Sacramento County — Design Review

Last reviewed: July 6, 2026

Overview

In unincorporated Sacramento County, “Design Review” is the County’s formal review of site, building, and landscape design against the Countywide Design Guidelines and applicable zoning standards. It applies across zoning districts whenever a project needs certain approvals, with clear exceptions and tiered levels of review under the Sacramento Zoning Code (SZC) Title IV, Chapter 6.3.2 . This page explains what triggers Design Review, who reviews it, how it ties to underlying Sacramento County Zoning and Development Standards, and the district/area nuances that matter in unincorporated areas.

Bottom line: if your project in the unincorporated areas needs a discretionary entitlement (use permit, subdivision map, etc.), it will be subject to Design Review to check against the Countywide Design Guidelines, unless an explicit exception applies under § 6.3.2.A.3 .

How Design Review works in unincorporated areas

• What is reviewed and why

  • The County checks discretionarily and non-discretionarily reviewed projects for “substantial compliance” with the Countywide Design Guidelines and may recommend modifications to achieve compliance (§ 6.3.2.A, § 6.3.2.F) .
  • If a conflict arises between other code provisions and § 6.3.2 or the Countywide Design Guidelines, § 6.3.2 prevails (§ 6.3.2.G) .

• What triggers Design Review

  • Discretionary projects: Any commercial, industrial, residential, mixed‑use, institutional, or public works project requiring discretionary entitlement(s) is subject to Design Review, regardless of zoning district (§ 6.3.2.A.1) .
  • Non‑discretionary projects: Building/sign permits, staff-level Development Plan Approvals, and improvement plans that construct or reconstruct parking lots or establish new commercial/industrial land use are also subject to Design Review, with listed exceptions (§ 6.3.2.A.2, A.3) .

• Exceptions (common carve-outs)

  • Examples include: wall signs and sign modifications that conform to current standards; interior-only improvements; ADA upgrades with no significant site/facade impacts; Accessory I solar; rooftop Accessory II solar; EV charging stations; certain SB 9/SB 1123 lot splits; minor mobile home park expansions (§ 6.3.2.A.3) .

• Single-family and small-lot subdivision specifics

  • For single-family and lot division scenarios, Design Review applicability is controlled by Table 6.2. For example: residential subdivisions of 20+ lots in RD‑10 or greater require map-level Design Review (site); subdivisions of 20+ lots in RD‑7 or less require map-level (site) and building/landscape Design Review before building permit; new homes on existing lots are typically “NR” (not required) for site/plot but may be “COA” (if conditioned) for building/landscape (§ 6.3.2.A and Table 6.2) .

• Levels of review and thresholds

  • Incidental, Minor, and Major Design Review levels apply to both discretionary and non‑discretionary projects (§ 6.3.2.B). Examples: awnings/decks/sheds are typically Incidental; facade improvements or one single‑family home are Minor; new commercial/industrial/institutional/mixed‑use and multi‑family (≥2 units) are Major. The Project Review Committee (PRC) gives an initial advisory review for non‑discretionary “Major” projects exceeding thresholds (e.g., commercial/industrial/mixed‑use >10,000 sq ft; multi‑family >4 units) (§ 6.3.2.B) .

• Review authorities

  • For non‑discretionary approvals, the Design Review Administrator (DRA) determines compliance; the DRA may seek input from the Design Review Advisory Committee (DRAC) (§ 6.3.2.E.1) .
  • For discretionary approvals, the DRAC makes findings/recommendations to the approving authority; final decisions rest with the approving authority (e.g., Planning Commission, Board of Supervisors) (§ 6.3.2.E.2–E.3) .
  • Appeals: Non‑discretionary DR decisions by the Planning Director go to the Board of Zoning Appeals; discretionary appeals follow § 6.1.3 (§ 6.3.2.H) .

• Waivers

  • The Planning Director may waive Design Review for listed cases (e.g., exterior work not proposed and no additional site work required; project is out of public view and consistent with applicable standards) (§ 6.3.2.C) .

• Relationship to other review processes

  • The County can waive Development Plan Review and require Design Review instead (§ 6.3.1.C) .
  • Landscaping is reviewed within Design Review; preliminary landscape plans are required, and design must meet § 5.2.4 standards (e.g., screening, frontage landscaping, planters) (§ 5.2.4.B, § 5.2.4.C, “Design Review”) . See Landscaping and Screening.

• Findings

  • Final action typically documents one of three outcomes: substantially complies; would comply with recommended modifications; or does not comply (§ 6.3.2.F) .

Fast-reference triggers and authorities

District- and area-specific notes that affect Design Review

Mixed-Use zoning districts

• Purpose and uses: Mixed-use districts implement integrated residential, retail, office, and civic uses along corridors and centers; uses are controlled in Table 3.2 (referenced in § 5.7.3.B.1). All mixed‑use development is subject to Design Review and specific mixed‑use standards (§ 5.7.4; § 5.7.3.B.1) .
• Key dimensional/design points commonly evaluated in DR:
  • Front setbacks/build‑to lines per Table 5.17; zero‑foot setback can be approved during Design Review where allowed (§ 5.7.3.B.2.a) .
  • Where new housing is within 25 feet of arterials, an acoustical analysis is required at Design Review to show 45 dB Ldn interior max (§ 5.7.3.B.7) .
  • Lighting and signage must meet County standards; signage follows § 5.10, with coordinated district signage plans reviewed in DR (§ 5.7.3.B.8–9) .
• Where it applies: Mixed-use base zones countywide in unincorporated areas (e.g., references to the NMC zone’s ground-floor commercial rule in § 5.7.3.B.2.b) .
• Process nuance: Submittals must be sufficiently detailed; findings specific to mixed‑use apply (consistency with plans, compatibility, unified design) in addition to § 6.3.2 (§ 5.7.4.A) .
• Related topics: Parking, Signage, Development Standards.

Industrial and Industrial Park districts — M‑1, M‑2, MP

• Purpose and uses: Light/heavy industrial and business park uses per underlying zone. All industrial development is subject to Design Review per the Countywide Design Guidelines (§ 5.14 preface) .
• Key dimensional standards that influence DR:
  • Typical minimum lot sizes: M‑1: 6,000 sf; M‑2: 20,000 sf; MP: 15,000 sf.
  • Setbacks: e.g., M‑1/M‑2 front/side-street yard 50 ft (no PUPF) / 56 ft (with PUPF); adjacency rules increase yards next to single‑family districts; max height up to 100 ft in M‑1/M‑2 (§ Table 5.14 excerpts) .
  • Landscaping: all setback areas visible from streets must be landscaped (§ 5.2.4; Table 5.14 notes) .
• Where it applies: Industrial base zones throughout unincorporated areas; industrial uses proposed in non‑industrial zones must meet M‑1 standards unless otherwise provided (§ 5.14 preface) .

Fair Oaks Boulevard Corridor Plan districts — East Fair Oaks Boulevard, Manzanita, South Gateway (SPA context)

• Purpose and uses: Uses mirror the underlying zoning unless specifically modified; certain uses require a Conditional Use Permit (§ 6.7.3.A) .
• Design Review applicability: All development and building permits in these districts are subject to the County’s Design Review program (§ 6.7.3.B.1) .
• Alternative standards: Applicants may opt to use the Corridor Plan’s alternative development/design standards, with DRA as approval authority (§ 6.7.3.B.2) .
• Where it applies: The three Fair Oaks Boulevard Corridor districts within unincorporated County; SPA tools are authorized more broadly in § 4.10.2 (SPAs can set their own permitted uses and design standards) .
• Related topic: Overlay Districts.

Single‑family residential districts (RD‑1 to RD‑10) — Design Review triggers

• Typical use: Detached single‑family dwellings.
• What DR looks at: Per Table 6.2, larger subdivisions in RD‑10 or greater are reviewed at map stage (site), while RD‑7 or less require map (site) and building/landscape DR before building permit; new homes on existing lots are generally NR for site/plot and may be COA for building/landscape (§ 6.3.2.A & Table 6.2) .
• Key dimensional standards: Not found in retrieved materials.
• Where it applies: RD districts in unincorporated areas; verify for parcel-specific conditions or SPA overlays. Verify with the jurisdiction.

Practical design content often reviewed

• Site planning: access, circulation, and open space integration with surroundings (§ 5.7.4.A; § 6.3.2.D) .
• Transitions to neighborhoods: height/massing step-downs, lighting control, privacy windows, and screened service/loading where near single-family (§ 5.7.3.B. “adjacent to single-family” techniques) .
• Landscaping: frontage trees, interior property-line screening planters, and parkways; alternatives can be approved during Design Review (§ 5.2.4.B–C) .
• Signs: Wall signs conforming to code may be exempt from Design Review; otherwise, sign design follows § 5.10 and is coordinated through DR where applicable (§ 6.3.2.A.3; § 5.7.3.B.9) .

Checklist

• Confirm your project’s trigger: discretionary entitlements or non-discretionary approvals that fall under § 6.3.2.A; check listed exceptions (§ 6.3.2.A.1–A.3) .
• Identify the applicable review level (Incidental/Minor/Major) and whether PRC advisory applies (§ 6.3.2.B) .
• Determine the reviewing authority (DRA for non-discretionary; DRAC recommendation for discretionary; final action by approving body) (§ 6.3.2.E) .
• Prepare complete site, building, and preliminary landscape plans showing conformance with the Countywide Design Guidelines and applicable Development Standards (§ 5.2.4; § 5.7.4.A) .
• For mixed‑use or industrial, incorporate use-specific standards (e.g., setbacks/build-to, acoustics, frontage landscaping) (§ 5.7.3.B; Table 5.14) .
• For subdivisions and single‑family work, apply Table 6.2 to confirm whether DR is “B,” “M,” “COA,” or “NR” (§ 6.3.2.A & Table 6.2) .
• If applicable, request a waiver and document how criteria in § 6.3.2.C are satisfied (e.g., out of public view, no exterior/site work) .
• Coordinate related approvals such as Parking or Signage early to avoid redesign at DR.

Risks & Ambiguities

Plain-English Summary

If you’re building or changing a site in the unincorporated areas, expect a Design Review unless you’re doing minor interior work or one of the listed exceptions. The County checks your site, building, and landscape plans against the Countywide Design Guidelines and applicable zoning standards; staff or a design advisory committee reviews it depending on your approval type. Larger subdivisions, mixed‑use, and industrial projects have extra design standards, and some non‑discretionary projects still get Design Review—especially for parking lots and new commercial or industrial uses.

Source References

• Sacramento Zoning Code — § 6.3.1 (Development Plan Review) and § 6.3.2 (Design Review), including Applicability, Exceptions, Levels, Authorities, Findings, Conflicts, Appeals
• Table 6.2 — Design Review for Single-Family Residential Projects or Lot Division Requests (RD thresholds; NR/B/M/COA indicators)
• Mixed‑Use standards and Design Review requirements — § 5.7.3.B, § 5.7.4.A–B (setbacks/build‑to, acoustics, lighting, signage; DR submittals & findings)
• Landscaping submittals and standards reviewed through DR — § 5.2.4.B–C (“Design Review”; frontage/planters/screening)
• Industrial/Industrial Park standards and DR requirement — Table 5.14 (M‑1, M‑2, MP)
• Fair Oaks Boulevard Corridor Plan districts — Design Review program applicability and optional corridor standards — § 6.7.3.A–B
• SPA framework — § 4.10.2 (permitted contents may set design standards and review procedures)

Retrieved passages

• Sacramento County Zoning Code (Section 5.2.5.D) High relevance show source text
• Sacramento County Zoning Code (Section 6.3.2.C.1.) High relevance show source text
• Sacramento County Zoning Code (Section 6.1.3.F.) High relevance show source text
• Sacramento County Zoning Code (Section 5) High relevance show source text
• Sacramento County Zoning Code (Section or) High relevance show source text
• Sacramento County Zoning Code (Article establishes) Medium relevance show source text
• Sacramento County Zoning Code (Section shall) Medium relevance show source text
• Sacramento County Zoning Code (Section 5.2.4.G) Medium relevance show source text
• Sacramento County Zoning Code (Section 6.3.2) High relevance show source text
• Sacramento County Zoning Code (Section 6.3.2.A.3.) High relevance show source text
• Sacramento County Zoning Code High relevance show source text
• Sacramento County Zoning Code (§65850.7.) High relevance show source text
• Sacramento County Zoning Code (Section 5.9.3.C.) High relevance show source text

Cited sections

• Sacramento Zoning Code — § 6.3.1 (Development Plan Review) and § 6.3.2 (Design Review), including Applicability, Exceptions, Levels, Authorities, Findings, Conflicts, Appeals (§ 6.3.1)
• Table 6.2 — Design Review for Single-Family Residential Projects or Lot Division Requests (RD thresholds; NR/B/M/COA indicators)
• Mixed‑Use standards and Design Review requirements — § 5.7.3.B, § 5.7.4.A–B (setbacks/build‑to, acoustics, lighting, signage; DR submittals & findings) (§ 5.7.3.B)
• Landscaping submittals and standards reviewed through DR — § 5.2.4.B–C (“Design Review”; frontage/planters/screening) (§ 5.2.4.B)
• Industrial/Industrial Park standards and DR requirement — Table 5.14 (M‑1, M‑2, MP)
• Fair Oaks Boulevard Corridor Plan districts — Design Review program applicability and optional corridor standards — § 6.7.3.A–B (§ 6.7.3.A)
• SPA framework — § 4.10.2 (permitted contents may set design standards and review procedures) (§ 4.10.2)
• SacramentoCounty_ZoningCode.md

• Official Sacramento County code library