An association’s governing documents may require association approval before a member may make a physical improvement or modification to the member’s property or to common area. In such cases, the association adopts an architectural application and approval process for members to utilize, and to assist the association in administering its architectural standards. The responsibility for reviewing and approving or disapproving a member’s architectural application is commonly delegated to an architectural committee that is separate from the board.
Procedural Requirements
When reviewing and approving or disapproving a member’s architectural application, the association must provide a “fair, reasonable and expeditious procedure for making its decision.” (Civ. Code § 4765(a)(1).) That procedure must:
The association must provide its members with annual notice of its architectural approval requirements. (See “Annual Policy Statement.”) The notice must describe the types of improvements/modifications that require association approval, and include a copy of the association’s architectural application and approval process. (Civ. Code § 4765(c).)
Decision Requirements
Any decision regarding a member’s architectural application must:
If an application is disapproved (rejected), the written decision must include both an explanation of why the application was disapproved and a description of the procedure through which the member may request reconsideration of the decision by the board. (Civ. Code § 4765(a)(4).)
Disapproval & Reconsideration (Appeal)
Where a member’s application is disapproved, the member is generally entitled to reconsideration by the board at an open meeting of the board. (Civ. Code § 4765(a)(5).) However, if the initial disapproval of the application was made by the board “or a body that has the same membership as the board” at a duly held board meeting, no reconsideration is required. (Civ. Code § 4765(a)(5).)
Scope of Approval Powers
An association’s architectural committee and board do not have the authority to approve the construction of improvements which are expressly prohibited by the provisions of the association’s CC&Rs. (Woodridge Escondido Property Owners Assn. v. Nielsen (2005) 130 Cal.App.4th 559, 572.) Where the improvement is not expressly prohibited by the CC&Rs or other provisions of the association’s governing documents, approval will often depend upon (a) whether the improvement is aesthetically harmonious with surrounding structures and (b) whether it will pose a burden on neighboring owners or the association.