Section 2: The architectural-review framework

2A. Source and scope of architectural authority

Architectural control in Oregon does not come straight from either Act. It starts in the recorded declaration, and the board or an architectural committee the declaration creates administers it, inside the framework of whichever Act applies. The Planned Community Act assumes this structure: its definitions describe declarations that impose architectural controls — fencing, landscaping, exterior colors and materials, and review of the plans for any structure an owner places on a lot or on the common property.¹ The Act supplies the enforcement rules and the limits; the declaration supplies the standards.

Two statutes divide the ground. The Planned Community Act, ORS 94.550 to 94.783, governs residential planned communities and reaches most single-family HOAs.¹ The Condominium Act, ORS Chapter 100, governs condominiums.² Associations organize as corporations: a planned-community association forms as a nonprofit corporation under ORS Chapter 65, and condominium associations created on or after September 27, 2007 must incorporate unless the condominium has four or fewer units.⁹ Where the community statute and the Nonprofit Corporation Act collide, the community statute wins — ORS 94.770 for planned communities, ORS 100.100 for condominiums.¹

Classification comes first because the governing Act and its cross-references differ, and because the Planned Community Act does not apply evenly across community classes. The Act sorts communities into Class I, Class II, and Class III by lot count and assessment level, and ORS 94.570 and 94.572 decide which provisions reach which class, and which reach communities formed before January 1, 2002.¹ Apply a Chapter 94 rule to a condominium, or a Class I rule to a pre-2002 Class III community, and you may be leaning on a provision that does not apply. For any architectural decision, the order of precedence runs from the applicable Act, to the declaration, to the bylaws, to the properly adopted rules and architectural guidelines.

2B. The approval process, standards, and fine procedure

Oregon sets no general statutory deadline for deciding an architectural application, no general deemed-approval rule, and no statutory requirement that a denial come in writing or state its reasons. Those pieces come from the declaration and from any architectural guidelines the board adopts. Two statutory deadlines are narrow. The association must approve a completed EV-charging application within 60 days.⁴ And since June 5, 2026, SB 1551 (Or Laws 2026, ch 86) provides that a planned-community application to install fire-hardened building materials or remove non-hardened materials "is deemed approved unless the association denies or requests modifications to the application in a written opinion that: (a) Is delivered within 90 days after the application is filed; (b) Demonstrates in reasonable detail the basis for the denial and the scope of any necessary modifications; and (c) Is not arbitrary or capricious." Section 4(1) also voids a provision limiting the "design, dimensions, placement, maintenance or external appearance" of hardened materials where it has "the practical effect of prohibiting" them or requires materials that "cost substantially more than other fire-hardened building materials of similar quality," and section 8 applies the act to documents executed "before, on or after" its effective date; ORS chapter 100 gets no parallel section.^10,11

The governing standard is reasonableness. Oregon enforces valid declaration and covenant terms, and the Planned Community Act lets an association levy reasonable fines for violations after notice and a hearing, and bring a legal action.⁶ Where the declaration hands an architectural decision to a committee's discretion, the Oregon Court of Appeals does not second-guess the aesthetics; it reviews the decision for good faith, which the court first framed in the Eagle Crest litigation as a question of fraud, bad faith, or a failure to exercise honest judgment.¹² The second Eagle Crest appeal (2026) made the test objective: "the duty of good faith requires that parties act in an objectively reasonable manner," and a committee that "may have rejected plaintiffs' construction plans to promote a certain aesthetic, and may have done so in all honesty," still breached that duty by effectively banning a garage the owners had an objectively reasonable expectation they could build.¹³ So architectural standards should be reasonable, applied consistently, and grounded in the declaration.

The fine procedure is the highest-risk operational rule. Under ORS 94.630, before an association imposes a fine it must give the owner written notice and a chance to be heard, and the fine must rest on a schedule — in the declaration or bylaws, or in an amendment or board resolution — that the association has delivered to each lot, mailed to each lot's mailing address, or mailed to the address an owner designates in writing.⁶ A fine schedule that sits only in the board's files is not enough; a fine built on an undelivered schedule is not properly authorized.

Nonemergency board meetings in owner-occupied communities require notice at least three days in advance, posted or otherwise reasonably provided.¹⁴ And before either side files suit in an adversarial matter, the party that starts it must offer to use a county dispute-resolution program and give the other side 10 days to accept.⁷ The practical sequence for the professional reader: classify the community, ground the decision in the declaration, adopt and deliver a fine schedule before you rely on fines, honor the solar and EV rights, and make the dispute-resolution offer before you file.

2C. Statutory and federal limits on architectural authority

Two carve-outs are verified. Solar: a provision in a planned community's declaration or bylaws that bars an owner "from installing or using solar panels for obtaining solar access" is "void and unenforceable as a violation of the public policy to protect the public health, safety and welfare of the people of Oregon," though the association may still adopt and enforce reasonable size, placement, or aesthetic requirements as long as it does not effectively prohibit the panels (ORS 94.778, enacted 2017 c.282).³

EV charging: an owner may install a charging station for personal, noncommercial use in a space reserved for the owner's exclusive use; the association may not prohibit it, may impose reasonable review and restrictions, and "shall approve a completed application within 60 days after the owner submits the application unless the delay in approving the application is based on a reasonable request for additional information" (ORS 94.762; the condominium analog, ORS 100.627, uses identical language).^4,15 We could not confirm a Chapter 100 analog to the solar provision, so a reviewer applying the solar rule in a condominium should check the governing document and any applicable statute first.

Two carve-outs that people assume exist are not established in Oregon. There is no confirmed standalone Oregon statute protecting flag display in community associations; the federal Freedom to Display the American Flag Act of 2005 supplies that protection, subject to reasonable restrictions.¹⁶ There is likewise no confirmed Oregon planned-community or condominium statute protecting political signs. The "ORS 94.757" citation that turns up in secondary Oregon HOA guides does not appear in the Oregon Revised Statutes, and House Bill 3406 (2013), which would have written flag and political-sign protections into both Acts, died in committee.⁵

On landscaping, Oregon has no drought-tolerant or native-landscaping carve-out, but irrigation requirements in a declaration, bylaws, rules, or landscaping and architectural guidelines are void and unenforceable during a declared drought (ORS 94.630(5) and ORS 94.779; the condominium counterpart is ORS 100.023).¹⁷ Wildfire defensible-space rules once overlapped with vegetation standards, but Oregon repealed the statewide wildfire hazard map and its defensible-space mandate in 2025.¹⁸

Oregon practitioner guidance identifies the Unlawful Trade Practices Act (ORS 646.605 et seq.) as reaching association-owner dealings, which hands owners consumer-protection remedies most states do not offer in this setting; that reading rests on secondary authority, so confirm it for a given dispute.⁸ The federal overlays apply too, and they add to state law rather than replace it: the Freedom to Display the American Flag Act of 2005, the FCC's OTARD rule (47 C.F.R. § 1.4000, covering most antennas and satellite dishes one meter or less), and the Fair Housing Act's reasonable-modification right (42 U.S.C. § 3604(f)(3)(A), owner-funded and subject to reasonableness).^16,19,20 That reasonable-modification right caps what an Oregon architectural review board can do once a resident shows a genuine disability-related need: the board may apply neutral aesthetic standards to how the work is carried out, but it may not use its review or approval process to indefinitely delay or effectively deny the request, and valid denial grounds are limited to undue financial or administrative burden, a fundamental alteration, or a direct threat to health, safety, or property — plain aesthetic preference is not enough.²¹

Section 3: Compliance obligations in the architectural-review process

A. Adopting and maintaining architectural standards

The duty to have architectural standards at all is a creature of the declaration. The Planned Community Act assumes the declaration will impose architectural controls and a plan-review requirement, but the Act does not supply the standards itself.¹ Any guidelines the board adopts must stay inside the authority the declaration grants and cannot conflict with it.¹² Statute constrains one area in particular: a solar-related standard may address size, placement, and appearance, but it may not effectively prohibit installation (ORS 94.778).³

B. Reviewing and deciding applications

The review timeline, the form of the decision, and any internal appeal come from the declaration, because neither Act sets a general deadline, a deemed-approval rule, or a written-denial requirement. The statutory timing rules are the EV deadline — the association must approve a completed EV-charging application within 60 days (ORS 94.762; ORS 100.627 for condominiums)⁴ — and, for planned communities, SB 1551's 90-day deemed-approval clock for fire-hardened building materials.¹⁰ When the declaration commits a decision to committee discretion, the association carries a duty — statutory and common-law — to exercise that discretion in good faith, and a court measures that good faith objectively and can reverse a denial that is not objectively reasonable.^12,13

C. Honoring statutory and federal owner protections

These obligations are statutory. Solar: an association may not enforce a provision that prohibits or effectively prohibits solar panels (ORS 94.778).³ EV charging: an association may not prohibit a compliant charging station, and it must approve a completed application within 60 days (ORS 94.762; ORS 100.627).⁴ Irrigation: an association may not enforce irrigation requirements during a declared drought (ORS 94.630(5) and ORS 94.779; ORS 100.023).¹⁷

The federal overlays run independent of the declaration and add to it: the Flag Act, the 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)).^16,19,20 And no one should treat a flag or political-sign carve-out as Oregon statutory law without first verifying it.⁵

D. Enforcement and dispute resolution

The fine procedure is statutory. An association may levy a fine only after written notice and a chance to be heard, and only on a fine schedule it has delivered or mailed to each lot; a fine on an undelivered schedule is unauthorized (ORS 94.630).⁶ Board-meeting notice is statutory too: at least three days for a nonemergency meeting in an owner-occupied community (ORS 94.644).¹⁴ The pre-litigation dispute-resolution offer is statutory (ORS 94.630(4)).⁷

So are the remedies: an assessment lien and, as a last resort, foreclosure (ORS 94.709); a civil action; and recovery of reasonable attorney fees by the prevailing party in an action to enforce the Act, the declaration, or the bylaws (ORS 94.719).^22,23 The Unlawful Trade Practices Act (ORS 646.605 et seq.) adds a further, statute-based consumer-protection avenue that is reported to reach association-owner dealings.⁸ Whether an unpaid fine is enforceable as an assessment depends on the declaration.

Section 4: Recent legislative and judicial activity

A. Recent bills

B. Recent rulings

C. Active legislative debates

HB 4080 died in committee, and SB 1551's fire-hardening provisions are the only 2026 enactment that reaches architectural review; we found no pending Oregon measure that squarely amends architectural-review authority, and no qualifying appellate ruling other than the Santoro line in the window from mid-2023 through 2026.

Section 5: National positioning and related coverage

Oregon is a detailed, carve-out-rich, two-statute state. An estimated 3,885 community associations serve roughly 551,000 residents, most of them concentrated in the Portland metropolitan area.²⁷ The state regulates planned communities and condominiums through separate, purpose-built Acts, protects solar and EV charging by statute, and reins in fines through a notice-hearing-and-delivered-schedule procedure backed by a consumer-protection overlay. That places Oregon alongside other protective western states, while it stays less architecturally prescriptive than California.

For a multi-state operator, the takeaways are concrete: the community type decides the governing Act; the solar and EV-charging rights cap what an association can prohibit; fines require a delivered schedule and a hearing; and the Unlawful Trade Practices Act adds consumer-protection exposure. That posture sets Oregon well apart from thin-statute states such as Mississippi and North Dakota, where architectural authority rests almost entirely on the declaration with little statutory overlay.

HOA Weekly updates its Oregon architectural-review coverage quarterly as the Legislative Assembly, the Oregon Court of Appeals, and the Oregon Supreme Court act. Federal frameworks — including the Freedom to Display the American Flag Act, the FCC OTARD rule, and the Fair Housing Act — apply to Oregon associations on top of state law.