Questions resurface over İstanbul's earthquake assembly zones

Following the magnitude 6.2 earthquake that struck İstanbul yesterday, disaster preparedness has once again become a major topic of concern.

Many people spent the night outside across the city, staying in parks, sports centers and schools. 

According to data from the Disaster and Emergency Management Authority (AFAD), there are around 3,000 designated assembly areas across the city.

However, experts say the number of accessible assembly points with proper infrastructure and shelter capacity is far lower than needed.

İstanbulites spend night outdoors as earthquake triggers fears

Today 11:16

Nusret Suna, chair of the Chamber of Civil Engineers (İMO), reminded that İstanbul is home to 16 million people, and said the existing number of assembly areas is highly insufficient given the city’s population density.

Suna noted that these sites are primarily intended for the initial moments after a quake, and the lack of areas suitable for shelter poses a serious risk.

He explained that many assembly points are small spaces like open lots next to apartment buildings or schoolyards, and are only meant for temporary congregation, not long-term shelter:

“The green signs placed on street corners indicate open spaces where people can initially gather after a quake. But most of these are just small empty plots.

Neighborhood parks, roadside green patches, leftover spaces next to housing complexes, mosque or schoolyards… These can only accommodate a limited number of people, and only for a short period. What we truly need are shelter areas alongside these gathering sites.”

Difference between shelter and assembly areas

Proper “shelter areas” should be large, pre-equipped sites with water, electricity, toilets, heating, and the capacity to host containers and tent, said Suna.

“When we talk about an assembly area, we’re referring not to just a patch of land to stand on, but to a large space where tents and containers can be set up and where electricity, water, heating, and showers are available. Spaces where people can live together for a period of time. That’s our definition.

“In a disaster, these sites should support sustained living. They must be planned as shelter areas. But when we look at İstanbul, we unfortunately don’t see such places. And where they do exist, they’re very few and located far from the city center—beyond the reach of residents during a quake.”

Assembly areas opened for development

Suna recalled that after the 1999 Kocaeli earthquake, which occurred on the same fault line as İstanbul and killed over 17,000 people,496 assembly areas had been designated by the İstanbul Governor’s Office and disaster coordination boards. Most of these, he said, were later zoned for development and replaced by residential complexes, shopping malls, and office buildings.

“Most of those disaster assembly areas were opened up for development. They were all built over—residences, malls, business centers... Central spaces in the city were erased for profit. This amounts to placing human life second," he said.

Pointing to the risk that hundreds of thousands could be left homeless in a major quake, Suna emphasized the need for plans not just for the first day but for weeks of temporary living.

“Even a 6.2 quake off the coast of Silivri affected all districts in İstanbul. A major quake would impact neighboring provinces as well. Just a 10% impact in İstanbul would affect about 2 million people. We don’t have the infrastructure to shelter that many.

"Even those whose homes aren’t damaged may not be able to return for a long time. That’s why we need much larger, more centrally located areas than currently declared.”

Access to safe areas 

Referring to the 2023 earthquakes which claimed over 50,000 lives, Suna warned that similar disaster scenarios, including collapsed roads, paralyzed transportation, could happen in İstanbul.

“In İstanbul, shelter areas are 30 kilometers away from the city center. They’re inaccessible. We saw the same in the Maraş quake. Buildings collapsed onto roads. People couldn’t reach these sites. And now, İstanbul has no remaining inner-city shelter areas.”

Suna criticized the lack of attention to years of warnings from İMO, saying that a profit-driven mindset has obstructed the city’s earthquake preparedness. He also noted that priorities in urban transformation are set by economic gain rather than actual need:

“When asked, officials say ‘We’re working on it,’ and refer to urban transformation. But as you’ve seen for years, this approach hasn’t made the building stock earthquake-safe.

It’s a matter of perspective. If you say, ‘We’ll demolish and rebuild everything,’ it doesn’t work. What happens instead? Unfortunately, urban transformation starts in areas with high profit margins, not in places that urgently need it. People living on the outskirts remain at risk.

The priority should have been in high-risk areas. But urban transformation began in high-return zones. Without a shift in this mindset, there won’t be a real solution.”

Damage projections

According to the municipality-affiliated İstanbul Planning Agency’s (İPA) report “Crisis at İstanbul’s Doorstep: Earthquake”, approximately 195,000 buildings are expected to sustain moderate or severe damage in the event of a major earthquake. The city could see 48,000 buildings heavily damaged and another 146,000 moderately affected.

However, after the February 6 quakes, rapid screening methods revealed the number of vulnerable buildings could be much higher. It is now estimated that a 7.5 magnitude quake could damage up to 500,000 buildings to varying degrees.

The parliament's Earthquake Research Comittee reported the economic impact of the February 6 quakes at $148.8 billion. According to the Türkiye Earthquake Recovery and Reconstruction Assessment (TERRA), the cost of recovery and rebuilding is estimated at $103.6 billion.

Another İPA report stated that zoning previously protected spaces—including green zones, forests, and military areas—and granting higher construction rights on existing lots generated $85 billion in profit. This amount, it said, could fund the reconstruction of all high and moderate-risk buildings in İstanbul four times over. (HA/VK)