1. Construction Contrary to Architectural Project and Legal Status of the Children’s Park

 Supreme Court decisions clearly find that the construction of structures not included in the approved architectural project of the main immovable property in common areas is unlawful. Supreme Court 5th Civil Chamber-2025/2711-2025/8491 -27.05.2025 in its decision numbered, it was emphasized that the construction of structures contrary to the project in common areas designated as green spaces is not in accordance with the law, and that requests for the prevention of such interventions and restoration to their former state should be accepted. Similarly, Supreme Court 5th Civil Chamber-2024/3602-2024/7608 -25.06.2024 in its decision numbered, the noise created by children’s playgrounds not included in the municipal approved project and the situation of non-compliance with the project were addressed; the local court decision for the restoration of these areas to their former state was upheld.

Pursuant to Article 19 of the Condominium Law no. 634 (KMK), condominium owners are meticulously obliged to preserve the architectural integrity of the main immovable property. Supreme Court 20th Civil Chamber-2017/9281-2019/1209 -21.02.2019 and Supreme Court 18th Civil Chamber-2012/818-2012/3550 -05.04.2012 according to decisions numbered, the written consent of four-fifths (4/5) of all condominium owners is required for construction or installation in common areas. However, even with this consent, the constructed facility must not violate zoning regulations and must not be of a nature that disturbs other condominium owners. Supreme Court 18th Civil Chamber-2009/2233-2009/5222 -12.05.2009 in its decision numbered, it was clearly stated that site management decisions cannot alter the settlement plan approved by the municipality.

2. Assessment within the Scope of Noise Pollution and Neighborhood Law 

Noise issues experienced on the site are evaluated within the scope of the “not disturbing each other” obligation, as per Article 18 of the Condominium Law (KMK). In the decision numbered Court of Cassation 5th Civil Chamber – 2025/2711-2025/8491 – 27.05.2025 , it was stated that co-owners are obliged not to disturb each other when using common areas, and in case of breach of this obligation, a decision can be made to prevent interference.

In the presence of structures causing noise (children’s playground, nursery, etc.), judicial authorities can also rule for noise-reducing measures to be taken. In the decision numbered Court of Cassation 20th Civil Chamber – 2019/222-2019/3142 -06.05.2019 , it was stated that sound insulation measures should be taken for noise transmission paths (doors, windows, walls, etc.). Furthermore, in the decision numbered Court of Cassation 18th Civil Chamber – 2015/20739-2016/2346 -15.02.2016 , it was emphasized that the court should investigate whether a facility constructed prevents or disturbs a co-owner from using their independent section.

3. Legal Process to Follow and Application Authorities 

The paths that can be followed to remove the children’s playground that contradicts the project and to prevent noise are as follows:

Civil Court of Peace: Lawsuits requesting the prevention of illegal use of common areas contrary to the project and intervention are heard in the Civil Court of Peace located where the immovable property is situated, in accordance with Article 1 of the Annex to Law No. 634 (Court of Cassation 20th Civil Chamber – 2008/18125-2009/1653 -09.02.2009).

Annulment of the Decision of the Board of Apartment Owners: If the park is based on a board decision, a lawsuit can be filed for the annulment of this decision in accordance with Article 33 of the Condominium Law (KMK) (Supreme Court 5th Civil Chamber-2024/3602-2024/7608-25.06.2024).

Municipality and Administrative Process: Children’s playgrounds not included in the building permit and its annexed architectural project are considered unauthorized constructions under Article 32 of the Zoning Law No. 3194. In this case, the relevant municipality may decide to demolish the structure and impose an administrative fine (Izmir Regional Administrative Court 3rd Administrative Litigation Chamber-2017/695-2017/788 -30.11.2017).

Request for Reinstatement to Original Condition: The apartment owner always has the right to file a lawsuit for the restoration of any construction contrary to the approved architectural project to its original condition (Supreme Court 20th Civil Chamber-2017/3138-2017/9494 -15.11.2017).

Conclusion: The children’s park located 1 meter from your home and not included in the municipal project constitutes a violation of the architectural project. To remove this structure (restore to original condition) and prevent noise (prohibition of interference), you can apply to the Civil Court of Peace or request the initiation of administrative proceedings under the Zoning Law with the municipality. Non-compliance with the time rule set by the site management and the noise problem give rise to the right to request judicial intervention in accordance with Article 18 of the Condominium Law (KMK).

Why is Expert Legal Support Necessary?

Disputes regarding common areas contrary to the project are a technical field that requires the joint evaluation of the relationship between the architectural project – management plan – zoning legislation, the distinction between 4/5 consent and unanimity, and objective expert measurement in terms of noise. The wrong court, insufficient evidence, or missing preclusive deadlines can lead to the dismissal of the case on its merits.

2M Law Office offers legal support to its clients in the fields of condominium law and urban transformation law in Istanbul’s Anatolian Side (Tuzla, Pendik, Kartal, Maltepe) and the Kocaeli corridor (Gebze, Darıca, Çayırova), covering preventing intervention, restoring to previous condition, annulment of board decisions, and managing zoning processes. A Tuzla condominium lawyer or Gebze real estate lawyer safely manages the process by determining the correct strategy from the outset.

For detailed information and appointments: 2mhukuk.com/iletisim

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

Which court should be approached for a children’s playground not included in the project?

Lawsuits for the prevention of intervention contrary to the project in common areas and for restoration to the previous condition are filed in the Civil Court of Peace where the immovable property is located, in accordance with Article 1 of the Condominium Law (KMK) Annex. If the site management has made a decision, can it have the park built?

A management decision cannot alter the settlement plan approved by the municipality and the architectural project attached to the license. Furthermore, for a structure/facility in a common area, as a rule, the written consent of 4/5 of the condominium owners (unanimity, if the management plan so stipulates) is required; even if this consent is obtained, the aspect of non-compliance with zoning legislation and disturbance is separately evaluated. Is the sound of children playing also considered noise?

Children’s usual play noises are accepted within the limits of tolerance. For noise to be a cause for legal intervention, it must be continuous, exceed the limits of tolerance and the measurement thresholds in the regulations; this is usually determined by expert measurement. Can the court completely remove the park, or only order precautions to be taken?

If a violation of the project is detected, a decision to restore the original state (removal) may be made. Regarding noise, the court may also order technical measures such as sound insulation, a buffer zone, or regulation of usage hours, instead of an abstract prohibition. An expert examination determines which of these will be applied in the specific case. What is the difference between applying to the municipality and filing a lawsuit?

The municipal/zoning process is administrative in nature and provides for demolition and administrative fines for unauthorized constructions; whereas a Civil Court of Peace lawsuit results in the prevention of intervention and restoration to the original state under private law. Both paths can be pursued in parallel and reinforce each other.

Related article: Can changes be made to common areas of a building? · Official legislation: mevzuat.gov.tr (Law No. 634 on Condominium Ownership, Law No. 3194 on Zoning).