Tag Archives: Architectural Review

AB-1684 (Ward) Common interest developments: cooling systems.

Would make any provision of the governing documents or architectural guidelines void and unenforceable if it prohibits or restricts the installation, upgrade, replacement, or use of a cooling system.

Current Status: Pending

FindHOALaw Quick Summary:

The Davis-Stirling Act includes provisions that limit the authority of an association or the governing documents to regulate the use of a member’s separate interest.

This bill would add Civil Code Section 4737 to make void and unenforceable any provision of the governing documents, architectural guidelines, or policies if the provision prohibits or restricts the installation, upgrade, replacement, or use of a cooling system.

The bill would make an association that willfully violates these provisions liable to the member for actual damages and a civil penalty paid to the member in an amount not to exceed $2,000.

View more info on AB 1684
from the California Legislature's website

SB-222 (Wiener) Residential heat pump systems: water heaters and HVAC: installations.

Would make any provision of the governing documents or architectural guidelines void and unenforceable if it prevents the replacement of a fuel-gas-burning appliance with an electric appliance, or prohibits or restricts the use of a residential heat pump water heater or heat pump HVAC system.

Current Status: Pending

FindHOALaw Quick Summary:

The Davis-Stirling Act makes void and unenforceable any provision of the governing documents or architectural or landscaping guidelines or policies that prohibits, or has the effect of prohibiting, the use of low water-using plants as a group or as a replacement of existing turf.

This bill would add Civil Code Section 4737 to make void and unenforceable any provision of the governing documents, architectural guidelines, or policies if the provision prevents the replacement of a fuel-gas-burning appliance with an electric appliance. The bill would also make any covenant, restriction, or condition contained in any deed, and any provision of a governing document, that effectively prohibits or restricts the installation or use of a residential heat pump water heater or heat pump HVAC system, void and unenforceable.

View more info on SB 222
from the California Legislature's website

SB-625 (Wahab) Housing developments: disasters: reconstruction of destroyed or damaged structures.

Would streamline the architectural approval process for owners to rebuild a residential structure that is damaged or destroyed during a declared disaster or state of emergency. Would also provide for streamlined ministerial approval to building a housing development on a parcel on which a residential structure was destroyed or damaged in a disaster.

Current Status: Chaptered

FindHOALaw Quick Summary:

If the governing documents require association approval before a member may make a physical change to the member’s separate interest or to the common area, existing law requires an association to satisfy specified requirements, including to provide a fair, reasonable, and expeditious procedure for making its decision in reviewing and approving or disapproving a proposed physical change.

This bill would add Civil Code Section 4752 to make any provision of a governing document void and unenforceable to the extent that it prohibits, or includes conditions that have the effect of prohibiting, a substantially similar reconstruction of a residential structure that was destroyed or damaged in a disaster. The bill would require a court to award reasonable attorney’s fees to the owner of a separate interest in a common interest development who prevails in an action to enforce the above provisions.

This bill would add Civil Code Section 4766 to require any provision of a governing document that subjects a modification to a separate interest to review by an association or architectural review commission to be processed and approved. The bill would require the association or commission to determine whether an application is complete or incomplete and to provide written notice of this determination to the applicant no later than 15 business days after the association receives the application. Once an application is deemed complete, the bill would require the association to conduct any review of the proposed modification to the separate interest within 30 business days. If an association finds that a complete application is noncompliant, the bill would require the association to provide the applicant with a list of items that are noncompliant and a description of how the application can be remedied by the applicant. If an application is determined to be incomplete or noncompliant, the bill would require the association to provide a process for the applicant to appeal that decision. The bill would require a court to award reasonable attorney’s fees to the applicant who prevails in an action to enforce the above-described provisions.

The Planning and Zoning Law authorizes a development proponent to submit an application for a development that is subject to a specified streamlined, ministerial approval process if the development satisfies certain objective planning standards and certain procedures are followed, including that the proponent of the development project requires in contracts with construction contractors that specified standards will be met in project construction, as specified.

This bill would add Government Code 65914.201 to authorize a housing development proponent to submit an application for a housing development that is subject to a specified streamlined, ministerial approval process if the housing development satisfies certain objective standards, including that the development is located on a parcel on which a residential structure was destroyed or damaged in a disaster. The bill would require a local agency to expedite the review and approval of a nondiscretionary permit related to a housing development subject to that streamlined, ministerial approval process, as prescribed.

The bill would add Government Code Section 65914.202 to provide that an ordinance that precludes specified placements and uses of manufactured homes, mobilehomes, or recreational vehicles for use during the reconstruction or repair of any home damaged or destroyed in a disaster is unenforceable for a period of 3 years following the disaster declaration.

**SB-625 was signed into law October 10, 2025, and takes effect January 1, 2026.

View more info on SB 625
from the California Legislature's website

SB-282 (Wiener) Residential heat pump systems: water heaters and HVAC: installations.

Current Status: Dead

FindHOALaw Quick Summary:

View more info on SB 282
from the California Legislature's website

SB-1095 (Becker) Cozy Homes Cleanup Act: building standards: gas-fuel-burning appliances.

Would make any provision of the governing documents or architectural guidelines that prevents the replacement of a fuel-gas-burning appliance with an electric appliance void and unenforceable.

Current Status: Dead

FindHOALaw Quick Summary:

Existing law makes void and unenforceable any provision of the governing documents or architectural or landscaping guidelines or policies that prohibits use of low water-using plants, or prohibits or restricts compliance with water-efficient landscape ordinances or regulations on the use of water.

This bill would add Civil Code Section 4737 make void and unenforceable any provision of the governing documents or architectural guidelines or policies to the extent that the provision prevents the replacement of a fuel-gas-burning appliance with an electric appliance.

View more info on SB 1095
from the California Legislature's website

Architectural Committee

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 association common area. (Civ. Code § 4765(a); See also “Architectural Application & Approval Process.”) Such improvements and modifications are regulated by the association’s architectural standards. Administering the architectural standards and the application/approval process are tasks which are typically performed by the association’s architectural committee.

Depending upon the provisions of the association’s governing documents, the architectural committee may be referred to as any of the following:

“Architectural Committee”
“Architectural Control Committee”
“Architectural Review Committee”
“Art Jury”
“Design Review Committee”
“Environmental Control Committee”
“Landscape Review Committee”

Many sets of association CC&Rs contain provisions that mandate the formation of an architectural committee that is separate from the board of directors. Where such provisions are absent, the board may either serve as the architectural committee or delegate its architectural control powers to an architectural committee that is created by the board. (See “Delegating Duties & Authority.”)

Scope of Authority
The scope of authority exercised by an architectural committee is impacted by the type of common interest development that the association was formed to manage:

PUDs	Condominiums
Landscaping improvements	Balcony flooring surfaces, plants, and furniture
Lot setback requirements	Hardwood and interior flooring installations
Structure and improvement design, placement, and height	Plumbing and electrical modifications
Exterior finishes, paint colors, roofing materials	Window tinting, design, and coverings
Fencing	Satellite dish placement
Satellite dishes	EV charging stations
Solar panels
EV charging stations

Code Compliance
An architectural committee’s approval powers extend to compliance with an association’s governing documents and do not serve as a substitute for any ancillary requirements imposed upon a member by local building codes or county ordinances. In most cases, a member’s proposed improvements or modifications will require separate approvals from the association’s architectural committee as well as local building/code enforcement entities.

Decision Requirements
Any decision regarding a member’s architectural application must:

Be made in good faith and not be unreasonable, arbitrary or capricious. (Civ. Code § 4765(a)(2); See also Cohen v. Kite Hill Community Assn. (1983) 142 Cal.App.3d 642.)
Not be in conflict with any “governing provision of law” (e.g., Fair Employment and Housing Act, building codes, laws governing land use or public safety, etc.). (Civ. Code § 4765(a)(3).); and
Be made in writing. (Civ. Code § 4765(a)(4).)

If an application is disapproved (rejected), the written decision of the architectural committee 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 by an architectural committee, 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).)

Architectural Committee Meeting Minutes
Because architectural committees are typically comprised of volunteer association members and not members of the association’s board of directors, the meetings of an architectural committee are not “board meetings” subject to the requirements and restrictions contained in the Open Meeting Act. However, to the extent that an architectural committees has “decisionmaking authority,” Civil Code Section 5210 requires the architectural committee to keep and maintain minutes of its meetings, and to make such minutes available for inspection by the association’s members within certain timeframes. (See “Committee Meeting Minutes.”)

Architectural Variances

The architectural control provisions of an association’s governing documents may permit the association to, in extraordinary circumstances, issue a member a variance from compliance with one or more of the association’s architectural standards. An association’s decision to issue a variance has been held to be analogous to the issuance of a zoning variance by an administrative agency, and must therefore be limited to unique and extraordinary circumstances where substantial evidence would justify the desired variance:

“In the zoning context as well as here, a departure from the master plan in the Declaration stands to affect most adversely those who hold rights in neighboring property. Hence, what the California Supreme Court has stated with regard to judicial review of grants of variances applies equally well to the Association’s actions herein: ‘[C]ourts must meaningfully review grants of variances in order to protect the interests of those who hold rights in property nearby the parcel for which a variance is sought. A zoning scheme, after all, is similar in some respects to a contract; each party foregoes rights to use its land as it wishes in return for the assurance that the use of neighboring property will be similarly restricted, the rationale being that such mutual restriction can enhance total community welfare. [Citations.] If the interest of these parties in preventing unjustified variance awards for neighboring land is not sufficiently protected, the consequence will be subversion of the critical reciprocity upon which zoning regulation rests.’ (Topanga Assn. for a Scenic Community v. County of Los Angeles (1974) 11 Cal.3d 506, 517-518 [113 Cal.Rptr. 836, 522 P.2d 12].) For nearly identical reasons, we conclude that the courts must be available to protect neighboring property interests from arbitrary actions by homeowner associations.” (Cohen v. Kite Hill Community Assn. (1983) 142 Cal.App.3d 642, 652.)

Variance Requirements
Subject to any additional restrictions or requirements in an association’s governing documents, an architectural variance may typically be issued where:

Extraordinary circumstances exist that justify the variance. Association governing documents often describe such extraordinary circumstances as those involving topography, natural obstructions, hardship or other environmental considerations;
The variance is not in conflict with the governing documents; and
Proper notice is provided. Such notice may include notice to: (a) applicable city or county building departments (i.e., if the variance involves setbacks or building code issues), (b) the board of directors (i.e., in situations where the body issuing the variance is separate from the board, such as an architectural committee), and (c) surrounding homeowners.

Architectural Application & Approval Process

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:

Be included in the association’s governing documents (i.e., in its CC&Rs or operating rules);
Provide for prompt deadlines; and
State the maximum time for the association to issue a response to the member’s architectural application or a request for the board to reconsider a disapproved application. (Civ. Code § 4765(a)(1).)

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:

Be made in good faith and not be unreasonable, arbitrary or capricious. (Civ. Code § 4765(a)(2); See also Cohen v. Kite Hill Community Assn. (1983) 142 Cal.App.3d 642.)
Not be in conflict with any “governing provision of law” (e.g., Fair Employment and Housing Act, building codes, laws governing land use or public safety, etc.). (Civ. Code § 4765(a)(3).); and
Be made in writing. (Civ. Code § 4765(a)(4).)

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.

Architectural Standards

Architectural standards (aka “architectural guidelines, “design standards,” etc.) set forth an association’s policies and procedures regulating a homeowner’s ability to make architectural improvements and modifications to the homeowner’s separate interest, as well as to common area and exclusive use common area. Architectural standards are operating rules which may impose additional architectural restrictions beyond those contained in an association’s CC&Rs, provided that there is empowering language in the CC&Rs to that effect. (Bear Creek Planning Committee v. Ferwerda (2011) 193 Cal.App.4th 1178.) An architectural standard may not be used to circumvent a contradictory provision contained in the CC&Rs (Ekstrom v. Marquesa at Monarch Beach HOA (2008) 168 Cal.App.4th 1111), but may be used to clarify ambiguous CC&R provisions. (Rancho Santa Fe Assn. v. Dolan-King (2004) 115 Cal.App.4th 28.)

Architectural standards often regulate exterior design elements such as paint colors, exterior finishes, and landscaping materials. Architectural standards often establish the procedure through which a homeowner may obtain the association’s approval for desired architectural improvements and modifications. (See “Architectural Application & Approval Process.”)

An association’s authority to establish and enforce architectural standards is premised upon the impact that aesthetics have on the property values of the association’s members:

“Maintaining a consistent and harmonious neighborhood, one that is architecturally and artistically pleasing, confers a benefit on the homeowners by maintaining the value of their properties.” (Dolan-King v. Rancho Santa Fe Assn. (2000) 81 Cal.App.4th 965, 976.)

Preserving “the aesthetic quality and property values within the community” is recognized by courts as an “important function” of an association. (Cohen v. Kite Hill Community Assn. (1983) 142 Cal.App.3d 642, 648.)

Adoption & Amendment
Architectural standards are a component of an association’s operating rules that are adopted and amended by the board of directors. (Civ. Code § 4355(a)(2),(6).) The board must therefore comply with the procedural requirements under Civil Code Section 4360 when adopting or amending architectural standards (i.e., providing the membership with thirty (30) days notice of a proposed change to the architectural standards). (See “Adopting & Amending Operating Rules.”)

Administered by Architectural Committee
The responsibility for administering an association’s architectural standards (i.e., reviewing a member’s architectural application) is often delegated to an “architectural committee” that is separate from the board. Modern sets of governing documents contain provisions requiring an architectural committee and further regulating its duties and responsibilities. (See “Architectural Committee” and “Architectural Application & Approval Process.”)

Current Status: Pending

FindHOALaw Quick Summary:

Current Status: Pending

FindHOALaw Quick Summary:

Current Status: Chaptered

FindHOALaw Quick Summary:

Current Status: Dead

FindHOALaw Quick Summary:

Current Status: Dead

FindHOALaw Quick Summary:

Related Links