Even if your building is structurally sound on its own, if the block it is located in is declared a risky area or a reserve building area; your parcel may be included in the implementation on an urban block basis, or even in ex officio consolidation. This is the most severe potential intervention of urban transformation into property rights. This article discusses how the declaration is made, its consequences, and the only true defense, which is an annulment lawsuit + stay of execution in administrative courts, based on the current legislation of 2026.

Most people think of urban transformation on a “risky building” scale: if my building is found to be risky, it will be demolished; if not, it will be untouched. However, Law No. 6306 has two different and much broader tools: risky area and reserve building area. When these statuses are declared, the implementation no longer applies to a single building but spreads to the entire urban block; the administration’s powers expand, and the ability of individual parcel owners to say “no” significantly diminishes. The good news is this: both statuses are administrative acts, and an administrative act is subject to judicial review with an annulment lawsuit filed within the prescribed period.

Three Concepts, Three Different Regimes: Risky Structure — Risky Area — Reserve Building Area

The first condition for correctly exercising your rights is to know which regime you are in. The definitions of the three concepts and the consequences they entail are fundamentally distinct (Law Art. 2):

In brief: a risky building only binds you within your own parcel. However, a risky area and a reserve building area make you part of a whole together with neighboring parcels. The protective effect of being an independent owner in a separate parcel weakens precisely in these two statuses.

How is a Risky Area Declared?

A risky area is an area that carries the risk of loss of life and property due to its ground structure or the constructions on it, determined by taking the opinion of the Disaster and Emergency Management Presidency (AFAD), and decided by the President K. art. 2. With the 2023 amendment (Law No. 7471), the process has been centered around the newly established Urban Transformation Presidency, and the administration’s authority to determine areas ex officio has been strengthened.

The moment the declaration legally takes effect is the date the decision is published in the Official Gazette. This date is also the beginning of the lawsuit filing period and is therefore of vital importance (see section 6 below).

Consequences of the Declaration: Implementation on an Urban Planning Block Basis and Ex Officio Consolidation

In risky areas or reserve building areas, on parcels where risky buildings are located; decisions regarding the consolidation of parcels, individual or combined implementation or block-based implementation, subdivision, partition, surrender, creation, and registration procedures, reconstruction of buildings, sale of shares, construction in return for land share or revenue sharing are made by a simple majority of shareholders in proportion to their shares, without requiring the demolition of buildings and regardless of whether one is a shareholder of the building Law art.6/1 Reg. art.15/2. With Law No. 7471, the old 2/3 (two-thirds) condition has been reduced to a simple majority (P+1).

The four much more severe powers that come into play under these statuses, compared to risky buildings, are as follows:

Holistic implementation on a block basis: Transformation is designed not on a single parcel, but on a block scale; your parcel is considered a “part” of the project.

Ex officio consolidation, subdivision, surrender, creation, and registration: In properties that have been demolished and turned into land, the consent of the owners is not required for these procedures; mortgages and annotations do not constitute an impediment Law art.6/1.

Temporary Treasury registration and urgent expropriation in the implementation area: These powers granted to the administration for the integrity of the implementation are the most criticized regulations in doctrine due to the risk of disproportionate interference with property rights Law art.6/A.

Suspension of infrastructure services: With the 2023 amendment, the way has been opened for the suspension of electricity, water, and natural gas services for structures “in areas covered by this Law.”

Critical Distinction

A simple majority, as a rule, is a ratio that operates among the co-owners of a parcel. However, in area/block-based implementations, this protection weakens: your parcel can be included in the application by being evaluated within the integrity of the block. Therefore, the assumption “I am on a separate parcel, they cannot touch me” is not valid in risky area/reserve status. The specific situation must be evaluated based on whether the declaration boundary covers your parcel.

Reserve Building Area: Its Difference and the Condition for Declaration by Owner’s Request

A reserve building area refers to areas designated for use in urban transformation applications; it does not always have to be “risky.” Most often, it serves as new settlement areas where beneficiaries of risky areas will be relocated. After 2023, the definition expanded to include existing urban and rural areas — this expansion is controversial in doctrine regarding property security.

For real persons or private legal entities to have their immovables declared as a reserve building area, they must consent to the transfer of ownership of 30% of the land square meterage forming the basis for construction, or register the value of the same amount as revenue in the special account for urban transformation projects K. art.3/7. This condition was regulated in this manner following the Constitutional Court’s annulment decisions in 2014 and 2017.

Right to Property and Proportionality: Why Is It So Controversial?

The risky area and Article 6/A implementation are intensely debated in the context of Article 35 of the Constitution and the principle of proportionality, as they directly interfere with the right to property. The Istanbul Bar Association has characterized the amendment numbered 7471 as a violation of property, housing, and effective recourse rights, due to the reduction of the quorum to a simple majority, ex officio implementation without requiring consent, and restrictions in notification/judicial procedures. Furthermore, in doctrine, it is argued that subjecting non-risky structures to the risky structure regime would be contrary to proportionality; and that the Constitutional Court’s past annulment grounds are also valid regarding Article 6/A.

These debates are not abstract for you: in your annulment lawsuit, they can be used as concrete grounds for illegality such as “a fair balance was not established between public interest and the right to property”, “the criteria of necessity-suitability-proportionality were not met”.

Grounds for Defense: Annulment Lawsuit and Stay of Execution in Administrative Jurisdiction

Since risky area and reserve building area decisions are administrative acts, annulment lawsuits can be filed against them and the implementation acts based on them. However, deadlines are peremptory; if missed, both the objection and litigation paths are closed.

a) Against the risky area / reserve building area decision

Competent court: Since the authority making the decision is the President, the lawsuit is filed in the Council of State as the court of first instance Council of State Law Art. 24.

Duration: From the date the decision is published in the Official Gazette, 30 days. In accordance with the regulation added to the Law, a lawsuit cannot be filed again against the risky area decision based on subsequent implementation procedures; therefore, the moment of announcement should not be missed.

Expedited judicial review: These lawsuits are subject to expedited judicial review under Article 20/A of the Administrative Procedure Law; defense periods are short, and the process proceeds quickly IYUK Art. 20/A.

b) Against implementation procedures (consolidation, expropriation, sale, valuation)

Block-based consolidation, urgent expropriation, sale of land shares, value determination based on a CMB-licensed appraisal report, and similar each procedure separately is a separate administrative action; the owner whose interest is violated can file an annulment lawsuit within 30 days from the date of notification/learning, in the competent administrative court.

This path is also open against the sale of a non-consenting owner’s share by public auction and against the valuation; an independent valuation report strengthens your strategy to object to the fair market value.

c) Stay of execution (SOE) — a decision that effectively halts the process

The mere filing of an annulment lawsuit does not, by itself, stop demolition or implementation. Therefore, the lawsuit must necessarily be filed with a request for SOE. Two conditions are required for SOE: the occurrence of damage that is difficult or impossible to remedy if the action is implemented, and the action being manifestly unlawful IYUK Art. 27.

Court Decision — Confirm from UYAP

The provision “a stay of execution cannot be decided in these cases,” which was included in the initial version of Law No. 6306, was annulled by the decision of the Constitutional Court dated 27.02.2014, with file no. 2012/87 E. and decision no. 2014/41 K.; thus, paving the way for stay of execution (YD) decisions in urban transformation lawsuits. Furthermore, in the decision of the 14th Chamber of the Council of State dated 27.02.2018, with file no. 2015/3787 E. and decision no. 2018/932 K., regarding the annulment of procedures established based on risky structure determination, it was accepted that the former owner had a current and legitimate interest. These decisions have been compiled from open sources and, before being used in a petition, must be personally verified from the official databases of UYAP Case Law / Council of State and Constitutional Court.

Step-by-Step Roadmap

Confirm the declared boundary and date. Verify from the official website of the Urban Transformation Presidency and the headman’s office under which risky area/reserve declaration your parcel falls and its publication date in the Official Gazette. The 30-day period begins on this date.

Obtain the title deed and encumbrance record. Is there a mention of “risky structure” or “within the scope of 6306” in the declarations section? Is your parcel independent or shared?

Prepare for an annulment lawsuit with a request for stay of execution (YD) without missing the deadline. For risky area/reserve decisions, the Council of State; for implementation procedures, the territorially competent administrative court.

Conduct a procedural review. The EK-12 meeting invitation, 15-day announcement, minutes, notification, and correct calculation based on the simple majority’s share ratio — since the 04.02.2026 regulation makes these documents mandatory, any deficiency may constitute a reason for annulment.

Object to the valuation with an independent report. If the sale of your share becomes an issue, an independent appraisal report licensed by the CMB is the basis for your objection to the fair market value.

Gather information and evidence in a single file. Municipal correspondence, zoning status, notification documents, and announcement papers are decisive in both preliminary injunction and substantive examinations.

Deadline Warning

The most common loss of rights in urban transformation is missing the 30-day forfeiture period — often unnoticed due to notifications being made via e-Government/headman’s office announcements. The moment you learn of the announcement, it is critically important to consult an urban transformation lawyer and have the deadline calculated.

Frequently Asked Questions

My building is sound; it’s not risky. Can I still be included in the area declaration?

Yes, it is possible. Risky building status is parcel-based, but risky area and reserve building area are block/zone-based. If your parcel is within the declared boundary, even if your building is sound on its own, it can be subjected to implementation on a development block basis. Therefore, it is necessary to first confirm whether the declared boundary covers your parcel. Subjecting non-risky structures to the risky building regime is debatable in terms of proportionality and can be put forward as a justification in your annulment lawsuit.In which court, and within what period, can I file a lawsuit against a risky area decision?

Since risky area and reserve building area decisions are in the nature of Presidential decrees, lawsuits are filed in the Council of State as the court of first instance (Council of State Law Art. 24). The period is 30 days from the publication of the decision in the Official Gazette, and this period is preclusive. Do not forget that lawsuits are subject to urgent proceedings in accordance with Article 20/A of the Administrative Procedure Law, and deadlines are shortened.If I file an annulment lawsuit, will demolition and implementation cease?

Filing a lawsuit alone does not stop the implementation. To actually halt the process, the lawsuit must definitely be filed with a request for a stay of execution (YD). For a stay of execution (YD), the conditions required are that the action is clearly unlawful and that its implementation would cause irreparable or difficult-to-remedy harm (Administrative Procedure Law, Article 27). After the Constitutional Court’s annulment decision in 2014, stays of execution can be granted in these lawsuits.If I don’t agree with the decision, will my share be forcibly sold?

Owners who do not agree with a decision made by a simple majority are notified through the EK-12/EK-13 procedure; if the offer is not accepted within 15 days, the land share is sold by open auction to the other consenting shareholders for a price not less than the market value. If it cannot be sold, in risky areas, the Presidency/Administration/TOKİ can purchase it by paying the market value. At this stage, objections to the valuation and annulment lawsuits based on procedural errors are your primary defense tools. For details on this matter, please refer to our article “I Don’t Want to Participate in Urban Transformation — Can My Share Be Forcibly Sold?”.What is the difference between a risky area and a reserve building area?

A risky area is an existing region that carries the risk of loss of life and property due to its ground conditions or existing structures, and therefore needs to be transformed. A reserve building area, on the other hand, is a new settlement area designated for use in transformation, where rights holders will often be relocated, and it does not necessarily have to be risky. Both are declared by Presidential decree and are subject to the oversight of the Council of State.What did the regulation amendment of 04.02.2026 change in this process?

The amendment did not change the majority ratio (simple majority); it re-regulated procedural rules such as meeting invitations, notifications, and the determination of the majority. Now, owner meetings are convened using the EK-12 form, minutes have become mandatory documents, and building permits are not issued before the share sale is completed. These procedural rules have created new points of inspection that can be relied upon in annulment lawsuits.

Expert Lawyer Support in Risky Area Cases

Risky area and reserve development area cases are processes where a single mistake can lead to difficult-to-remedy consequences, due to short forfeiture periods, rules of duty/jurisdiction divided between the Council of State and administrative courts, urgent judicial procedure, and a strategy for staying of execution. As 2M Law Office, we manage the process end-to-end, from the “reading of the declaration/determination” to the “annulment lawsuit and request for stay of execution,” and from there to “objection to value determination and defense against share sale.”

We offer active legal support in urban transformation and real estate law cases, primarily in Istanbul’s Anatolian Side:

Tuzla, Pendik, Kartal, Maltepe, Gebze, Darıca, Kocaeli

To evaluate the announcement date and deadlines in your file without missing them, you can reach us through our urban transformation consultancy page.

Resources and Related Content

Official / Primary Sources

Law No. 6306 on the Transformation of Areas Under Disaster Risk (consolidated text) — mevzuat.gov.tr

Implementation Regulation of Law No. 6306 and amendment dated 04.02.2026, numbered 33158 — resmigazete.gov.tr

Urban Transformation Presidency — kentseldonusum.gov.tr / csb.gov.tr

For case law confirmation: official decision databases of the Council of State and the Constitutional Court, UYAP Case Law.

2M Law — Related Articles

• Urban Transformation — General Guide and Consultancy
• I Don’t Want to Participate in Urban Transformation — Can My Share Be Forcibly Sold?
• Your Rights as a Tenant or Owner in a Risky Building
• Share of Flats or Fixed-Price Contract? Choosing the Right Model
• Tax and Fee Exemptions in Urban Transformation