appeals to City Council — verify applicable appeal route § 17.68.050, § 17.60.050 .
Risks & Ambiguities
| Issue | Why it matters | What to verify |
|---|---|---|
| Which board reviews my permit (DRB vs Residential Review Board) | The applicable board determines process, required findings, public hearing/notice, and appeal timelines; Planning Director can waive DRB review in some cases § 17.60.030(B) | Confirm zoning of parcel, project scope, and whether the Planning Director has administratively waived review; ask planning staff for formal determination. |
| ADU — objective (ministerial) vs discretionary review | ADUs that meet Chapter 17.104 are ministerial (60‑day rule); discretionary design review may be unlawful delay for compliant ADUs § 17.104.050 | Provide a complete objective‑standards compliance checklist with submittal; verify any additional local objective standards in Chapter 17.104. |
| Numeric dimensional standards per zone (setbacks, FAR, lot coverage, height) | Findings require compatibility with setbacks and height, but the exact numeric standards aren’t visible in retrieved materials and are decisive for approval § 17.60.040, § 17.68.040 | Pull the district‑specific tables in Title 17 (e.g., Chapters for R‑1, R‑2, R‑M, C‑3) or confirm via development standards. |
| Special plans and PD‑PS overrides | PD‑PS ordinances and specific plans can override standard Title 17 rules and set unique approval criteria § 17.72.010–050 | Check whether the parcel is inside a specific plan or PD‑PS area; if so, obtain the PD ordinance. |
| Public notice / hearings and appeal windows | Different boards have different appeal procedures and timeframes (§ 17.68.050 vs § 17.60.050) | Confirm notice area, hearing schedule, and exact appeal deadlines with Planning Department staff. |
| Objective design standards referenced but not retrieved | The code references “objective design standards” for some residential/mixed projects (e.g., Chapter 17.12) but those numeric/objective items were not included in the retrieved materials § 17.08.130 | Request the specific Chapter (17.12 or other cited chapter) text from the City to confirm objective criteria used for ministerial review. |
Plain‑English Summary
If your project is in Paramount, first confirm the zoning: many commercial, industrial, and multi‑family projects must go to the Development Review Board, while single‑family and small residential projects go to the Residential Review Board; both boards must find the design is compatible with the neighborhood on factors like setbacks, height, parking, and landscaping before a building permit is issued (see § 17.60.040 and § 17.68.040) . Accessory dwelling units that meet the city’s objective ADU rules are handled ministerially and are not subject to discretionary design review § 17.104.050 .
Source References
- § 17.60.030 (Development Review Board powers — zones that trigger DRB review)
- § 17.60.040 (DRB findings and conditions of permit approval)
- § 17.60.050 (Appeals from Development Review Board decisions)
- § 17.68.010–050 (Residential Review Board creation, powers, findings, appeals)
- § 17.72.010–050 (PD‑PS zone purpose, pre‑application, submittal items)
- § 17.72.050 (PD application content: site plan, elevations, landscaping, maintenance)
- § 17.44.320 (Satellite dish/antenna — DRB submittal requirements)
- § 17.08.130 (Two‑unit residential developments / applicability of Chapter 17.12 objective design standards)
- § 17.104.030, § 17.104.040, § 17.104.050 (ADU definitions, permitted locations, ministerial application requirements)
Sources
Retrieved passages
- Paramount Zoning Code (§ 44-227) High relevance
- Paramount Zoning Code (§ 44-228) High relevance
- Paramount Zoning Code (title or) Medium relevance
- Paramount Zoning Code (§ 44-28.2) Medium relevance
- Paramount Zoning Code Medium relevance
- Paramount Zoning Code (§ 44-211) Medium relevance
- Paramount Zoning Code Medium relevance
- Paramount Zoning Code (§ 44-225) Medium relevance
Cited sections
- § 17.60.030 (Development Review Board powers — zones that trigger DRB review) (§ 17.60.030)
- § 17.60.040 (DRB findings and conditions of permit approval) (§ 17.60.040)
- § 17.60.050 (Appeals from Development Review Board decisions) (§ 17.60.050)
- § 17.68.010–050 (Residential Review Board creation, powers, findings, appeals) (§ 17.68.010)
- § 17.72.010–050 (PD‑PS zone purpose, pre‑application, submittal items) (§ 17.72.010)
- § 17.72.050 (PD application content: site plan, elevations, landscaping, maintenance) (§ 17.72.050)
- § 17.44.320 (Satellite dish/antenna — DRB submittal requirements) (§ 17.44.320)
- § 17.08.130 (Two‑unit residential developments / applicability of Chapter 17.12 objective design standards) (§ 17.08.130)
- § 17.104.030, § 17.104.040, § 17.104.050 (ADU definitions, permitted locations, ministerial application requirements) (§ 17.104.030)
- Paramount_ZoningCode.md
Frequently asked questions
Do I need design review in Paramount?
If your parcel is in R‑2, R‑M, PD‑PS, C‑3, C‑M, M‑1, M‑2, the central business district, or a specific plan area that requires review, the Development Review Board reviews building permits prior to issuance; Residential Review Board review applies in R‑1, R‑2, and R‑M for residential structures — see § 17.60.030 and § 17.68.030 .
What findings do reviewers use to approve or deny a design?
The boards must find the proposal will not be detrimental to the zone’s character, will protect adjacent structures from noise/vibration, and will be compatible in setbacks, building height, parking/ingress/egress, service locations, walls, landscaping, and gross floor area — see § 17.60.040 (DRB) and § 17.68.040 (Residential Review Board) .
Are ADUs subject to discretionary design review in Paramount?
ADUs and JADUs that conform to Chapter 17.104 objective standards are processed ministerially and are not subject to discretionary board design review; the City must approve or deny within 60 days or the application is deemed approved — see § 17.104.050 .
What must I include in a PD‑PS (Planned Development) application?
A PD‑PS application must include a legal description or boundary, a general development plan with land ownership, proposed uses, dimensions and locations of structures, circulation, open space and landscaping, architectural drawings, and wall/fence heights plus maintenance methods per § 17.72.050 .
Can the Planning Director waive Development Review Board review?
Yes. The Planning Director has authority to waive DRB approvals in certain cases; when waivers are granted, Section 17.60.040’s spirit should still be observed for conditions of permit approval — see § 17.60.030(B) .
What are the appeal timelines for board decisions?
For Residential Review Board decisions, interested parties may appeal to the Planning Commission within 10 days of the Board decision § 17.68.050; for Development Review Board decisions, appeals to the City Council must be filed within 30 days § 17.60.050 .
Does Paramount require DRB review for satellite dishes or antennas?
Yes — satellite dish installations require Development Review Board approval and must include a scaled site plan, elevations, manufacturer specs, and photographs per § 17.44.320 .
Where are the “objective design standards” that can allow ministerial review?
The code references objective residential design standards in Title 17 (for example, Chapter 17.12 for R‑2 applications via § 17.08.130). The numeric/objective standards themselves were not included in the retrieved materials — verify Chapter 17.12 and Chapter 17.104 with the City for the exact criteria .
More in Paramount code
Ask about any Paramount property
Get a cited, plain-English answer on Paramount zoning, setbacks, FAR, ADUs and permits — for any address.
Start Free Trial