Helpful Hints for Architectural Review

Many recorded declarations grant broad discretion to an association’s board or architectural committee for the purposes of reviewing and approving or denying owners’ requests to make architectural improvements, modifications, and alterations to their properties. The extent of this discretionary authority depends on the specific language of an association’s governing documents. Some governing documents establish very specific guidelines, leaving little room for interpretation. Others grant the board or architectural committee very broad discretion in determining what is and what is not appropriate for the community aesthetic. In either case, committee decisions are generally upheld, so long as those decisions reflect a uniform and reasonable application of the particular association’s restrictions. Having a ‘formal’ architectural application and review process helps to ensure this outcome. However, whether a particular association’s architectural review policies are specific or ambiguous, there are certain issues that every board and architectural committee should keep in mind when reviewing applications.

First, it is essential to be aware of whether there is a deadline or time limitation on the committee’s review of an architectural application. Many governing documents specify that if an owner’s application is not reviewed and approved or denied within a specified amount of time, the application is deemed approved. Failure to keep these deadlines in mind could result in an owner receiving approval for a modification that the committee may have otherwise denied. If too much time passes without a decision from the committee, an owner may rely on the language in the governing documents that indicates that the application is deemed approved, and proceed to make those improvements. It is quite possible that in those circumstances a court would find that owner’s reliance justifiable, leaving the association with little recourse against that owner.

Second, many boards and committees run into trouble when decisions are made without sufficient information. Perhaps in large part due to a time limitation imposed by the governing documents as discussed above, committees may be inclined to make rushed decisions without all of the relevant details, or to let the time allotted lapse while the committee further investigates the intended modifications.

Take, for example, a committee that is reviewing an application of an owner that would like to install new landscaping. The application fails to specify the particular types of plants to be installed, or the effect of the landscaping on the lot’s drainage. The committee may issue a letter to the owner requesting additional information. In the mean time, the deadline for approval or denial passes, and the application is deemed approved. The committee may also conditionally “approve” the application, pending the receipt of additional information from the owner. This, too, could lead to bad results or confusion because of the “approval”. If a committee is reviewing an application and is unsure about particular aspects of the proposal and/or requires more information, a best practice would be to deny the application due to insufficient information, and invite the owner to submit a new application with the additional details or supporting information. This protects the committee from the looming deadline, while still allowing the application process to continue.

These are just some of the many considerations that come into play when boards and architectural committees review architectural applications. To best protect the interests of an association, it is important to keep these types of issues in mind. Doing so will encourage a more uniform process, better results, and consistency throughout the community.

For more information, contact Kellie Callahan or any other attorney in our office.