Updated: September 2026 · Legal status: August 2026
It is not the height itself that determines this, but rather where the mast will be located. Building code does not recognize the categories of “mast” or “tower” as such. What matters is something else: whether the structure is erected on the ground—in which case it is the construction of a building—or whether it is mounted on an existing building, in which case it is the installation of technical equipment. These are two different regulatory regimes with different thresholds. Customers confuse the two in every other inquiry, and that’s where most of the misunderstandings stem from.
Ground-mounted mast
The only exemption is provided for in Article 29(2)(37) of the Building Code: freestanding masts no taller than 7 meters, whether flagpoles or guyless, intended for radio communication equipment, surveillance, or passenger information. All of these conditions must be met, and the lot must not be located within the area covered by the master plan for a public airport. If any one of these conditions is not met, the exemption does not apply.
It all comes down to the guy wires. Our M-series masts—M250, M400, M500, M600, M750, M1000—are guyed. When installed on the ground, each of them requires a building permit, regardless of height. This includes the 5-meter-tall M250. The exemption up to 7 meters applies exclusively to structures without guy wires—in our case, the T-series towers, CCTV poles, and short structures without guy wires. T-series towers are usually taller than 7 meters, so in reality, only short poles qualify for this exemption.
For structures over 7 m above ground level, a building permit is required, and there is no intermediate option. Article 29(1)—which lists the types of construction projects subject to notification—does not include “free-standing masts” or “towers” — except for narrow exceptions for railways and restricted areas under the Ministry of National Defense or the Ministry of the Interior and Administration. The general rule set forth in Article 28(1) applies.
The list of devices in item 37 is exhaustive. Lighting fixtures, advertising, weather sensors, and PV panels are not included in it. For a pole that is intended to both provide lighting and mount a camera, the exemption is questionable—the regulatory authority may determine that the lighting function causes the structure to fall outside the scope of the regulation. When submitting a bid, do not base your offer on this exemption without a written statement from the regulatory authority.
Two shortcuts that don't work
First: “It will be a temporary structure.” The mere intention of temporary use is not enough. The temporary nature must be evident in the design, construction, and materials, and the deadline for demolition or relocation within 180 days is strict. Administrative courts are closing this loophole.
Second: “A ballast structure has no foundation, so it is not anchored to the ground.” That doesn’t hold up either. Case law does not focus on the method of foundation, but rather on whether the size, structure, intended use, and safety considerations require a permanent connection to the ground. Ballast blocks and slabs have sometimes been considered to serve as a foundation. We use ballast because it is impossible to pour a foundation or because disturbing the subsoil is prohibited—not because it exempts the structure from requiring a permit.
An Honest Look at What We Don't Know Yet
The exemption for structures up to 7 m applies starting January 7, 2026. There is not a single interpretation from the National Building Control Authority (GUNB) or a single court ruling regarding it. Furthermore, in the 2023 regulation of the Minister of Digital Affairs, an “antenna mast” is defined as a structure with guy wires, while a structure without guy wires is referred to as a “tower” — the authority may infer from this that a lattice structure without guy wires is not a “mast” and is therefore not covered by the provision. In our opinion, the opposite is true, because the law explicitly refers to guy-wire-free masts, and the definition in the regulation applies only within that regulation. But this is an argument based on interpretation, not a certainty.
In practice: If the matter is significant in terms of cost or timing, submit a written inquiry to the relevant county office before beginning work. The response is not binding on the authority, but in the event of a dispute, it serves as evidence of due diligence. Do not plan your schedule as if the exemption were a foregone conclusion.
A mast on the roof of an existing building
Here, the regulations are different and much more lenient, because the law treats this as the installation of a technical device on an existing structure, rather than as construction.
Structures up to 3 m — neither a permit nor a notification is required (Article 29(4)(3)(a)). Over 3 m and up to 12 m — notification required; 21 days for the authority to object, followed by tacit approval (Article 29(3)(3)(a)). Over 12 m — a building permit is required. The same provisions apply to structures for cameras and lighting; there is no need to look for a separate regulation for them.
These 3 and 12 meters are measured from the point where the structure is attached—that is, from the roof surface—and not from ground level. This caveat is important: the law does not define this. This method of calculation stems from a January 2026 ruling by the Supreme Administrative Court (NSA) and a June 2026 position statement by the National Building Control Authority (GUNB), in which structures 8.3 meters high on the roof, with antennas 25 meters above ground level, were classified as subject to the notification procedure. This interpretation is well-established, but it remains an interpretation. Therefore, in the notification, we always provide both dimensions—the structure’s own height and its elevation above ground level. Explicitly stating this parameter protects against allegations of misleading the authority and against challenges to tacit consent years later.
A more common problem than the height limit itself is interference with the building’s load-bearing structure. If the installation requires cutting through the ceiling, installing new joists, reinforcing the roof trusses, or drilling into a load-bearing wall—and the building is not a single-family residence—such work is not exempt and requires a building permit. Simply bolting the structure to existing elements, without altering their function, is considered installation. This is determined by a structural assessment of the roof. The law does not require it, but without it, it is unclear what classification the structure falls under or whether the roof can support it. We always recommend obtaining one.
One more thing to keep in mind: if the structure has its own poured foundation on the roof or a load-bearing frame that is independent of the building, the authorities may consider it a separate structure—and in that case, the exemption no longer applies. When it comes to ballast placed on the roof, the line can be blurred.
A separate issue: raising an existing mast or adding a structure to it. The authority may classify this as an expansion of a structure, rather than the installation of equipment. Treat this as a contentious issue and consult the authority before beginning work.
What makes the matter subject to a permit regardless of the thresholds
A structure listed in the register of historic monuments — a building permit plus a separate permit from the provincial historic preservation officer. An area listed in the register — at least a notification and also a permit from the historic preservation officer.
A project requiring an environmental impact assessment or a Natura 2000 assessment — a building permit. For a mast with antennas, there is currently no specific environmental decision (we write about this in a separate post about radio wave emissions), but the Natura 2000 screening process is in effect, and the authority is required to apply it.
Aviation. Any structure with a height of 100 meters or more above the surrounding terrain is considered an aviation obstacle by law throughout the country—and must be reported and marked. The height is measured including any antennas. Below 100 meters, the location relative to the obstacle limitation surfaces around the airport is decisive; exceeding this height requires approval from the President of the Civil Aviation Authority (ULC), and for military airports, coordination with the Military Aviation Authority. Regarding marking: obstacles up to 10 m are not subject to these requirements; medium-intensity lights are required starting at 45 m, and high-intensity lights starting at 150 m.
And here’s something worth knowing in advance: even if the application is filed correctly, the authority may require a building permit (Article 30(7)) if it determines that the project may endanger the safety of people or property, deteriorate the environment or health and sanitation conditions, or increase nuisances for neighboring areas. The list of criteria is vague. No “notification” outcome is 100 percent certain before the 21-day period expires—do not schedule installation before then.
Separate layer: location
Building code is one thing, but whether a mast can be erected in a given location at all is another. If there is a local zoning plan, we check its provisions. If there is no plan, and the mast is a public-purpose project in the field of telecommunications, you need to obtain a decision on the location of the public-purpose project. If there is no plan and the mast is for private use (facility surveillance, lighting), a decision on building conditions is required.
When it comes to private transmission towers, it’s important to keep an eye on the calendar: after August 31, 2026, in municipalities that have not adopted a general plan, the issuance of zoning permits may be suspended. This poses a real risk to the schedule.
What we do, and what is the investor’s responsibility
This is the part that most often leads to misunderstandings, so we're addressing it head-on right from the start.
On our end: technical design of the structure including structural analysis, calculations for the main shaft, rigging, wind and ice load calculations, foundation and anchorage design, a complete set of construction drawings, architectural and technical design documentation for the building permit application, prefabrication, transportation, assembly, as-built documentation for the structure, and a verticality report.
On the Investor’s side: the decision itself—whether to apply for a building permit or file a notice—because the Investor is a party to the proceedings. Next, a declaration of the right to use the property for construction purposes—which, by definition, we cannot submit on your behalf—as well as a new declaration effective May 29, 2026, regarding protective structures and temporary shelters, a map for design purposes, geotechnical surveys, a decision on zoning conditions or on the location of a public-purpose project, approvals from relevant authorities, a construction manager and a construction log, geodetic staking out of the foundation and an as-built survey, and for structures 15 m or higher above ground level, also a client supervision inspector. Finally, an occupancy permit—masts fall under Category XXIX of the appendix to the Building Code.
We can handle some of the paperwork under a power of attorney; in that case, we price those services separately. Preparing the documentation for a building permit — starting at 5,500 net. Notification — starting at 2,500 net. Technical design with structural analysis for the site — typically 6,000 net; depending on the scope, 5,500–7,500 net. The costs of approvals (conservator, ULC, Military Aviation, RDOŚ, map, geology) are charged separately and are not included in the project price.
What we do not do: final inspection as defined by the Construction Law. Without a construction log and a site manager on your end, there is nothing to accept. We will, of course, sign an acceptance document between our companies—this is a protocol for the acceptance of delivery and installation of the structure, not the acceptance of the facility itself.
And one more thing. Even if the regulations state that no documents need to be submitted, that doesn’t mean there’s no liability for the structure. We prepare the structural design and the foundation design in the same way—in the event of damage, these are the only proof of due diligence. After construction, the mast is always subject to a five-year inspection, and to an annual inspection if it does not fall under the exemptions listed in Article 29, paragraphs 1 and 2.
Antennas: Notification of a facility that generates an electromagnetic field
Regardless of the construction procedure, there is one additional requirement. Any installation generating an electromagnetic field with an EIRP of 15 W or more, in the frequency band from 30 kHz to 300 GHz, must be reported to the county administrator before it is put into operation. The authority has 30 days to object. The notification is submitted by the investor, as they are the operator of the installation.
Beware of the most common misconception: the threshold applies to EIRP—that is, equivalent isotropically radiated power—and not to the transmitter’s power or “power at the antenna.” A 5 W transmitter with a 10 dBi antenna produces an EIRP of 50 W and is subject to reporting. The statement “nothing needs to be reported for up to 15 W” is, in this form, incorrect. Let’s elaborate on this in a separate post about radio wave emissions.
What do we need to calculate the price?
Four things that are essential for a quote: a mast or tower (i.e., whether there is space for guy wires), height, location (or at least the wind zone), and the equivalent antenna area at the top in square meters—not the weight or the number of units. For larger structures, terrain exposure is also a factor.
We almost always ask, as well, who’s building it and who’s laying the foundation, whether there have been soil tests, whether a radio link is planned (in which case an anti-twist ring is required), and whether it’s a competitive bid or if you already have a deal in place.
Email us or give us a call. If you're not sure which plan you're on, we'll walk you through it over the phone—it usually takes just five questions.
Legal status: August 2026. Legal basis: the Construction Law of July 7, 1994, consolidated text, Journal of Laws No. 2026, item 524.
The classification of a specific investment is determined by the competent authority on a case-by-case basis, and the practices of county offices can vary. This text describes the legal situation and our experience—it is not legal advice or an opinion regarding your specific case. Before submitting your documents, verify the wording of the regulations or consult with the authority.