Objective Design Standards Take On New Importance Under State Law

January 29, 2025

As housing across California and the nation has become more scarce and less affordable, legislation to spur and incentivize residential development has increased dramatically. In California, the legislature has determined that the construction of new housing has been constrained by uncertainties of time, cost, and effort to move a development project through the entitlement process. In response, legislators passed new laws in recent years that require local governments to make more of their decisions about housing development based on objective standards.

Historically, planners and elected officials have relied on design guidelines and subjective assessments to evaluate project aesthetics with respect to community desires and expectations. However, opinions on what design elements make a project “compatible with neighborhood character,” or similar subjective standard, can be very different and can require applicants to spend considerable time trying to create the “Goldilocks” project that will obtain design approval – the one that is “just right.”

Recent changes in state law, including the adoption of SB 35, SB 330, and AB 2011, require that for certain types of housing and mixed-use projects, jurisdictions may only consider objective criteria, and only those that are in place at the time project application is filed. Objective standards are a key feature of the state’s new streamlined approval processes to provide predictability for developers regarding what can be approved without discretionary review. The law requires that standards be stated clearly and easily understood, leaving nothing open to interpretation. Subjective design guidelines and interpretive policy guidance cannot be used to deny many categories of projects, making the drafting of thoughtful objective standards for every jurisdiction essential to protect the policy goals that the subjective standards had been drafted to address.

Development Standards and Design Standards: What’s the Difference?

Most cities and counties already have objective development standards in their zoning and subdivision ordinances. Development standards are clear, often numeric, and generally not open to interpretation. Development standards include minimum parcel sizes, maximum building height, and minimum building setbacks, to name a few. They are usually delineated by zoning district. Design standards, on the other hand, address the appearance and features of buildings, as well as site planning elements that contribute to the project look and layout. Design standards address a range of factors such as methods and requirements to vary building massing, describing specifically how buildings interface with public spaces such as the sidewalk or an adjacent park, and identifying what architectural elements are allowed and which are prohibited.

Tips for developing Objective Design Standards

When sitting down to draft objective design standards (ODS), here are a few things to think about:

1. Consider Multifamily and Mixed Use ODS. State law requires streamlined review for multifamily and mixed use projects that meet certain affordability criteria, among other thresholds. If your agency has not yet developed ODS for multifamily and mixed use projects, start here. ODS for single family units are also a good idea to have, but can be more challenging to develop.
2. Accessory Dwelling Units. State law also limits local discretion to regulate accessory dwelling units (ADUs), as stated in Government Code Section 66314. However, local governments do have authority to adopt objective standards for ADU design, so if your community has certain design features or elements that are important to incorporate into ADUs, include these in your ordinance.
3. Determine what is critical to your community. Community engagement can be an important part of the process to develop ODS. What issues typically come up during discretionary design review for multifamily or mixed use projects in your community? Does the discussion focus on building materials and colors? On the design of on-site common spaces? Protecting privacy? Emphasizing a specific architectural style or styles? Your agency’s ODS should provide standards for those design elements that the community wants to make sure are addressed in a certain manner and do not want left to chance.
4. Do not over-prescribe. If ODS are overly prescriptive and have a standard that addresses every intricate detail, there is a risk creating a community prototype and having all buildings looking eerily similar. Pick the most important design areas where your community wants to be explicit about design expectations, and be more flexible (or entirely hands-off) with design elements that are not as critical.
5. Is total conformance required? If your agency wants to allow minor deviations from a standard, be sure to describe the process to allow the deviation in your ODS. The process applicable to allowing deviations should itself be made clear and objective, lest they render the ODS discretionary and thus inapplicable for approval decisions – the opposite of what you want! For example, if the ODS creates a numerical standard and the agency anticipates wanting to allow minor deviations from that standard, this should be written into the ODS (e.g., a 10% deviation from the standard is always permissible or allowed under specified, objective conditions).
6. Density bonus is allowed. Mixed-use and multifamily projects can utilize the provisions of state density bonus law to obtain concessions and waivers from the ODS in accordance with Government Code Section 65915. In a density bonus scenario, both objective design and objective development standards may be waived (in accordance with the statute) without triggering the need for discretionary review.

While the requirement to solely apply objective standards to new development can at first seem limiting, there are silver linings to this approach. First, the public and public agencies benefit when rules are clear. It can help avoid processes that require extensive time attending public hearings and repeated engagement from decision-makers. Second, applicants benefit by knowing requirements up front before they begin designing a project, making it possible to devote time and resources to more quickly achieving desired outcomes. In turn, planning staff are able to efficiently review applications that are more complete and that require fewer changes and resubmittals. Third, developing ODS allows a community to proactively state what design features and elements are important to include in new residential development, rather than only getting input on a project-by-project basis.

Ultimately, if the process works as it should, housing will be approved, constructed, and occupied more quickly than it has been in the past, and the projects will blend in well with the community. Well-written objective standards can be a win for everyone.

For more information about how your agency can develop effective Objective Design Standards, contact Kristi Bascom.