If your declaration requires architectural approval before you can change the exterior of your home, the committee's power is real. But Washington's leverage for owners here isn't a list of protected projects, it's a paper trail the board can't avoid creating. RCW 64.90.495 requires the association to retain, for seven years, the materials the board or any committee relied on to approve or deny a design or architectural request, and that file is yours to request under the same statute's access right. A denial that just says no isn't the end of the story; the actual guideline the board says you violated, and whatever it compared your project to, has to exist somewhere on paper, and you're entitled to see it.
Washington also removes one specific procedural hurdle that can slow-walk a request: RCW 64.90.405 lists the association's power to grant easements over the common elements, and specifically carves out electric vehicle charging stations from the extra reallocation vote that would otherwise apply. In plain terms, the board can't tell you it needs a full common-element reallocation vote among every owner before it can even consider letting you install a charger; the statute already cleared that hurdle out of the way.
The resale certificate keeps your project's history honest
Architectural history follows the home. RCW 64.90.640 requires the resale certificate every seller must provide to disclose whether the board has given or received notice that any existing use, alteration, or improvement on the unit or its limited common elements violates the governing documents, and to separately disclose any requirements, insurance terms, or costs tied to an EV charging station on the property. That cuts both ways: if the board never flagged your modification in a resale certificate, that silence is itself evidence it never treated the project as a violation.
The authority
The statutes behind this
Cited by name as authority, for your own reading. Informational only, not legal advice.
RCW 64.90.495
Requires the association to keep, for seven years, the materials the board or a committee relied on to approve or deny an architectural request, and gives owners the right to request that file.
RCW 64.90.405
Carves electric vehicle charging station installations out of the common-element reallocation vote that would otherwise apply to granting an easement over common elements.
RCW 64.90.640
Requires the resale certificate to disclose any known governing-document violation tied to the unit and any EV-charging-station terms, so the architectural history travels with the home.
Step by step
How to challenge an architectural denial in Washington
Steps to push back on an ARC denial using Washington's records-access and EV-charging rules.
- 01
Request the ARC decision file in writing
Cite RCW 64.90.495 and ask for the materials the board or committee relied on to deny your request, which the association must have kept for up to seven years.
- 02
Pin the denial to an actual written standard
Ask exactly which recorded covenant or guideline your project violated. A denial that can't point to one is weak.
- 03
Check whether it's really an EV-charging request
If so, remind the board that RCW 64.90.405 already removes the common-element reallocation vote as a barrier; it can't cite that as a reason to delay.
- 04
Gather comparables
Document similar approved projects in the community, and check resale certificates (RCW 64.90.640) for properties with comparable features to see whether the board ever flagged them as violations.
- 05
Appeal in writing, citing the statute
Resubmit with your comparables and the statutory citations, and ask that the appeal go to the full board with minutes taken.
Straight answers
Common questions
Can I get the file behind an ARC denial in Washington?
Yes. RCW 64.90.495 requires the association to retain the materials the board or committee relied on to approve or deny a design or architectural request for seven years, and gives owners the right to request it.
Can my HOA block an EV charging station?
Washington's RCW 64.90.405 removes the common-element reallocation vote that would otherwise apply to granting an easement for an EV charger, though the board may still apply reasonable conditions.
How would I know if the board ever flagged my project as a violation?
Check the resale certificate history. RCW 64.90.640 requires disclosure of any known governing-document violation tied to the unit, so a clean history is itself evidence.
The committee approved my neighbor's identical project. What now?
That's a selective-enforcement fact pattern. Pull the ARC decision files for both projects under RCW 64.90.495 and see the selective-enforcement guide.