Accelerated Permitting for Real Estate Development Projects: An Overview of the 2026 Amendment to the Building Act
On 10 July 2026, the Chamber of Deputies approved an extensive amendment to the Building Act, which is set to fundamentally change the building permit process in the Czech Republic — large residential projects over 10,000 m² will become reserved constructions in the public interest, a single procedure and a single decision should be sufficient for a permit, and building authorities will be transferred under state administration. This guide summarises what the amendment means for developers and investors, what the timeline is, where the risks lie — and what to do with projects that are currently in progress.
Where the amendment currently stands — and when it will take effect
The amendment was submitted by a group of MPs from the governing coalition in December 2025 as Chamber of Deputies Print 67. The third reading concluded on July 10, 2026, with its approval by 89 votes — just over the 86-vote threshold required given the attendance. The bill will now be reviewed by the Senate and subsequently the President; until then, it is an approved bill, not yet valid law.
The effective date is set to be gradual, and this timeline is the most crucial piece of information for project planning: The Office for Spatial Development is scheduled to begin operations on January 1, 2027, the Transport and Energy Construction Authority (DESÚ) will be dissolved at the end of 2026, and the regional offices for spatial development are set to launch from 2028. Until then, the existing building authorities will operate in parallel — meaning developers will navigate a transitional regime of two systems at least during 2027–2028. The specific dates may still be changed in the Senate; the Ministry of Regional Development publishes current information on the reform on its website novystavebnizakon.gov.cz.
Residences over 10,000 m² as reserved structures: the biggest change for developers
Until now, reserved structures under Annex No. 3 of the Building Act (Act No. 283/2021 Coll.) primarily included motorways, railways, power plants, and other strategic infrastructure, which were permitted by the central DESÚ. The amendment newly classifies mass housing buildings with a floor area of over 10,000 m² and a predominant residential function into this category. A large residential project will thus gain two fundamental advantages: permitting at the central level by a specialized authority instead of the locally competent building authority — and the status of a project whose planning, preparation, construction, and operation are, by law, in the public interest.
Public interest is not just a declaration. It is factored into the balancing of other protected interests in the proceedings and may also play a role in considerations of expropriation under Act No. 184/2006 Coll. — which is also one of the reasons why the opposition labels the amendment as unbalanced in favor of developers and why it can be expected to be tested before the Constitutional Court. For investors, the sober conclusion is this: the new regime is an opportunity, but its legal stability has yet to be proven.
We discuss the 10,000 m² threshold, the regime of reserved structures, and how the amendment will speed up obtaining a building permit in detail in a separate article Building permits for large development projects 2026: how the amendment will accelerate construction permitting.
Who can advise you on this issue?
A single stamp: joint proceedings and fewer binding opinions
The second pillar of the amendment is the consistent integration of decision-making. A single joint construction proceeding, conducted by one authority and concluded with a single stamp, should be sufficient to permit a structure. A substantial part of the agenda of the current concerned authorities is being transferred directly to the building authority, the number of binding opinions is being reduced, and with it, the number of places where a project can get stuck. A related change is the repeal of the Act on the Uniform Environmental Statement (Act No. 148/2023 Coll.) — its agenda is to be moved primarily into the EIA process under Act No. 100/2001 Coll., which will now be able to integrate other necessary statements at the developer's request.
However, integration has a flip side: errors in the documentation can no longer be gradually negotiated with individual concerned authorities — everything is concentrated into a single proceeding, so the quality of the initial documentation is more decisive than ever before.
New state construction administration: The Office for Spatial Development
The amendment abandons the model in which 638 building authorities at municipal and regional offices made first-instance decisions. In its place, the Office for Spatial Development is being established as the central administrative authority for spatial planning, the building code, and expropriation, under which 14 regional offices for spatial development and 205 local offices in the seats of municipalities with extended powers will fall. The goal is to eliminate so-called systemic bias — the influence of local governments on officials — and to unify the interpretation of the law across the republic. Spatial planning, on the other hand, is being transferred to the independent competence of municipalities and regions, and all regional capitals will gain the right to issue their own building regulations, a right previously held only by Prague, Brno, and Ostrava.
This is also the greatest practical risk of the entire reform. According to the Minister for Regional Development, the new system should require only about half the current number of officials — critics, including parts of the opposition, consider the staffing of the new authorities uncertain and recall the experience with the digitalization of construction proceedings in 2024. For a developer, this means factoring into schedules that the first months or even years of the new system may not run according to statutory deadlines — and managing this uncertainty contractually and financially.
An end to "ping-pong" and narrower scope for objections
Two procedural changes of a milder nature may in practice save more time than the entire organizational reform.
First: in the event of an appeal, the superior authority will have to make a final decision and will not be able to return the case to the first-instance authority for a new hearing — thus ending the appellate "ping-pong" that could add years to large projects.
Second: in developable areas, a rebuttable presumption is introduced that a project compliant with the spatial plan and construction requirements is permissible, and neighbors will only be able to raise objections to the extent that their property rights are actually affected — a general disagreement will be dismissed by the authority as inadmissible.
Both changes help developers, but both have an opposing side: The Association of Local Governments, part of the opposition, and some lawyers see them as a weakening of the rights of municipalities, neighbors, and the public, and these provisions are among the candidates for constitutional review. Criticism has also been sparked by a new exception allowing, under certain conditions, for the retroactive permitting of an illegal structure whose removal would be a clearly disproportionate intervention, and the so-called economic clause, which allows for deviation from technical construction requirements if their fulfillment would be economically unreasonable — professional chambers warn of pressure to lower standards.
The current regime vs. the regime after the developers' amendment
What are developers interested in? | Current situation | After the amendment (as approved by the Chamber of Deputies) |
|---|---|---|
Large residential project (over 10,000 m²) | A standard structure permitted by the locally competent building authority. | A reserved structure in the public interest, permitted at the central level. |
System of authorities | 638 building authorities at municipalities and regions + DESÚ for reserved structures. | State Office for Spatial Development (from Jan 1, 2027), 14 regional offices (from 2028), 205 local offices; DESÚ is dissolved at the end of 2026. |
Binding opinions | Dozens of opinions from concerned authorities, Uniform Environmental Statement (JES) for environmental agenda. | Significant reduction; part of the agenda moves to the building authority, JES is abolished and its agenda moves to the EIA. |
Appeal proceedings | The superior authority can repeatedly return the case ("ping-pong"). | The appellate body must decide; returning the case for a new hearing is ended. |
Neighbors' objections | Broad scope for objections and obstruction. | Only to the extent of affected property rights; in developable areas, a presumption of permissibility for a compliant project. |
Municipal building regulations | Own regulations only for Prague, Brno, Ostrava. | All regional capitals gain the right to issue their own building regulations. |
Project in progress: submit the application now, or wait?
For every developer with a project in the preparation phase, timing is now the most important question. The general rule of the transitional provisions is that proceedings initiated before the amendment's effective date will be completed under the current legislation — projects already underway will not have to start over.
However, this means that an application submitted shortly before the effective date will run entirely under the old regime, while an application submitted shortly after will gain the advantages of the new one — including the reserved structure regime for large residential projects. Counterbalancing this is the risk that the new system of authorities will not be personally or technically stabilized in its first months.
There is no one-size-fits-all answer — it depends on the size of the project, the stage of preparation, relationships with the municipality, and how the debate in the Senate and the final wording of the transitional provisions turn out.
What should a developer do now? How to prepare for the new regime?
What to do with current development projects? | Why does it matter? |
|---|---|
Verify if the project exceeds the 10,000 m² floor area threshold | This determines whether the project falls under the reserved structures regime with central permitting — for projects near the threshold, adjusting the volume can be a strategic decision in either direction. |
Map the project schedule against the reform timeline (2026–2028) | Each phase — spatial plan amendment, EIA, permitting proceedings — may fall under a different regime and before a different authority. |
Improve the quality and completeness of the initial documentation | In joint proceedings, it will no longer be possible to progressively resolve deficiencies with individual concerned authorities; a flaw in the documentation delays the entire permit. |
Revise contracts with municipalities and planning agreements | Spatial planning is being transferred to the independent competence of municipalities, and the regulation of planning agreements is changing — the negotiating positions of both municipalities and developers are shifting. |
Contractually manage the risk of the transitional period | Deadlines tied to the finality of the permit, financing, and relationships with suppliers should account for the possible instability of the new authorities in 2027–2028. |
Monitor the debate in the Senate and the final wording of the transitional provisions | The Senate can still change the text; it makes sense to finalize the application timing strategy only after the final version of the law is published. |
What to do about the amendment now
The amendment still has to pass through the Senate, and its practical impact will only be tested in the first few years of the new authorities' operation. But what a developer can and should do right away is: legally assess whether their projects will exceed the 10,000 m² threshold, map project schedules against the 2026–2028 timeline, and prepare a decision on the timing of applications, including the conditions under which they would change it.
We deal with these issues in our construction practice daily — if you want to apply the approved text to a specific project, write to us at consultations@arws.cz with the basic parameters of your project and its preparation stage. Within a few days, we will tell you which regime it will fall under, what your windows of opportunity are, and where the risks lie.