ARC review - Legal Reasons

The legal reason is that's in your governing docs (CCRs, Covenants, deed restrictions) which form a contract between the homeowners.

The reason, as others have pointed out, is because it's part of the contract (covenants).

The purpose is to ensure changes comply with current covenants, restrictions and guidelines. Otherwise, the cost of enforcement after the fact (if a change doesn't comply with the governing docs) can spiral out of control.

Regarding developer approval - The developer was the ARC and, effectively, the Association at the time approval was granted. Even if there was an error in granting the change (5 foot fence vs. 4 foot authorized in covenants), to enforce will likely cost more then it's worth. This is because the member acted in good faith when the changes were made (they asked and received approval) and would be entitled to damages (i.e. the Association pays them) to remove, replace or adapt the previously approved change.

The best way to address this is, in my opinion, sending a letter that the Board is aware the change was approved by the developer. However, the change did not comply with the covenants at the time and should not have been approved. Therefore, the member may keep the change until the item needs to be replaced. At that time, the member must comply with all covenants.

ok, this sounds good. Now, there is verbiage in the CCR's that state "your project can be denied based purely on aesthetic reasons". Some folks like to question that and feel that should not be enforceable. What do you all think? Just trying to do the right thing by the homeowners. There are about 5 people on ARC review and they have to make these decisions and sometimes they deny based on aesthetics. I believe this should hold up just fine but wanted to ask.

As a practical matter, ARC approval can help ensure the community’s original look and design are preserved and that the homeowner has qualified contractors do the work.

Like you, I think denying a project for aesthetic reasons alone can be tricky. It may be easy to deny a house repainting job because the proposed color is totally gaudy (which is also a judgment call), so I think it’s best for the Board and ARC committee to recognize that materials, styles, colors – and homeowner taste - can and do evolve over time. Just because the project can be rejected for that reason doesn’t mean that it should.

On the other hand, some projects look good on paper but are completely different when completed. For example, paint can look different on a house than a color sample, especially when you consider sunny days vs. cloudy days or even how much sun hits one side of the house vs. another.

It may be helpful for the committee to develop some general guidelines on what it will review so if something is rejected, they can give a reasonable explanation. For example, the website of one paint company suggested when a homeowner wants to repaint his/her house in an HOA, he/she should consider the house's current color, the color of the neighbors' homes and colors that are HOA approved (if you have such a list). The owner might ask the neighbors what they think of the proposed color and get some sort of written statement stating they're ok with it (if they don't do that, the ARC committee could do it, remembering some neighbors won't care and others may have beef with the owner and blast anything suggested).