The house is one of the most important necessities of mankind. Since the dawn of history shelter for the activities of families has been a conspicuous feature of every civilization “Housing problem” in Turkey has been growing in volume due to rapid population increase and particularly rapid urbanization. Due to the industrialization and rapid urbanization of the new developing cities, such as Izmir -the third biggest city of Turkey-, housing demand has been increasing together with an insufficient housing production to meet the needs of the city. Besides all these effects, Izmir faces the difficulty of the rapid increasing population, and migrating people from rural areas with hopes of finding new job opportunities, since 1950’s. The ongoing migration process from rural to urban areas has accelerated socio cultural and spatial differentiation and diversity, and constituted a great housing problem. In order to find a solution to this housing problem, various housing policies, and master plans have been put into practice; but cannot be properly implemented, because of the land speculation, and lack of financial resources of the municipalities to expropriate the land for basic services and political pressures. Depending on this, both planned, and unplanned housing areas have been constituted without assuring the physical, and social well-being. As a result; the land speculation ruined the historical buildings of _zmir in the needs of the housing demand to build new high-rise apartments that can be evaluated as insufficient. The lack of financial resources of the municipalities, and the policies that encourage the migrations from rural areas to developing city Izmir formed the “squatter housing” in the borders of the city. Squatter housing construction is the major means for shelter of low-income families who cannot have their place in the housing markets, and self-housing their own individual homes. Therefore, the number of squatter dwellings has increased parallel to the rapidly growing urban population. In 1980’s as a solution of the housing demand, “mass housing” areas have been built in the planned areas by the municipalities, and public associations. This new item; was an alternative solution for preventing the demolition of the historical buildings and to build new squatter houses. “Mass Housing Solution” served especially for the lower income group with the houses located outskirts of the city within low quality of urban life with lack of green areas, natural elements, and social environment. These households mostly the immigrants of the rural areas represented the continuum traditional-rural way of life in the cities firstly in “squatter areas” than in “mass housing” areas. This kind of mass housing areas served to provide the balance between cultural continuity, and the needs of modernization. While the mass houses for the lower income group was continuing to be produced, another approach have been developed for the mass housing policy. This new policy is aimed to build new “mass houses” with high living quality standards for the upper income groups, in the centre of the city, with green areas, play areas, recreation areas, shopping centres, sport centres and etc. Both the community and individual household either from lower income group or higher income group, are interested in the housing status of that household. By “housing status” it is meant a whole complex of activities, satisfactions, rights, obligations, convinces, and expectations surroundings the use of a particular dwelling unit by a particular household. The mass houses that have been built both for lower income, and higher income groups have to sustain the housing status which the society living in those houses wish to own. In this paper, the house status of the mass houses will be put in to light by comparing them with the criteria shown below, and building “mass houses” as one of the solutions for the housing demand will be criticized._ House Quality_ Environmental Quality_ Neighbourhood Quality _ “Mass House’s Settling Principles_ Accessibility To City Centre_ Typology Of Plans_ Profile Of The Users.Representation of the continuum traditional-rural way of occupants’ lives in the mass housing areas will also be put forward in addition to the points that we have focused on in this paper. To put forward the different uses of the mass-housing areas, and to compare the space and neighbourhood quality of the mass Housing areas in Izmir, the mass houses in “Maviehir” as the examples of the high economic levelled way of living, and mass houses of “Çili” as the examples of the low economic levelled way of living will be discussed in this paper as a case study.