Local zoning · Tehama

Tehama — Design Review

Q: Where does Tehama require a site plan and materials sample for a manufactured home?

Chapter 17.24 requires that applicants for manufactured homes submit a site plan, description of roof and siding materials and roof pitch, and pictures of all four sides; the city clerk may approve the permit or the decision can be appealed per § 17.24.010 G–I .

Q: If I propose a new fence taller than 4 ft in the front yard, how is design reviewed?

Front‑yard fences taller than the 4 ft visibility threshold and other exceptions are handled through a use permit; the council may grant permits where the proposed location, size, design are compatible and not materially detrimental (see § 17.20.010 A–E ). That means design compatibility is evaluated as part of discretionary findings.

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

Ask a question free See coverage

Last reviewed: July 2, 2026

Overview

Tehama’s Title 17 does not create a separate “design review” board or a single Design Review chapter. Instead, design control is accomplished piecemeal: objective design requirements appear in specific chapters (most notably accessory dwelling unit standards and manufactured-home/site-plan rules), discretionary review that considers design occurs through use permits and planning‑commission findings, and historic/overlay guidelines are invoked where applicable. For quick operational guidance about where design rules live in Tehama’s code, see the city’s zoning page. If your project touches site layout, parking, or setbacks/development standards(/us/california/tehama/development-standards) will also matter.

Summary of how design is handled in the code: there is no single "design review" chapter; design is enforced via specific standards and discretionary permits (use permits/planning commission) when required. See the key code references cited in each section below (each requirement is grounded in the local ordinance).

Where to look in the code (quick map)

Accessory dwelling unit (ADU) design rules: § 17.60.080
ADU by‑right/ministerial processing: § 17.60.040 and § 17.60.050
Use permits, required findings, and planning commission role: § 17.28.010–.060 (findings: § 17.28.040)
Manufactured homes — site plan, materials, and city clerk review: § 17.24.010 G–I
Fence height/design exceptions and use‑permit criteria: § 17.20.010 A–E
The city expressly states it “does not regulate design on multifamily housing developments”: § 17.12.080
Historic/overlay applicability to ADU design: § 17.60.080 I.2 (historic district consistency)

District-by-district breakdown

Note: each district heading names the City’s local designation exactly as used in Title 17 and cites the relevant code passages.

Residential (R)

Purpose: The Residential (R) district purpose and intent are set out in § 17.12.010 and the purpose statement in § 17.12.020 (housing variety and preserving residential character).
Typical permitted uses: Single‑ and two‑story single‑family dwellings, multifamily housing, accessory dwelling units, small community care and day‑care uses, etc., listed in § 17.12.030.
Key dimensional / development standards you will see in the ordinance text:
- Minimum dwelling dimensions for single family: 20 ft minimum width and 800 sq ft minimum floor area (see § 17.12.030.A).
- ADU sizing, compatibility and processing are located in Chapter 17.60 and apply in residential zones (see § 17.60.040, § 17.60.050, § 17.60.080).
- Fences and front‑yard visibility/design rules apply (fence heights 4 ft in front yard if blocking view; 6 ft side/rear yards) under § 17.20.010.
How design review happens here: ADUs must be architecturally compatible by objective measures (roof pitch, materials, color, fenestration) per § 17.60.080 I; otherwise design‑level discretion is exercised via use permits or other discretionary applications where required (see § 17.28 for use‑permit process).
Where it applies: all platted residential lots within City limits (see Chapter 17.08 for district mapping).

Open‑Space (OS) / Open‑Space District

Purpose: The Open‑Space District purpose and permitted public recreational and preservation uses are in § 17.16.010.
Typical permitted uses: Production of food and fiber, parks, river bank access, wildlife preservation, scenic beauty — see § 17.16.010.A.
Key development/design controls:
- Any street improvements, sewers or public works within OS must be referred to the planning commission for a report and require a finding of conformity before proceeding — § 17.16.010.B (this is a design‑adjacent procedural control).
How design review happens here: instead of a design board, the planning commission reviews proposed improvements for conformity to the open‑space plan (see § 17.16.010.B), which is the functional mechanism for design oversight in OS parcels.
Where it applies: unplatted land or parcels designated open‑space per Chapter 17.08.

Business Overlay Zone (BOZ)

Purpose: The Business Overlay Zone (BOZ) is defined at § 17.14.010–.020 to allow commercial uses (targeted along C Street) while remaining compatible with the general plan.
Typical permitted uses: Retail, offices, restaurants, outdoor dining, hotels/motels, banks — enumerated in § 17.14.030 (some conditional uses exist in § 17.14.040).
Key dimensional / design standards:
- Development in the BOZ is required to comply with the underlying base‑zone development standards (see § 17.14.050). That means design controls may be drawn from the Residential or other base zone rules depending on parcel location.
- Lot division limits for BOZ: minimum lot size constraints are noted in § 17.14.070.
How design review happens here: the BOZ relies on the underlying zone’s development standards; discretionary commercial or special uses will be subject to use‑permit findings and the planning commission/city council process (§ 17.28).

Most decision‑relevant design standards and permitting triggers

Topic / Standard	What matters to an applicant	Code Reference
ADU architectural compatibility (objective measures: roof pitch/materials, colors, materials, fenestration, style)	ADUs in residential zones must demonstrate an architectural relationship to the primary dwelling; non‑compliance can affect ministerial approval	§ 17.60.080 I
ADU ministerial approval / by‑right processing (60‑day rule)	ADUs that meet Chapter 17.60 standards are ministerially approved (building permit), not subject to discretionary design review	§ 17.60.040, § 17.60.050
Manufactured home submittal: site plan, roof/siding description, photos	Manufactured homes in residential areas must include a site plan and materials description; the city clerk may approve or applicant can appeal to council	§ 17.24.010 G–I
Use permits / discretionary review (findings and planning commission role)	Where a use permit is required, design compatibility, neighborhood character, and harmful effects are part of findings prepared for the planning commission and city council	§ 17.28.010–.060, § 17.28.040
Fences: front yard 4 ft visibility rule; side/rear 6 ft	Fences exceeding these heights may require a use permit; design and compatibility are part of the use‑permit review criteria	§ 17.20.010 A–E
Multifamily design	The city explicitly states it does not regulate design on multifamily housing developments (this limits local design review power for multi‑unit projects)	§ 17.12.080
Historic district consistency for ADUs	Where a historic district or overlay applies, ADU design must be consistent with applicable historic design guidelines	§ 17.60.080 I.2

Checklist

Confirm the project’s zoning and district (see Chapter 17.08 and § 17.12.030) and whether the Business Overlay Zone or a historic overlay applies.
If an ADU, design the unit to meet architectural compatibility objective measures in § 17.60.080 I (roof pitch, materials, paint, fenestration).
For manufactured homes provide a site plan, roof/siding description, and four‑side photos as required by § 17.24.010 G.
Check whether the proposed work triggers a use permit or other discretionary permit; prepare evidence to satisfy the findings in § 17.28.040.
Confirm setbacks and parking requirements from the development standards that apply to the base zone and include them in plans (see Chapter 17.12 and the city’s development standards).
If in a historic district overlay, obtain and follow the local historic design guidelines (ADUs must comply per § 17.60.080 I.2).
Prepare hearing materials (site plans, elevations, materials samples) for planning commission or city clerk review depending on permit type (see § 17.28.020, § 17.24.010 G).

Risks & Ambiguities

Issue	Why it matters	What to verify
No standalone “Design Review” chapter	The code relies on topic‑specific standards and use permits rather than a uniform review process — applicants can’t assume there’s a single checklist or board	Verify the procedural steps and which body reviews design (city clerk, planning commission, or city council) for your specific permit type; the code does not create a centralized design review body (Not found in retrieved materials).
Multifamily design “not regulated” language	For multifamily projects the City says it does not regulate design; this may limit local discretionary design control but could interact with state housing laws	Confirm whether any objective standards (setbacks, parking, etc.) still apply and whether SB 35/other state laws affect review — see § 17.12.080 and verify with the city.
Historic/design guidelines referenced but not included in this text	The code requires ADUs in historic zones be consistent with guidelines, but the guideline document itself is not in the retrieved materials	Ask the planning department for the applicable historic district design guidelines and the overlay map; Chapter 17.60 references them (§ 17.60.080 I.2).
Exact dimensional standards for every parcel	Some development standards are referenced (e.g., Chapter 17.12.050B) but full numeric tables for setbacks/coverage were not reproduced in the retrieved extracts	Pull the complete Chapter 17.12 development standards and the parcel’s zoning map to confirm numeric setbacks, coverage and height limits (verify with the jurisdiction).
Potential conflict between ministerial ADU rules and discretionary design controls	ADUs that meet 17.60 standards are ministerial, but other site changes (e.g., demolition of parking, change to lot coverage) can trigger discretionary review	Confirm that your ADU package fully meets § 17.60 objective standards before relying on ministerial approval; consult the city on how combined actions are processed.

Plain‑English Summary

Tehama does not have a single “design review” chapter or board — design is enforced where it matters by topic‑specific rules (ADUs, manufactured homes, fences) and by the use‑permit/discretionary review process (planning commission/city council) when required; ADUs that meet the Chapter 17.60 objective measures are approved ministerially, while other projects will need to clear use‑permit findings. Verify parcel specifics with the city because many design checks are parcel‑ and permit‑type specific.

Source References

Title 17 — ZONING, City of Tehama (print export / ordinance compilation). Key chapters cited below are contained in this file:
§ 17.60.080 (ADU design / architectural compatibility).
§ 17.60.040 and § 17.60.050 (ADU where allowed and ministerial processing/60‑day rule).
§ 17.12.030 (Residential permitted uses) and § 17.12.080 (multifamily design not regulated).
§ 17.28.010–.060 and § 17.28.040 (Use permits, findings and planning commission role).
§ 17.24.010 (Manufactured homes: site plan, materials, city clerk review).
§ 17.20.010 (Fence heights and use‑permit exceptions — design compatibility language).
City of Tehama zoning/land‑use menu pages referenced in text: Tehama Zoning, Tehama Development Standards, Tehama Parking, Tehama Overlay Districts, Tehama Historic Preservation, Tehama ADUs.
Reference to state building standards where foundations/fire sprinklers are required: California Building Standards Code. (The building code itself is a distinct source; see the City code's cross‑references to the California Building Code for technical building requirements.)

Sources

Retrieved passages

Tehama Zoning Code (§ 1) Medium relevance
Tehama Zoning Code (Section 17.30.040) Medium relevance
Tehama Zoning Code (title of) Medium relevance
Tehama Zoning Code (Title 17) Medium relevance
CBC § 198 (Chapter 17.16) Medium relevance
CBC § N104.1 (Section N104.1) Medium relevance
CBC § 65852.26 (chapter shall) Medium relevance
CBC § N105 (SECTION N105) Medium relevance
Tehama Zoning Code (Title 17) Medium relevance
Tehama Zoning Code (Chapter 8.08) Medium relevance

Cited sections

Official Tehama code library

Frequently asked questions

Do I need “design review” in Tehama for a house addition?

Not in the sense of a single Design Review Board — Tehama enforces design through chapter‑specific standards and discretionary permits. If your addition is an ADU that meets § 17.60.080 objective criteria it is processed ministerially; if the work triggers a use permit or conflicts with development standards you’ll go through the planning commission/city council findings in § 17.28.

What design rules apply to Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) in Tehama?

ADUs must meet the objective “architectural compatibility” measures listed in § 17.60.080 (roof pitch/materials, colors, exterior materials, fenestration or style) and, if compliant, are ministerially approved under § 17.60.040–.050. If the ADU is in a historic overlay, it must also be consistent with local historic guidelines per § 17.60.080 I.2.

Where does Tehama require a site plan and materials sample for a manufactured home?

Chapter 17.24 requires that applicants for manufactured homes submit a site plan, description of roof and siding materials and roof pitch, and pictures of all four sides; the city clerk may approve the permit or the decision can be appealed per § 17.24.010 G–I.

If I propose a new fence taller than 4 ft in the front yard, how is design reviewed?

Front‑yard fences taller than the 4 ft visibility threshold and other exceptions are handled through a use permit; the council may grant permits where the proposed location, size, design are compatible and not materially detrimental (see § 17.20.010 A–E). That means design compatibility is evaluated as part of discretionary findings.

Does Tehama regulate multifamily design?

The code explicitly states the city “does not regulate design on multifamily housing developments” in § 17.12.080 (note: other development standards like setbacks, parking, and flood requirements still apply).

What body decides discretionary design questions (use permits) in Tehama?

Use permits and the findings prepared by the planning commission are submitted to the city council for final action; the code sets the planning commission and city council as the review path for discretionary matters (see § 17.28.040 and related subsections).

Who enforces compatibility for ADUs in a historic district?

ADU design in historic districts must comply with applicable historic district design and development guidelines as required by § 17.60.080 I.2; obtain the local historic guidelines from the planning department and expect the planning staff to check consistency.

If my ADU meets Chapter 17.60 standards, how long will the city take to act?

A complete building permit application for an ADU that complies with Chapter 17.60 must be acted upon within 60 days per § 17.60.050 (unless you request a delay and toll the timeline).

Ask about any Tehama property

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

Start Free Trial