The declaration of 2026 as the “Year of Urban Planning and Architecture” in Azerbaijan has once again brought to the agenda the fate of unplanned and undocumented buildings, as well as structures located in risky zones, which have been discussed for many years.
Commenting on the issue to Modern.az, Milli Majlis deputy Rovshan Muradov noted that instructions regarding undocumented houses have already been given through relevant decrees of the head of state, and the documentation process for nearly 500,000 undocumented houses in our country has begun. The process will continue this year.
“The documentation of other houses will be carried out, with the exception of those located near high-voltage electricity networks, gas pipelines, SOCAR, and railway lines. However, undocumented houses located in strategic areas will be demolished in the future. This will happen on the condition that appropriate compensation is provided to the residents.”
The deputy noted that the declaration of 2026 as the "Year of Urban Planning and Architecture" will give a serious impetus to the restoration and reconstruction works carried out in Karabakh and East Zangazur, especially within the framework of the second state program related to the Great Return.
“Our historical monuments there will gradually be restored. We will continue our urgent work in accordance with the Second State Program.”
Deputy Nagif Hamzayev, on the other hand, stated that Ganja, Azerbaijan's second-largest city, is experiencing a significant transitional phase between its historical architectural heritage and its pursuit of modern development.
“The declaration of 2026 as the “Year of Urban Planning and Architecture” creates a favorable opportunity for solving long-standing problems, but the success of these processes depends on a correct strategy and a balanced approach. Dedicating the year to a specific field traditionally acts as a catalyst for increasing attention to that field, expanding budget allocations, and accelerating institutional reforms.”
N. Hamzayev noted that, first and foremost, it is necessary to create a unified urban planning database and improve the digital cadastre system.
“In Ganja, the transparency of the legal status of every building is the first step in solving the problem. Currently, there is no complete information about many undocumented buildings, which complicates planned interventions.”
“In the second phase, it is important to update the city's master plan and adapt it to reality. Plans prepared in the 1970s-80s do not reflect modern urban dynamics. A clear zoning of Ganja's historical center, new residential areas, and industrial zones, as well as a strategy for protecting green zones, must be formulated,” he noted.
The deputy stated that another direction is to improve the quality of public spaces:
“Parks, pedestrian zones, improvement of the transport system. This would demonstrate that urban planning is not just about construction order, but also about the quality of life.”
The existence of undocumented buildings in Ganja, as well as in other cities of Azerbaijan, is a problem spanning decades. Emphasizing the importance of balancing strict determination and humanitarian logic in approaching this issue, the deputy also outlined cases where demolition is inevitable:
“The demolition of some buildings is indeed inevitable and necessary to ensure urban planning justice. This particularly applies to structures arbitrarily erected within and around historical architectural monuments and protected zones, buildings located under engineering communications, high-voltage power lines, or in other dangerous zones, illegal constructions in areas prone to floods and inundations, structures encroaching upon areas designated for public use – parks, squares, road infrastructure – as well as objects built in violation of other citizens' property rights.”
He noted that it would be wrong to group all undocumented buildings under one umbrella. In many cases, people have been unable to obtain documentation due to necessity, system deficiencies, or procedural complexities. In such situations, alternative approaches should be considered:
“The first option is the simplification of documentation procedures and the development of amnesty programs. If a building meets technical standards, does not create an infrastructure burden, and does not violate the rights of others, its legalization process should be facilitated and made financially accessible. The second approach involves phased reconstruction and renovation programs. In some cases, buildings can be brought to an acceptable state by partially conforming them to standards, demolishing additional parts, or rectifying facades.”
“The third approach involves relocation and compensation mechanisms. If a building genuinely needs to be demolished, residents should be offered alternative housing or adequate compensation. The principle of social justice demands that people are not left homeless,” the deputy concluded.
