San Francisco County — Design Review

Last reviewed: July 3, 2026

Overview

This page summarizes how Design Review (also called architectural or site plan review in places) works under the San Francisco County planning/zoning ordinance as applied to unincorporated areas. It extracts the code triggers, procedural steps, and the Special Use / historic / waterfront districts in the ordinance that create mandatory design review. For related topics see the county’s pages on design review, parking, development standards, overlay districts, historic preservation, variances and exceptions, landscaping and screening, and the California Building Standards Code for building-code interactions. If you are considering an ADU, also consult the California ADU law.

Note: this page only covers what the local planning/zoning ordinance text establishes about design review. For anything not located in the retrieved materials, the entry explicitly states "Not found in retrieved materials" or instructs "Verify with the jurisdiction."

How the ordinance frames Design Review (summary of the code)

• Design review is a procedural and substantive review performed primarily by Planning Department staff (Planning Director) with Commission referral for larger or modified projects. The code repeatedly limits the Director's discretion where projects comply with quantitative (numeric) standards, reserving review mainly for qualitative/design issues and for Major Modifications (see § 249.87, § 249.90, § 309.1).
• Typical triggers include project scale (height, gross square footage, frontage), new construction or major alterations within Special Use Districts, and projects in historic or waterfront districts. The code gives explicit numeric triggers such as >65 ft height, >25,000 gross sq ft, or ≥150 linear feet of contiguous street frontage in several SUD procedures.
• The process often requires a pre-application meeting, a submittal showing elevations, plans, renderings and landscape materials, a staff completeness check, a staff report within set timeframes, and approval or referral within short statutory windows (e.g., staff report posted within 60 days; Director action within 10 days after staff report delivery for certain categories).

District-by-district breakdown

Downtown Residential Districts — Downtown Residential (DR) (Design review rules)

Purpose and where it applies

• Applies in the Downtown Residential Districts for review of projects subject to the Section 309.1 procedure. It covers construction and substantial alteration within those DR districts and is intended to ensure compatibility with the General Plan and Code policies. § 309.1.

Typical permitted uses

• Uses follow the Downtown Residential district use table (see the main Zoning table). Design review is independent of underlying permitted uses; it evaluates design not use. Not found in retrieved materials: a single-line consolidated list of permitted uses in DR from the zoning table. Verify with the jurisdiction.

Key dimensional / decision-relevant standards

• Projects over 50,000 gross sq ft or 85 ft in height are explicitly subject to Planning staff design review under § 309.1(a)(1). The design review scope includes building massing, facades, lower-floor design, setbacks, open space, streetscape and circulation. § 309.1(a)(1)(A)-(H).

Process highlights

• Staff-led design review at permit filing; Director prepares recommended modifications and may refer contested matters to the Planning Commission. § 309.1(a)(2).

Executive Park Special Use District — Executive Park SUD (Section 309.2 rules)

Purpose and where it applies

• Applies to the Executive Park Special Use District; Section 309.2 adapts the Downtown Residential review for the SUD’s objectives. The SUD imposes staff design review for all new construction and ties decisions to the Executive Park Subarea Plan and Design Guidelines. § 309.2(a).

Typical permitted uses

• Varies by subarea; retail thresholds trigger additional Commission criteria when Retail Sales and Service exceed 10,000 gross sq ft. § 309.2(a)(2).

Key standards / design scope

• Comprehensive design review scope like massing, façade, lower-floor treatment, parking/loading, open space, streetscape, and circulation. Director’s recommended changes go to the Commission if opposed. § 309.2(a)(1)-(3).

Parkmerced Special Use District — Parkmerced SUD (Sections 249.75, 249.79, 249.90)

Purpose and where it applies

• Applies within the Parkmerced Special Use District, where a Development Agreement and Design Standards/Guidelines (DSG) govern phased redevelopment. Design review here is tightly integrated with phasing, Development Phase Approvals, and Design for Development documents. § 249.75, § 249.79, § 249.90.

Typical permitted uses

• Uses are established in the SUD text and underlying zoning; Parkmerced-specific rules often exempt certain numeric standards or set unique floor-area rules (see the particular sub-section for each parcel). Not found in retrieved materials: a consolidated list of permitted uses for Parkmerced. Verify with the jurisdiction.

Key dimensional / decision-relevant standards

• Some absolute limits cannot be modified (e.g., maximum height in certain subsections, maximum stories per Design for Development Standard 6.4.2, maximum parking ratios, minimum bicycle parking). Major vs. Minor Modifications are defined; Minor Modifications can be approved administratively by the Director, Major Modifications by the Commission. § 249.79(i)(1)-(3), (l).

Process highlights

• Pre-application public meeting(s) required; staff completeness review within 30 days; staff report posted within 60 days; Director acts or refers within 10 days after report delivery for designs seeking no modifications; Major Modifications require Commission hearing and public notice. § 249.79(l)(2)-(5).

Waterfront Special Use Districts — Waterfront SUDs (1, 3, 4) (Section 240 and waterfront design review)

Purpose and where it applies

• Waterfront design review applies to Port jurisdiction properties in Waterfront Special Use Districts 1, 3, and 4 for urban design consistency with the Port’s Waterfront Plan and public trust obligations. § 240(c).

Typical permitted uses

• Waterfront uses include maritime, commercial, recreational and public-access uses; specific allowed uses and conditional-use rules are set in the Waterfront SUD text and Port controls. Not found in retrieved materials: a single-table of permitted uses for Waterfront SUD. Verify with the jurisdiction.

Key standards and process

• Waterfront Design Advisory Committee reviews urban design; the Committee makes recommendations to Planning and the Port; Planning Commission may review or override as provided by code. Projects on Port land meeting certain thresholds (e.g., lease >10 years and ≥½ acre) are subject to waterfront design review. § 240(c)(1)-(3) and § 240(d). The Committee’s recommendations are final for design issues unless the Planning Commission intervenes. § 252.1 / 240(c).

Civic Center Historic District — Civic Center Historic District (Appendix J to Article 10)

Purpose and where it applies

• The Civic Center Historic District designation aims to preserve buildings and the distinct historic character of the Civic Center area. Design review is used to ensure compatibility and preservation objectives. See Appendix J to Article 10 and the Historic District provisions. Appendix J.

Design criteria highlights

• Staff uses standards that emphasize respecting historic and architectural characteristics while discouraging false historic replication; materials must be compatible in character, color and texture; vertical additions require visibility analysis with sightlines and sections. Appendix J criteria and associated Code references.

Dolores Heights Special Use District — Dolores Heights SUD (Section § 241)

Purpose and where it applies

• Designed to preserve a unique neighborhood character and view corridors; specific height and rear-yard rules differ from underlying RH-1 district provisions. § 241.

Key dimensional standards

• Maximum height: 35 ft in most parts (measured per Section 260), and minimum rear yard depth equal to 45% of lot depth (min 25 ft). Variances from these specifics follow Section 305 procedures but may not allow heights above the RH-1 district cap. § 241(a)-(c).

Design review applicability

• Because the SUD modifies yard and height standards, design-review-like Board/Commission consideration occurs where variances or special authorizations are sought. § 241(c).

Decision-relevant standards & permitted-uses table

Checklist — what an applicant must prepare (typical)

• Conduct and document required pre-application meeting(s) as specified for the district (one or more public meetings). § 249.79(l)(1)-(3).
• Complete design review application form and pay applicable fees (where specified; some SUDs list application fees). § 249.79(l).
• Submit full design package: site plans, sections, elevations, renderings, exterior material samples, landscape plans, and any required visibility/sightline studies for vertical additions. § 249.79(l)(1)-(3); Civic Center Historic District criteria.
• Demonstrate compliance with numeric standards in the applicable SUD or district (height, FAR, coverage, parking). If proposing a Minor or Major Modification, include a written justification and supporting imagery/narrative. § 249.79(i),(l).
• Provide off-street parking submittal when required; some SUDs require cumulative parking accounting tied to a development program. § 249.87(4).
• Respond to completeness review within the timeframe (Planning staff typically advises deficiencies within 30 days). § 249.79(l)(2)-(3).

Risks & Ambiguities

Plain-English Summary

If your project is in the county’s unincorporated area and is in a Special Use, downtown, waterfront, or historic district, expect a Planning Department design review: plan to meet pre-application outreach, submit full drawings and materials, and to have staff evaluate massing, façades, setbacks, parking, and public-realm impacts; large or modified projects can be sent to the Planning Commission or waterfront bodies for public hearings. See the district-specific rules such as § 309.1, § 249.79, § 249.87, and § 240 for the exact triggers and timelines.

Source References

• Planning Code — Downtown Residential District design review procedures, § 309.1.
• Planning Code — Executive Park Special Use District design review, § 309.2.
• Planning Code — Parkmerced & related SUD design review, modification rules, and timeframes, § 249.75, § 249.79, § 249.90 (multiple subsections on applications, pre-app meetings, staff report timelines, Minor/Major Modifications).
• Planning Code — Design Review Application process and staff report posting within 60 days, Director/Commission action windows, and parking/cumulative parking rules in SUD, § 249.87, § 249.90.
• Waterfront Special Use District and Waterfront Design Advisory Committee procedures, § 240(c) and waterfront design review provisions.
• Civic Center Historic District design criteria and Appendix J (historic review emphasis on character and materials).

If you need the ordinance text for one specific parcel or the controlling Design Standards/Guidelines referenced by a Special Use District, request the parcel APN or address and I will identify the exact controlling subsection and any referenced guideline document. Verify with the jurisdiction for parcel-specific interpretations.

Retrieved passages

• San Francisco County Zoning Code (Section 309.1) High relevance show source text
• San Francisco County Zoning Code (Section 309.1) High relevance show source text
• San Francisco County Zoning Code (Section 249.87) High relevance show source text
• San Francisco County Zoning Code (Section 312.) High relevance show source text
• San Francisco County Zoning Code (ARTICLE 10) High relevance show source text
• San Francisco County Zoning Code (Article 1.5) High relevance show source text
• San Francisco County Zoning Code (Section 249.90) High relevance show source text
• San Francisco County Zoning Code (Section 2.4) High relevance show source text

Cited sections

• Planning Code — Downtown Residential District design review procedures, **§ 309.1**. (§ 309.1)
• Planning Code — Executive Park Special Use District design review, **§ 309.2**. (§ 309.2)
• Planning Code — Parkmerced & related SUD design review, modification rules, and timeframes, **§ 249.75**, **§ 249.79**, **§ 249.90** (multiple subsections on applications, pre-app meetings, staff report timelines, Minor/Major Modifications). (§ 249.75)
• Planning Code — Design Review Application process and staff report posting within **60 days**, Director/Commission action windows, and parking/cumulative parking rules in SUD, **§ 249.87**, **§ 249.90**. (§ 249.87)
• Waterfront Special Use District and Waterfront Design Advisory Committee procedures, **§ 240(c)** and waterfront design review provisions. (§ 240)
• Civic Center Historic District design criteria and Appendix J (historic review emphasis on character and materials).
• SanFranciscoCounty_ZoningCode.md

• Official San Francisco County code library