Nowadays it is common to destroy some existing buildings in order to execute an urban project. It is mostly said that it is inevitable to demolish parts of urban context to provide more comfortable conditions for citizens. But what is destroyed belongs also to some citizen for whom this means that there would be no home tomorrow. While it is stated that such a matter is a kind of superiority of collective benefits to personal ones, in this article it is discussed that such a claim is not as true as it seems. There are many economic values stemming from urban situation that makes powerful groups or individuals concentrate on affecting urban projects for their own benefit. Here some historical examples of such a phenomenon are discussed in two categories: the first two ones are in the area of Islam – Cairo of MamaliK and Iran of Safavid (the case of Naghshe’ JahanPlazza). Both of them tried to exploit of urban fabric in such a manner but it has been done very conservatively. In comparison western counterparts belonging mostly to recent centuries are more explicit in such exploitation. Paris of Husman is a key example of this type in which owners of remained properties received reparation for being affected by the plan. But after some short period that such plans are made common it was the owners’ duty to pay for perceived benefit from these projects. Another example is Boston of 19th century where a vast destruction was taken into effect to expelling Irish dwellers from a site which was seen of economic value. The Exploitation Hypothesis is formulated to describe these tacit or explicit mechanisms that are designated to gather special benefits for some poles of power in the city and are often released in the form of city land plannings. Then there is some detailed reference to Islamic laws that puts some strong barriers against these processes of jobbery of urban projects. This body of regulations can be traced in basic texts of Islam i.e. the Holy Quran and Ahadith. Here the thereligios law emphasizes on rights of the former dwellers of an urban site as well as defends from their possession against new proposed situation. So it could be concluded that the Islamic jurisdication puts the responsibility of overcoming restrictive new conditions on those who caused these circumstances i.e. new dwellers or developers. Here it is stated that one who caused new situation or wants the new situation to be taken into effect is responsible to persuade previous dwellers or must be dissuaded. At the end of article a recent urban project of this kind in city of Qom is reviewed. AmmarYaser Bulvard is a cutting highway across old context of Qom around which too vast lands are dissposessioned. So the role of exploitative forces in forming the real project is discussed with reference to municipal laws of Iran. Then a formulation as well as comparison of exploitative mechanism in Iranian urban projects is presented and concluded.