New York HOA Architectural Review

Quick-Reference Architectural Authority Table

Section 1: Overview — How architectural review works in New York

New York governs condominiums, cooperatives, and planned-community HOAs under three separate legal frameworks. It anchors architectural and alteration authority in each community's governing documents, and it reviews board decisions under the business-judgment rule rather than a statutory reasonableness standard.¹ So the first job for any professional facing an approve-or-deny decision is to classify the community. A condominium takes its form from the New York Condominium Act (Real Property Law article 9-B). A cooperative organizes as a corporation under the Business Corporation Law, and its proprietary lease and bylaws set the relationship between the corporation and the shareholder. A planned-community HOA operates under recorded covenants and the Not-for-Profit Corporation Law, with no central HOA act to govern it.²

The governing standard is the business-judgment rule, which the New York Court of Appeals laid out in Levandusky v. One Fifth Avenue Apartment Corp. Under that rule, a court's review "is limited to determining whether the challenged action is taken in good faith and in the exercise of honest judgment in the lawful and legitimate furtherance of corporate purposes."¹ The statutory carve-outs are narrow. The Solar Rights Act bars an HOA from imposing unreasonable limitations on a rooftop solar power system, and it requires a detailed written basis for any rejection.³ The Condominium Act protects a unit owner's display of a modest United States flag.⁴ New York also inverts the usual court naming: the Supreme Court is the trial-level court of general jurisdiction, the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court is the intermediate appellate court organized in four Departments, and the New York Court of Appeals is the state's highest court.¹ The Attorney General's Real Estate Finance Bureau regulates the front-end offering and sale of condominium and cooperative interests, but no state agency regulates ongoing architectural disputes.² The sections that follow set out the framework, the compliance obligations, and the recent activity.

Section 2: The architectural-review framework

2A. Source and scope of architectural authority

Architectural and alteration authority in New York starts in a community's governing documents, and those documents differ by structure. In a condominium, the authority sits in the declaration and bylaws, and the board of managers or an architectural committee administers it. In a cooperative, it sits in the proprietary lease and bylaws, and alteration requests usually run through an alteration agreement that the shareholder signs before any work begins. That alteration-agreement mechanism sat at the center of the facts in Levandusky itself.¹ In a planned-community HOA, the authority sits in the recorded covenants, conditions, and restrictions, backed up by bylaws and architectural guidelines.

The statutory backdrop differs across the three structures. The New York Condominium Act, Real Property Law article 9-B, governs condominiums. It supplies the framework for formation, management, powers, and operation, and it requires each unit owner to comply strictly with the bylaws and the adopted rules.⁴ The Business Corporation Law governs cooperatives as corporations, and the proprietary lease sets the substantive relationship. Planned-community HOAs have no dedicated statute. They operate under the recorded covenants, the Not-for-Profit Corporation Law for corporate governance, the common law, and the Real Property Actions and Proceedings Law for enforcement.² Across all three structures, the Attorney General's Real Estate Finance Bureau regulates only the front-end offering and sale.

Because the rulebook and the enforcement mechanics differ, you start any architectural decision by classifying the community. The order of precedence within each structure matters too. In a condominium, the Condominium Act controls first, then the declaration and bylaws, then the rules. In a cooperative, the corporate statute controls first, then the proprietary lease and bylaws, then the house rules. In an HOA, the recorded covenants control first, then the bylaws and architectural guidelines, and the Not-for-Profit Corporation Law supplies the corporate governance. A cooperative is not a condominium. Treat a shareholder-tenant relationship as if it were unit ownership, and you will reach the wrong analysis.

2B. The approval process, standards, and review

New York imposes no general statutory deadline for architectural or alteration decisions, no general deemed-approval rule, and no general written-denial requirement. The process comes from the governing documents, and for cooperatives that includes the alteration agreement. Two narrow statutory exceptions apply. First, an HOA that denies a homeowner's solar installation must give a detailed written description of the exact basis for the rejection.³ Second, inside the Condominium Act, an EV-charging application must draw a written decision within 60 days: "If an application is not denied in writing within sixty days from the date of receipt of the application, the application shall be deemed approved, unless that delay is the result of a reasonable request for additional information."⁵

The business-judgment rule is the governing standard for board decisions. Levandusky itself grew out of a cooperative's refusal to approve a steam-riser realignment during a kitchen renovation, and there the Court of Appeals held that a court will defer to a board's decision so long as the board acted within the scope of its authority, in good faith, and in the lawful and legitimate furtherance of corporate purposes. The court will not substitute its own judgment for the board's.¹ The rule defers, but it is not absolute. It "permits review of improper decisions, as when the challenger demonstrates that the board's action has no legitimate relationship to the welfare of the cooperative, deliberately singles out individuals for harmful treatment, is taken without notice or consideration of the relevant facts, or is beyond the scope of the board's authority."¹ The Court of Appeals extended the rule to a cooperative's termination of a proprietary lease for objectionable conduct in 40 West 67th Street Corp. v. Pullman,⁶ and New York courts apply the same standard to condominium boards.⁷

Enforcement and review track the structure. A condominium holds a statutory lien for unpaid common charges, can foreclose it the way a lender forecloses a mortgage, and enforces its declaration and rules through the courts.⁸ A cooperative enforces the proprietary lease and bylaws, and its remedies include ejectment.⁶ An HOA enforces its recorded covenants in court, with the Real Property Actions and Proceedings Law governing enforcement and foreclosure.² For the professional reader, the practical sequence runs like this: classify the community, ground the decision in the governing documents, act within the board's authority and in good faith to earn business-judgment-rule deference, and honor the solar, EV, and flag carve-outs.

2C. Statutory and federal limits on architectural authority

The state's cluster of carve-outs is short. The Solar Rights Act — Real Property Law article 9-C, § 342, effective October 1, 2021 — bars a homeowners' association from adopting or enforcing a restriction that effectively prohibits, or unreasonably limits, a rooftop solar power system with a rated capacity of not more than 25 kilowatts. The statute defines an unreasonable limitation to include one that "(a) inhibits the solar power system from functioning at its intended maximum efficiency; or (b) increases the solar power system's installation or maintenance costs by an amount which is estimated to be greater than ten percent of the total cost of the initial installation."³ The HOA must give a detailed written basis for any rejection, though it may still prohibit a system on property the HOA owns or that the members own in common.³ The statute reaches "homeowners' associations," so condominium and cooperative solar requests run through the governing documents under the business-judgment rule. A separate, older provision, § 335-b, lets property owners record voluntary solar-access easements, which run against neighboring owners rather than against the association.⁹

The EV-charging provision, Real Property Law § 339-ll, sits inside the Condominium Act and speaks to condominiums. It voids covenants and bylaws that effectively prohibit or unreasonably restrict a charging station in an owner's unit or designated parking space, while it still permits reasonable restrictions. By its terms, it does not reach cooperatives or HOAs.⁵ The flag provision, Real Property Law § 339-j, bars a condominium from maintaining any action for relief "due to the display of a flag of the United States measuring not more than four feet by six feet."⁴

New York confirms no statutory carve-out for political or campaign signs — courts analyze those under the business-judgment rule and public-policy principles — and it confirms no carve-out for drought-tolerant or native landscaping. Three federal overlays sit on top of state law, and they add to it rather than replace it. The Freedom to Display the American Flag Act of 2005 bars a condominium, cooperative, or residential real estate management association from restricting a member's display of the United States flag on separately owned or exclusively used property, subject to reasonable safety restrictions.¹⁰ The FCC's OTARD rule, 47 C.F.R. § 1.4000, limits restrictions on covered antennas and satellite dishes — generally one meter or less — within an owner's exclusive-use area.¹¹ The Fair Housing Act gives a disabled resident the right to make reasonable modifications at the resident's own expense.¹²

Section 3: Compliance obligations in the architectural-review process

A. Adopting and maintaining architectural standards

The authority to adopt architectural standards, design guidelines, and an approval process comes from the governing documents — the declaration and bylaws for condominiums, the proprietary lease and bylaws for cooperatives, and the recorded covenants for HOAs — not from a statutory mandate. A board must act within the scope those documents grant. A rule the board adopts outside that authority loses the protection of the business-judgment rule, and a court can void it.⁷

B. Reviewing and deciding applications

The duty to review and decide an application — along with any deadline or written-decision requirement — comes from the governing documents, because New York imposes no general statutory deadline and no general deemed-approval rule. The one statutory process obligation is the condominium EV-charging rule, § 339-ll. It requires a written decision within 60 days, and it deems an application approved if the board does not deny it in writing in time.⁵ Otherwise, courts review board decisions under the business-judgment rule.¹

C. Honoring statutory and federal owner protections

Several protections are statutory, and they override any contrary term in the governing documents. The HOA solar right, § 342, bars unreasonable limitations and requires a detailed written basis for a rejection.³ The condominium EV-charging provision, § 339-ll, voids covenants and bylaws that prohibit charging stations.⁵ The flag protection, § 339-j, together with the federal Freedom to Display the American Flag Act, protects flag display.^4,10 The FCC OTARD rule, 47 C.F.R. § 1.4000, and the Fair Housing Act's reasonable-modification right, 42 U.S.C. § 3604(f)(3)(A), apply as federal overlays.^11,12

D. Enforcement and dispute resolution

Enforcement remedies are part statutory and part contractual. A condominium's lien for unpaid common charges, and its foreclosure remedy, are statutory — § 339-aa.⁸ Covenant and rule enforcement otherwise proceeds through the courts, with the Real Property Actions and Proceedings Law governing the enforcement and foreclosure actions and the business-judgment rule governing review of the board's decision. Cooperatives enforce the proprietary lease and bylaws. HOAs enforce the recorded covenants under the Not-for-Profit Corporation Law and the RPAPL.²

Section 4: Recent legislative and judicial activity

A. Recent bills

New York's recent legislative activity touches the Condominium Act, but it leaves architectural-review authority alone. One bill in particular shows the pattern.

For recent context, the Solar Rights Act — Senate Bill S2997, sponsored by Senator Kevin Parker, and Assembly Bill A1933, sponsored by Assemblymember Sandy Galef, both in 2021 — added Real Property Law article 9-C effective October 1, 2021. It remains the most recent enactment that actually changed architectural authority, and it created the HOA solar carve-out described above.¹⁴

B. Recent rulings

Two recent decisions show the business-judgment rule at work in New York's appellate courts.

C. Active legislative debates

Lawmakers have floated a Cooperative and Condominium Ombudsperson Program — Senate Bill S7745 (2025-2026), sponsored by Senator Shelley Mayer — that would create a neutral state resource for co-op and condo disputes, funded by a per-unit fee. A companion condominium and cooperative disclosure measure, Assembly Bill A8337, had its enacting clause stricken in June 2025. Neither has become law.^17,18

Section 5: National positioning and related coverage

New York is a three-structure, business-judgment-rule state. It regulates the front-end offering and sale of condominium and cooperative interests heavily, through the Attorney General's Real Estate Finance Bureau, but it leaves day-to-day governance to the governing documents and corporate law. Its architectural carve-outs stay comparatively narrow — solar, EV charging, and the flag — and it carries a distinctive, dominant cooperative sector concentrated in New York City. For a multi-state operator, the takeaways come down to a few points. The community type determines the framework. Courts review board decisions under the business-judgment rule rather than a statutory reasonableness test. The solar right is written for homeowners' associations, not for condominiums or cooperatives. And the court naming runs backward: the Supreme Court is the trial court, and the New York Court of Appeals is the highest court. New York stands in contrast to comprehensive carve-out states such as California and Nevada, which codify detailed statutory limits on association architectural authority across signs, flags, landscaping, and more.

HOA Weekly's New York Architectural Review coverage updates quarterly as the Legislature, the Attorney General, the Appellate Division, and the New York Court of Appeals act. Federal frameworks — including the Freedom to Display the American Flag Act, the FCC OTARD rule, and the Fair Housing Act — apply to New York associations in addition to state law.

1. Matter of Levandusky v. One Fifth Ave. Apt. Corp., 75 N.Y.2d 530 (1990) (N.Y. Court of Appeals, official reporter) ↩
2. Consolidated Laws of New York (Real Property Law art. 9-B; Business Corporation Law; Not-for-Profit Corporation Law; RPAPL), NYS Open Legislation ↩
3. N.Y. Real Property Law § 342 (Solar Rights Act, art. 9-C), NYS Open Legislation ↩
4. N.Y. Real Property Law § 339-j (Compliance with by-laws and rules and regulations), NYS Open Legislation ↩
5. N.Y. Real Property Law § 339-ll (Electric vehicle charging station installation), NYS Open Legislation ↩
6. 40 West 67th Street Corp. v. Pullman, 100 N.Y.2d 147 (2003) (N.Y. Court of Appeals opinion) ↩
7. Turan v. Meadowbrook Pointe Homeowners Assn., Inc., 211 A.D.3d 985 (App. Div. 2d Dept. 2022) (applying the business-judgment rule to a condominium board and holding it inapplicable to an unauthorized house rule) ↩
8. N.Y. Real Property Law § 339-aa (Lien for common charges; duration; foreclosure), NYS Open Legislation ↩
9. N.Y. Real Property Law § 335-b (Recording of solar energy easements), NYS Open Legislation ↩
10. Freedom to Display the American Flag Act of 2005, Pub. L. No. 109-243, 120 Stat. 572 (GovInfo) ↩
11. 47 C.F.R. § 1.4000 (Over-the-Air Reception Devices rule), eCFR ↩
12. 42 U.S.C. § 3604(f)(3)(A) (Fair Housing Act reasonable-modification right), Office of the Law Revision Counsel ↩
13. N.Y. Senate Bill S7541 (2025-2026), transparency guidelines for condominiums and cooperative housing units, NYS Open Legislation ↩
14. N.Y. Senate Bill S2997 (2021-2022) and Assembly Bill A1933 (2021), Solar Rights Act, NYS Open Legislation ↩
15. Avrahami v. 235 West 108th Street Owners Corp., 2025 N.Y. Slip Op. 02126 (App. Div. 1st Dept. 2025) ↩
16. Ng v. Board of Directors, 2024 N.Y. Slip Op. 51206(U) (App. Term, 2d Dept. 2024) ↩
17. N.Y. Senate Bill S7745 (2025-2026), Cooperative and Condominium Ombudsperson Program, NYS Open Legislation ↩
18. N.Y. Assembly Bill A8337 (2025-2026), transparency guidelines (enacting clause stricken), NYS Open Legislation ↩