Guatemala Court Suspends Zone 11 Height Limits, Reviving Regulatory Debate

Alegalis | At the end of last year, concerns were raised regarding the impact of Resolution RES-DS-464-2025 issued by the General Directorate of Civil Aeronautics (DGAC), which revoked Administrative Resolution RES-DS-084-2020. The measure implied a reduction in permitted height parameters in Zone 11 of Guatemala City, setting the Internal Horizontal Surface at 1,551 meters above mean sea level (masl) and establishing a Conical Surface with a 5% slope.

In response, the real estate sector adopted different strategies. While some developers opted to engage with the authority through dialogue tables—leading to working sessions, privately funded studies, and proposals aimed at redefining maximum height limits—others pursued a legal and technical approach.

Within this latter group, a review of the technical basis underlying both Resolution RES-DS-084-2020 and its subsequent revocation was undertaken. With the support of subject-matter experts, it was concluded that Resolution RES-DS-464-2025 lacked sufficient technical justification. Consequently, and with the assistance of attorney Sebastián Meany Díaz, Head of Civil Litigation at ALEGALIS, a general unconstitutionality action was filed.

Under Case No. 9083-2025, the Constitutional Court ordered the provisional suspension of Roman numeral I and the provision stating "to deny, in a general and definitive manner, all new applications and those currently under review" contained in Resolution RES-DS-464-2025. Notably, the suspended section is the one that revoked Resolution RES-DS-084-2020.

As a result of this decision, the previous height regime for Zone 11 regains effect. Specifically, the maximum elevation within the Internal Horizontal Surface increases to 1,595 masl until it intersects with the Conical Surface, from which point a 5% slope applies up to a distance of six kilometers from the runway of La Aurora International Airport, reaching a maximum elevation of 1,651 masl at the edge of the Conical Surface.

The unconstitutionality action is currently proceeding through its ordinary course, and the provisional suspension must be confirmed—or overturned—in the final ruling to be issued by the Court.

For the real estate sector, the current regulatory landscape presents significant challenges. The lack of legal certainty directly affects project structuring, particularly in construction cost modeling and investment planning, amid ongoing regulatory changes impacting the industry.

In this context, industry stakeholders have emphasized the need to update regulations as part of the country’s institutional development. However, they stress that such changes should be implemented gradually, with prior consultation processes, and without retroactive application in administrative matters, in order to safeguard the principle of legality.

From a professional standpoint, the importance of providing certainty to investments through strict adherence to the applicable legal framework has also been underscored, along with a willingness to contribute technical input to regulatory processes. In this regard, authorities have been urged to assess pending applications in accordance with the current legal framework, in light of the Constitutional Court’s decision, without prejudice to any legal actions that may be pursued.

alegalis.com