A single permit for major development projects
What are the practical steps?
“One procedure, one authority, one stamp” is the slogan the government is using to promote the amendment to the Building Act, approved by the Chamber of Deputies on 10 July 2026. But what does this mean in practice—from the first inquiry at the authority, through the composition of the documentation and the course of the procedure, all the way to the final building approval? This article guides a large development project through the new regime step by step, showing at each stage what is changing and where new pitfalls lie in wait.
The essentials in six points
Where this article fits in our series on the amendment
In the main article Accelerated Permitting for Development Projects: What the Building Act Amendment (2026) Brings, we summarized the overall picture of the reform—the status of the legislative process, the new system of authorities, and the timeline for 2026–2028.
Here, we build on both by covering what was not in previous parts: a practical walkthrough of the procedure from the first contact with the authority to the final building approval. A word of caution: the amendment is heading to the Senate, and the rules described are based on the version approved by the Chamber of Deputies (Parliamentary Print 67)—details may still change.
Step 1: Preliminary Information—Find Out the Rules of the Game in Advance
The amendment significantly expands the institute of preliminary information. A developer will be able to ask the authority in advance not only about the conditions for land use but also, for example, about the circle of participants in the proceedings, the scope of required documentation, or requirements that will not apply to their project. The municipality will also be able to express its opinion on the project's compliance with the zoning plan in the form of preliminary information. For a project worth hundreds of millions, this is an inexpensive tool to verify with whom and about what the proceedings will be conducted—and to have it confirmed in writing—before purchasing land or finalizing the design.
Step 2: Documentation and Supporting Materials—The Core of the Entire Process
In the joint procedure, a simple equation applies: what used to require twenty separate opinions now requires one single procedure—and any defect in the supporting documents delays everything. The preparation of the application thus ceases to be an administrative step and becomes a legal-engineering project: complete documentation, affected land plots and rights to them, and resolved connections to infrastructure.
Three new features in the approved version help: statements from utility network administrators are given a fixed deadline, designers have access to data from the digital technical map, and the developer can attach their own draft of the decision's operative part to the application, which the authority will assess for legal compliance. A well-prepared draft operative part effectively pre-empts the authority's work—and is precisely the type of document that a lawyer should write together with the designer.
For projects already in preparation today, it is crucial that opinions and decisions of the concerned authorities issued before the establishment of the new authorities will retain their effects under the transitional provisions—if the developer submits them, the authority will not reassess the interests protected by them. The investment in supporting documents for ongoing preparations will therefore not be lost.
Step 3: EIA as the Sole Environmental Interface
Large residential projects are often subject to an environmental impact assessment (EIA) under Act No. 100/2001 Coll.. The amendment simplifies the architecture of environmental assessment: the single environmental statement under Act No. 148/2023 Coll. is abolished, and its agenda is primarily transferred to the EIA process, which can also integrate other necessary opinions at the developer's request. The result should be a single environmental interface before a single permitting procedure—instead of today's cascade of EIA, single environmental statements, and subsequent opinions. For the project schedule, this means that the EIA remains the critical path for a large project, and its high-quality preparation must precede everything else.
Step 4: The Joint Procedure—One Authority, Closed Issues, Justified Objections
The procedure itself for large residential projects will be conducted by the Spatial Development Authority; it will primarily ensure the protection of public interests itself, and the remaining binding opinions have firm limits—a review within 30 days with a fiction of confirmation and a prohibition on considering parts of a statement outside the authority's competence. The principle of closed issues is fundamental: what has been resolved in the spatial planning documentation is not reopened in the procedure, and in a developable area, a project consistent with the zoning plan benefits from a rebuttable presumption of permissibility. Objections from participants must be justified and specific; otherwise, they are disregarded.
In practice, this shifts the focus of legal work: instead of resolving disputes during the procedure, decisions are made in advance—in the spatial planning phase (where municipalities and the public retain their main role) and in the quality of the submission. A developer who has legally argued for compliance with the zoning plan at the time of submission benefits from the presumption of permissibility; a developer who leaves it to the authority risks that the single procedure will be as long as three separate ones were before.
Step 5: The Decision—One Stamp and Swift Legal Force
The result of the procedure is a single decision on the project permit—the "one stamp." For designated constructions, an administrative appeal (rozklad) is not permissible, so it becomes legally effective without an appeal phase; the defense for affected parties (and for the developer against a rejection) is an administrative action with a one-month deadline.
Step 6: Construction, Changes, and Final Approval—The End of the Procedure Is Not the End of the Rules
The amendment also considers the phase least discussed in debates about acceleration. It precisely defines a non-substantial deviation from the verified documentation, so minor changes during implementation will not require further permitting. It allows for the early use of the building before its complete finalization—crucial for developers due to client mortgages, land register entries, and unit handovers. And the final approval decision (kolaudace) can now also be issued by an authorized inspector, which opens a private-sector path for the final phase, which often gets stuck in overloaded authorities today. For underground lines, the as-built documentation (pasport) can be replaced by a geodetic survey.
Phase | What is changing and what it means for the developer |
|---|---|
Before submission | Preliminary information now provides broader data about the project. It is worthwhile to use it even before land acquisition and keep it as support for further proceedings. |
Documentation | Fixed deadlines for utility administrators and the option to attach a draft operative part. At the same time, it is necessary to submit flawless documentation, as later corrections will be limited. |
EIA | EIA becomes the main environmental process. For the project schedule, it remains crucial to initiate it as soon as possible. |
Procedure | A single procedure, fewer opportunities for delays, and stricter rules for objections. Compliance with the zoning plan must be documented at the time of submission. |
Decision | A single integrated decision, without administrative appeal (rozklad) for designated constructions. It is necessary to quickly evaluate the next steps after its delivery. |
Construction and final approval | New rules for non-substantial deviations, early use, and final approval. Changes during construction must be continuously and correctly assessed. |
Who will conduct the procedure and from when
For large residential projects, the procedure will be conducted by the Spatial Development Authority, which, according to the approved version, is set to begin operating on January 1, 2027; other projects will continue to be permitted by the existing building authorities during the transitional period until they are gradually replaced by regional spatial development authorities with 205 local offices (from 2028).
The complete timeline, including the dissolution of the DESÚ and the risks of staffing the new authorities, can be found in the main article of the series Accelerated Permitting for Development Projects: What the Building Act Amendment (2026) Brings; the current implementation status is published by the Ministry of Regional Development on the website novystavebnizakon.gov.cz.
How to Navigate the New Process: The Focus Is on the Work Before Submission
The new system follows a simple logic—and your preparation should follow the same logic. Take advantage of the expanded preliminary information and learn the rules of the game before finalizing your proposal. Have the documentation, contractual relationships regarding the land, and arguments regarding compliance with the zoning plan ready by the filing date, not during the proceedings—including a draft of the decision, which will help the authority prioritize its work. Coordinate the EIA as a critical path in the schedule. And keep in mind that the work doesn’t end with the proceedings: short deadlines apply after the decision is delivered, deviations during construction must be continuously classified from a legal standpoint, and final inspection can now be expedited through an authorized inspector.
We encounter all of this on a daily basis in construction practice. Are you preparing a project that will go through the new permitting process? Write to us at konzultace@arws.cz—we’ll review the readiness of your documentation with you, align your schedule with the reform timeline, and structure your submission so that you really only need one stamp.
About the author
Disclaimer:
The information in this article is for general informational purposes only and provides a basic overview of the issue under Czech legislation as of 2026. Although we strive for maximum accuracy, legal regulations and their interpretation evolve over time. We are ARROWS, a Prague-based law firm, an entity registered with the Czech Bar Association (our supervisory authority), and for the maximum security of our clients, we are insured for professional liability with a limit of CZK 400,000,000. To verify the current version of regulations and their application to your specific situation, it is necessary to contact ARROWS law firm directly (konzultace@arws.cz). We are not liable for any damages arising from the use of information from this article without prior individual legal consultation.