Sacramento Wrote Its Historic ADU Rules by Resolution. HCD Says No.
HCD's position: ADU standards must be adopted by ordinance, not resolution — one of 11 findings in its second Sacramento letter this year.
You own a lot in one of Sacramento's older neighborhoods — inside a historic district, or next door to a landmark house — and you want an ADU in the back. You pull the city's ADU rules and the historic-district design standards aren't even in the ordinance. They live in a separate document: a resolution the council adopted. And inside it is a line routing some ADU work through discretionary design review.
Here's the thing: before you get anywhere near those design standards, HCD's position is that the resolution itself is the problem.
The headline finding: standards by resolution
On August 18, 2026, HCD sent Sacramento an ADU Ordinance Findings Letter reviewing two things: the city's ADU Ordinance No. 2026-0001, adopted January 13, 2026, and a companion Resolution No. 2026-0074, adopted March 24, 2026. The ordinance tells applicants that an ADU in a historic district or on a landmark-designated property "must comply with objective standards … as adopted by resolution of the city council."
HCD found fault with that last clause. State ADU Law lets a local agency create ADUs "by ordinance," and Sacramento instead built a procedure to adopt ADU and JADU standards by resolution — "whereas State ADU Law requires them to be adopted by ordinance." HCD ordered the city to delete the resolution procedure, repeal Resolution No. 2026-0074, and re-adopt the standards — historic preservation standards included — by ordinance.
Why it matters to you: HCD's stated reason is that adopting an ordinance carries more public-engagement requirements than a resolution. The blunter point for a homeowner — HCD's position is that the whole historic-ADU rulebook Sacramento handed you was adopted the wrong way.
Verified against HCD's ADU Ordinance Findings Letter to the City of Sacramento (August 18, 2026).
Historic rules can only reach California Register properties
Even inside the resolution, HCD found the historic net cast too wide. Government Code section 66314, subdivision (b)(1) lets a city impose objective standards "that prevent adverse impacts on any real property that is listed in the California Register of Historical Resources." HCD's reading is that those standards can reach California Register resources only — not properties that are merely designated locally. If your lot sits near a locally listed building but nothing on the California Register, HCD's position is that the historic ADU standards shouldn't apply to your project.
Discretionary review is the bright line
This is the finding most likely to hit your permit. Sacramento's resolution sends certain ADUs — those touching historic buildings — through its Site Plan and Design Review (SPDR) process, which the city's own code calls discretionary. HCD drew the line hard:
"…State ADU Law requires ministerial review of ADU applications and makes no exception to this general rule for historic resources."
Ministerial means objective boxes checked — no hearing, no judgment call. HCD ordered the city to create a ministerial review process for all ADUs, "regardless of whether they are attached to or located within a historic resource."
Subjective language and a height cap
Two more findings matter if you're at the drawing board. HCD flagged a resolution design principle reading, "Inspiration shall be drawn from the defining features of the primary dwelling and/or closest contributing resource whenever possible" — subjective, HCD said, because an objective standard must "involve no personal or subjective judgment by a public official." Same trouble with a pedestrian-entrance rule: HCD found the phrase "fronting a public street or alley" is not objective "because it does not specify how close the structure must be to the street or alley to be considered 'fronting' on it."
Then the height rule. The resolution says ADUs "must not be more than 150% taller than any contributing resource or landmark structure" nearby — a cap that, HCD warned, can pull an ADU below the minimum heights of 16, 18, or 20 feet that Section 66321 provides for detached ADUs. HCD told the city to ministerially waive the cap whenever it would drop an ADU below its statutory height.
What to do with it
If your Sacramento ADU is stuck behind historic design review — or a height or setback rule that traces to Resolution No. 2026-0074 — it's worth asking which document the standard lives in and whether it squares with State ADU Law. This isn't legal advice, and HCD's findings are its enforcement position, not a court ruling — so confirm with Sacramento's planning staff or your own counsel before you rely on any of it. But HCD has put the city on notice, with a September 17, 2026 response deadline and a possible referral to the Attorney General if the rules aren't fixed.
What CrossBeam does with it
When the letter lands on your desk, CrossBeam turns it around the same day: what each item is actually asking, the code or law behind it, and a written response you can hand to your team or your attorney — the back-and-forth that used to eat weeks, done in a couple of hours.