Amendment to the Building Act could lead to the collapse of permitting new constructions, critics claim
The domestic real estate market has long suffered from slow permitting. The supply of apartments lags behind public interest. An amendment to the building act is supposed to change that. However, according to professional organizations and some politicians, it has many shortcomings. They argue that the change can paradoxically lead to further increases in system operating costs and worsen conditions for current employees in offices. Some even claim that the new system could lead to a collapse of the permitting system.
The number of building permits in our country is at historically lowest levels. Last year was the worst since data collection began in 1999. Building authorities issued only 61,613 permits, which is approximately 10,500 less year-over-year. Compared to 2021, when the number of issued stamps last increased, this decline was roughly one third.
Developers defend the amendment
The amendment to the building law aims to simplify and speed up the entire permitting process. According to the Developers Association, solving the housing crisis requires a combination of public and private investments, a stable legislative environment, and the removal of administrative obstacles.
"Without accelerating permitting and without more construction, affordable housing won't be possible. The approval of the new building law is therefore a step in the right direction,"
wrote to the editorial office the director of the Association of Developers, Tomáš Kadeřábek.
According to the amendment, the system of building offices will be overhauled. The current structure of more than 600 building offices is to be replaced by a central state building office, which will decide on the largest constructions.
One Office, One Stamp
The purpose of the reform is the idea that there should be one contact point for the builder. This office will have the authority of most agencies that previously issued opinions and statements for construction. The building office will thus evaluate the requirements for nature and landscape protection, agricultural land fund, waste water and forestry management, public health protection, and state heritage care in a single procedure.
The deadline for issuing opinions or binding statements is to be shortened to 30 days, with no possibility of extension. A review will only be possible until the permit becomes legally binding.
Furthermore, the relevant authorities will mostly no longer issue binding statements, but rather non-binding opinions that the building authority will not be required to consider. The binding nature of fire protection and integrated rescue system statements, for example, will also be abolished.
Experts Express Concerns
However, many experts disagree with the current standard. They claim it will not significantly speed up the construction and availability of housing.
Professional associations reportedly do not have a fundamental problem with the introduction of a central construction administration, which the amendment to the building law envisages. However, they consider its preparation and subsequent implementation contentious. The change in law was submitted in the form of a parliamentary proposal. Therefore, it did not have to go through a consultation process or have an impact study prepared. Experts describe this as unconventional, especially for an amendment that they say fundamentally transforms the entire building code.
According to the analyst of the Association of Local Governments, Jindra Tužilová, members of parliament will vote on a law to which the public has no access due to the manner of its submission. Moreover, after the second reading, it will be difficult to significantly amend the amendment.
"It will be very difficult to correct anything unless the proposer himself decides to pull the emergency brake,"
Tužilová stated for ČTK.
According to experts, the transition period setting between the full effect of the building law amendment and the implementation of a central construction administration is insufficient. As they claim, issues like the transfer of employees from municipal building offices to work for the state have not been resolved, for example.
Chairman of the Czech Chamber of Architects Jan Kasl then states that the amendment and comprehensive amendment proposal, which consists of over 1000 pages, has many errors. However, according to him, the individual shortcomings in the amendment are minor compared to the fact that the change may lead to a collapse of the permitting system. The only thing that he believes will be permitted before the completion of the construction reform will be large projects, which will be handled by the Transport and Energy Construction Office.
It's chaos, Hřib thinks
Some politicians are also not satisfied.
"What the government has proposed is a textbook example of chaos and lack of concept. Instead of a well-thought-out reform, we have a thousand-page legislative patchwork. Yet the government wants to push it through in an expedited manner without proper expert discussion. This is not how a law, which will affect the shape of cities and the availability of housing for decades to come, should be made,"
stated in a press release for example, the leader of the Pirates, Zdeněk Hřib.
"The amendment to the Building Act is not a law for people who want to live. It's a law for those who want to build and sell. The ordinary citizen will lose the ability to influence what is built next to their home. The biggest developers will get expedited proceedings without the possibility of appeal. This law was created behind closed doors and serves those who sat behind those doors,"
thinks again the Green Party MP Gabriela Svárovská.
Sources: author's article, ČTK, Association of Developers, Czech Chamber of Architects, Pirates, Green Party
