Arkansas HOA Architectural Review

Quick-Reference Architectural Authority Table

Section 1: Overview — How architectural review works in Arkansas

Start with a simple fact: Arkansas has no standalone architectural-review statute. Architectural control begins in the recorded declaration, the covenants, conditions, and restrictions that run with the land, and for condominiums the Horizontal Property Act, Ark. Code § 18-13-101 et seq., read together with that declaration, supplies the statutory backstop.¹ Planned communities that are not condominiums get no dedicated Arkansas statute at all. There, the declaration is the entire source of architectural authority, and the Arkansas Nonprofit Corporation Act of 1993, Ark. Code § 4-33-101 et seq., adds only corporate-formality scaffolding, how a board acts, how it calls meetings, and how it gives notice at the corporate level, not any architectural-review process.⁸

Because no dedicated statute exists, the mechanics that owners in other states treat as statutory rights, decision timelines, deemed approval when an association misses a deadline, and mandatory written denials, live in Arkansas only as declaration terms, and only where a particular declaration spells them out.² Owner-protective carve-outs stay minimal. Arkansas has no HOA solar-access law, and the operative statutory limits on association authority are federal, the Freedom to Display the American Flag Act of 2005, the FCC OTARD rule, and the Fair Housing Act.⁴ That makes Arkansas a CC&R-primary, light-touch state, and it stands in contrast to carve-out-heavy states such as California, Arizona, and Colorado, which stack statutory design-review protections on top of the declaration. The sections that follow lay out the framework, the compliance obligations, and the recent legislative and judicial activity.

Section 2: The architectural-review framework

2A. Source and scope of architectural authority

Architectural authority in Arkansas starts in the recorded declaration, which usually hands review to the board or to an architectural review or control committee. A declaration may call that body an architectural review committee, an architectural control committee, or a design review committee; where the declaration names no committee, the board holds the authority.² For condominiums, the Horizontal Property Act (§ 18-13-101 et seq.), read with the recorded master deed, governs. The Act organizes the community around a council of co-owners, defines general and limited common elements, and, as amended in 2025, addresses declarant development rights and the boundaries between individual units and common elements.¹ The Act itself lays out no architectural-review procedure; design control comes instead from the master deed and any recorded architectural standards.

For planned communities that are not condominiums, no Arkansas statute sits above the declaration. The declaration is the entire source of architectural authority, and the Nonprofit Corporation Act of 1993 supplies only corporate-formality scaffolding, how the board acts, how it calls meetings, and how it gives corporate notice, not any standard for approving or denying an exterior change.⁸ The Horizontal Property Act covers condominiums only; it does not reach non-condominium planned communities, and secondary sources repeatedly make the mistake of treating it as a general HOA statute.¹ The practical order of precedence depends on the community type. For condominiums, it runs from the Horizontal Property Act, to the declaration or master deed, to the bylaws, to the rules. For planned communities, it runs from the declaration, to the bylaws, to the rules, with no HOA-specific statute sitting above the declaration.¹

2B. The approval process and standards of review

Arkansas imposes no statutory application deadline, no deemed-approval rule, and no written-denial requirement on either community type. Where those protections exist, they come from the declaration as contractual terms, not from any statutory mandate.² What constrains a challenged decision is judicial, not statutory. As the Arkansas Supreme Court put it in Forrest Constr., Inc. v. Milam, "Restrictive covenants are to be strictly construed against limitations on the free use of property. All doubts are resolved in favor of the unfettered use of land. However, this rule of strict construction is limited by the basic doctrine of taking the plain meaning of the language employed."³ So a decision that is arbitrary, capricious, or untethered from the declaration's stated criteria stands on shaky ground, and a court will read an ambiguous covenant in the owner's favor.

A defensible review record in Arkansas therefore looks a certain way: the association applies its published standards consistently, ties each decision to the declaration's stated criteria, and documents the basis for any denial. Because the timeline and written-decision requirements are contractual rather than statutory, the declaration and any adopted architectural guidelines serve as the operative rulebook. An association should follow its own published procedure precisely. When a court sets aside an approval or a denial, it most often does so because the association strayed from the declaration's own terms, or leaned on a restriction that the recorded language does not clearly state.³

2C. Statutory and federal limits on architectural authority

Arkansas keeps its state carve-outs to a minimum. No Arkansas HOA solar-access statute exists; the declaration and common-law reasonableness govern solar installations.⁴ Here is where multi-state operators can stumble. Arkansas did enact a measure nicknamed the "Arkansas Solar Access Act," Senate Bill 145 of 2019, enacted as Act 464, but that law amends definitions under the Arkansas Renewable Energy Development Act and the authority of the Arkansas Public Service Commission. It deals with net metering, third-party financing, and the mechanics of solar adoption. It does not bar HOAs from restricting solar installations, and it does not override recorded covenants.⁴ The Arkansas Code confirms no state-level carve-out for flags, political signs, landscaping, EV charging, or rainwater.²

The operative limits come from federal law, and they apply no matter what the declaration says. The Freedom to Display the American Flag Act of 2005 provides that an association "may not adopt or enforce any policy, or enter into any agreement, that would restrict or prevent a member of the association from displaying the flag of the United States on residential property within the association with respect to which such member has a separate ownership interest or a right to exclusive possession or use," subject to reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions needed to protect a substantial interest of the association.⁵ The FCC OTARD rule, 47 C.F.R. § 1.4000, bars restrictions that impair the installation, maintenance, or use of covered antennas and satellite dishes, direct-broadcast-satellite antennas one meter or less in diameter, video-programming antennas one meter or less in diameter or diagonal measurement, and television-broadcast antennas and their supporting masts, within an owner's exclusive-use area, subject to safety and historic-preservation exceptions.⁶ The Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. § 3604(f)(3)(A), requires an association to permit reasonable disability-related modifications of existing premises, made at the owner's expense and subject to reasonableness.⁹ These set the floor; they are not absolute bans on association authority.

Section 3: Compliance obligations in the architectural-review process

A. Adopting and maintaining architectural standards

For planned communities, the authority to adopt architectural standards arises from the declaration and applies to those communities alone; no state statute imposes or governs the obligation.² For condominiums, the master deed and bylaws frame the standards under the Horizontal Property Act, which requires a recorded master deed and bylaws, statutory as to recording and corporate structure, though not as to the content of the design standards themselves.¹ To bind a later owner, restrictive covenants must be executed by the owners and recorded; the Arkansas Supreme Court has held that covenants signed by only one of several owners are "not valid pursuant to Ark. Code Ann. § 18-12-103."³

B. Reviewing and deciding applications

For both community types, the duty to review and decide applications, along with any deadline, written decision, or appeal right, arises from the declaration, not from statute.² On a challenged decision, the governing standard is judicial: common-law reasonableness, with ambiguities construed in favor of the free use of land under Arkansas case law rather than statute.³ For associations organized as nonprofit corporations, the mechanics of how the board or committee acts on an application are corporate obligations under the Nonprofit Corporation Act of 1993.⁸

C. Honoring statutory and federal owner protections

For both community types, the operative owner protections are federal, and they override the declaration: the right to display the U.S. flag (Freedom to Display the American Flag Act of 2005), covered antennas and dishes (FCC OTARD, 47 C.F.R. § 1.4000), and reasonable disability-related modifications (FHA, 42 U.S.C. § 3604(f)(3)(A)).^5,6,9 No Arkansas state carve-out for solar, signs, landscaping, EV charging, or rainwater is confirmed, so the declaration keeps governing those items, subject only to common-law reasonableness.⁴

D. Enforcement and dispute resolution

For planned communities, enforcement authority, the fines and the standards for imposing them, arises from the declaration; no Arkansas statute sets fine caps or a fining procedure for non-condominium HOAs.² For condominiums, the Horizontal Property Act addresses assessments and the priority of unpaid assessments on sale, a statutory matter under § 18-13-116.⁷ For both types, an association enforces architectural restrictions through the courts, usually by an action for injunctive relief in circuit court, and a covenant that is ambiguous or has been enforced inconsistently is vulnerable under Arkansas's strict-construction rule.³ Trial-level disputes move through the Arkansas Circuit Courts, with appeals to the Arkansas Court of Appeals and discretionary review by the Arkansas Supreme Court. Arkansas has no dedicated HOA regulator and no architectural ombudsman. The Arkansas Real Estate Commission oversees real estate and property-management licensing, but it does not regulate ongoing HOA operations or architectural decisions.¹⁰

Section 4: Recent legislative and judicial activity

A. Recent bills

Arkansas lawmakers took a narrow, technical approach to community-association law in the 2025 session. One measure modernized the state's condominium statute; another tried, and failed, to extend regulation and audits to property owners' associations. Here are the two that matter most.

B. Recent appellate rulings

No Arkansas Court of Appeals or Supreme Court opinion decided between July 2023 and July 2026 has been verified as squarely addressing architectural review or restrictive-covenant enforcement in a common-interest community. The governing standard still rests on established precedent, chiefly the decision below.

C. Active legislative debates

Two threads are worth watching. The 2025 session produced Act 392, which sets up property-management broker and associate licensing under the Arkansas Real Estate Commission; the measure can affect community association managers, but it does not regulate architectural review.¹⁰ And HB 1660's failed attempt to regulate property owners' associations signals a continued interest in association-level oversight that may return in a future session.¹²

Section 5: National positioning and related coverage

Arkansas is a CC&R-primary, light-touch state for architectural review. Unlike carve-out-heavy states such as California, Arizona, Colorado, Nevada, and Florida, which pile statutory solar, landscaping, flag, sign, and EV-charging protections on top of the declaration, Arkansas leaves architectural control almost entirely to the recorded declaration, subject only to common-law reasonableness and a few federal overlays. For multi-state operators, the takeaway is direct: in Arkansas, the declaration is the operative architectural rulebook, and the main statutory limits are federal, the Freedom to Display the American Flag Act, the FCC OTARD rule, and the Fair Housing Act, not state-specific carve-outs. That picture reflects Arkansas's low volume of HOA-specific legislation and the absence of a comprehensive common-interest statute; the Horizontal Property Act covers condominiums only, and no equivalent statute governs planned communities.

HOA Weekly updates its Arkansas architectural-review coverage each quarter as the General Assembly and the Arkansas appellate courts act. The federal frameworks noted throughout, the Freedom to Display the American Flag Act, the FCC OTARD rule, and the Fair Housing Act, apply to Arkansas associations regardless of the declaration.

1. Arkansas Horizontal Property Act, Ark. Code § 18-13-101 et seq., as amended by Act 516 of 2025 (official Arkansas General Assembly text) ↩
2. Arkansas Horizontal Property Act, Ark. Code § 18-13-101 et seq. (text contains no architectural-review deadline, deemed-approval, or written-denial provision; no Arkansas statute supplies these for planned communities) ↩
3. Forrest Constr., Inc. v. Milam, 345 Ark. 1, 43 S.W.3d 140, 145 (2001) (restrictive covenants strictly construed against limitations on the free use of property; all doubts resolved in favor of the unfettered use of land; covenants must be executed by the owners and recorded under Ark. Code § 18-12-103) ↩
4. Arkansas SB 145 of 2019 (Act 464), amending the Arkansas Renewable Energy Development Act and Arkansas Public Service Commission authority (net metering / solar adoption; no HOA solar-access provision) ↩
5. Freedom to Display the American Flag Act of 2005, Pub. L. 109-243, 120 Stat. 572, codified at 4 U.S.C. § 5 note ↩
6. FCC Over-the-Air Reception Devices (OTARD) rule, 47 C.F.R. § 1.4000 (Electronic Code of Federal Regulations) ↩
7. Ark. Code § 18-13-116 (liability for expenses and assessments; priority of unpaid assessments), as amended by Act 516 of 2025 ↩
8. Arkansas Nonprofit Corporation Act of 1993, Ark. Code § 4-33-101 et seq. (Act 1147 of 1993, official text) ↩
9. Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. § 3604(f)(3)(A); U.S. Dept. of Housing and Urban Development / Dept. of Justice joint statement on reasonable modifications ↩
10. Act 392 of 2025 (HB 1558), property management broker and associate licensing under the Arkansas Real Estate Commission ↩
11. Act 516 of 2025 (SB 323), "An Act To Amend The Horizontal Property Act" (official enrolled text; approved April 10, 2025; applicable to regimes organized on or after September 1, 2025) ↩
12. Arkansas HB 1660 of 2025 (status: died in House Committee at sine die adjournment) ↩