Overview of Architectural Review Process in Common Interest Developments

By August 26, 2016 Blog No Comments
Business workplace, boardroom white interior

Common interest developments (CID) in California are regulated by the Davis-Stirling Common Interest Development Act (Act). The Act governs several of areas of CID operation, such as requiring board meetings to be administered by parliamentary procedures and mandating that board meetings be open to all members of the community subject to certain exceptions.

The Act requires that any revisions to the operating rules of the Board, as set forth in the governing documents, meet specified requirements. These operating rules are applicable only to certain matters and actions. One area of regulation involves comprehensive standards for architectural review of CID structures. According to the legislation, CIDs that require board approval for physical changes to individual structures must conform to detailed requirements in their review of architectural proposals. Typically board approval is required for a host of physical alterations, such as building an extension or painting the exterior of a home. The requirements for reviewing proposals for renovations include the following:

  • The Board must provide a “fair, reasonable and expeditious procedure” for the Board’s decision. This procedure should be outlined in the governing documents of the Board.

 

  • The Board’s ruling must be in writing. If the homeowner’s proposal is not approved, the Board must issue a written explanation for its decision and describe the process by which the Board will reconsider the application.

.

  • If an applicant’s proposal is rejected, then the applicant can petition for consideration at an open meeting of the Board, subject to certain exceptions.

 

  • The Board must provide annual notice of the conditions for approval of physical changes to a structure, including the kinds of alteration that would require Board approval and the procedures applied to review the proposal and make a decision.

 

  • The Board’s decision must be rendered in good faith and cannot be unreasonable or arbitrary.

The underlying goal of establishing standards for architectural review is to provide transparency and uniformity in the process. In the absence of comprehensive guidelines for reviewing physical changes, there is a risk that the review process appears unfair or capricious.

Contact Shane Coons at 949-333-0900 or visit his website at www.ShaneCoonsLaw.com to find out more about his practice.

Leave a Reply