Skip to main content

Galt Herald

Council Adopts Objective Residential Design Standards

Jun 17, 2026 09:39AM ● By John McCallum

From upper left to lower right are four of the five architectural house designs: Ranch, Modern, Spanish and Prairie. These are examples of styles the city wants to use as its standard for single-family homes when approving future developments. Graphics courtesy of City of Galt

GALT, CA (MPG) - At its June 2 meeting, the City Council unanimously approved an ordinance amending and updating the city’s single-family residential design standards.

City staff said the amendments were necessary because a review indicated the standards adopted in 2022 were not objective enough to meet state requirements updated by recent legislation as well as “achieving the design and architectural goals of the community.” 

The amendments were reviewed and commented on at a March 30 joint City Council and Planning Commission study session as well as reviewed and recommended by the Planning Commission, with modifications, at its May 14 meeting that included a public hearing.

Community Development Director Jennifer Carloni told council all recommended changes or modifications were included in the ordinance’s final language and updates to the city’s Municipal Code section 18.16.055. One of the updates changed the title of the section from “Recommended residential design standards” to “Single Family Objective Design Standards.”

“The main point here was to make clearly objective standards for developers to follow,” Carloni said.

The standards apply to single-family attached and detached residential developments. Excluded are accessory dwelling units, junior accessory dwelling units, multifamily developments such as condominiums and apartments and mixed use developments. Carloni said the city’s Municipal Code already has guidelines that apply to these projects, noting staff felt creating additional barriers might discourage these types of affordable housing construction, something city officials believe is lacking in the community.

Key elements of the objective standards include more clarity on the scale of homes built near existing single-story neighborhoods, including limiting the addition of a second story to no more than 50% of the total first floor space. New design requirements were added to windows, roofs and “articulation and massing changes” in order to “achieve a less ‘generic’ design” in construction.

Also required are variations in building materials, colors and articulation, reduced dominance of garage door presence on front elevations and adding practical needs such as lights near garage doors and walkways along with wider driveways and offset windows to create more privacy.

Amendments to infill subdivision construction include requiring all exterior perimeter lots adjacent to existing single-story homes to be no more than one story and no artificial grade separation between existing neighborhoods and the new development.

In unanimously approving the new objective design standards, the Planning Commission did make three modifications. The first moved imitation masonry and Styrofoam/foam reinforced with steel, fiberglass or concrete from the prohibited materials list to the allowed list while the second now requires 50% of new detached, single-family homes to have front-loaded garage doors set back at least 5 feet from the front façade.

The third removed the requirement for a 5-foot setback for a second-story addition.

Most questions by council members focused on design specifics, either seeking clarification on some elements or making sure proposed changes or additions brought up at the previous meetings had been included. Councilmember Paul Sandu asked Carloni if the new standards would create an issue with housing affordability by potentially adding extra requirements to construction.

Carloni said the standards were in place in most California cities and didn’t believe they would create pricing issues.

“There might be a small changed based on material type or requiring specific doors or windows,” she added. “But overall, the affordability will not be changed with the standards.”

Also at the June 2 meeting, council unanimously approved a resolution adopting a policy on disruption of telephonic or internet service during a meeting. The resolution addresses changes made to existing law by Senate Bill 707, passed in 2025, requiring following a specific process should service be disrupted for individuals taking part in government meetings remotely.

The legislation applies to all legislative bodies, but applies certain provisions to eligible legislative bodies, which the Galt City Council qualifies as because it’s located in a county with a population of more than 600,000 people.

According to a report by Galt Interim City Attorney Frank Splendorio, the new legislation requires legislative bodies to “follow specific requirements for providing remote access to public participants in Council meetings via two-way audiovisual platforms or two-way telephonic services; captioning when using audiovisual platforms; and expanded accessibility and translation for notices and websites.”

The city is in the process of implementing these requirements, which must begin by July 1. Regarding a service disruption, the law requires the presiding officer, either the mayor or city clerk, to publicly declare a disruption has occurred and call for a recess of up to one hour or until service is restored.

Council has the option of meeting in closed session during this period as already provided by law. During the recess city staff shall do their best to restore service.

If after an hour service has not been restored, council shall reconvene to either adjourn the meeting, extend the recess to allow more time to rectify the problem or continue the open session portion of the meeting by adopting through a roll call vote a statement noting the city has made a good faith effort to fix the disruption and that public interest in continuing the meeting outweighs public remote access.

The city clerk shall enter a brief statement into the meeting minutes noting the nature and time of service disruption, time meeting reconvened, if applicable, and any findings adopted pursuant to the reconvening in open session.