Seoul City and the Korea Land and Housing Corporation (LH) are at odds over the roles of private and public redevelopment in housing supply in the capital. Seoul City argues that since approximately 90% of redevelopment plans are handled by the private sector, there is a need to ease regulations on private projects. In contrast, LH contends that public implementation can enhance speed and transparency.
According to Seoul City, private redevelopment encompasses 373 zones, amounting to about 375,000 housing units, while public redevelopment includes 32 zones with approximately 42,000 units. This means that private redevelopment accounts for about 90% of the total planned housing supply of around 417,000 units.
On November 5, Seoul City stated, “Dichotomizing public and private redevelopment and demonizing private projects does not contribute to expanding housing supply,” urging the government to actively pursue regulatory improvements and ensure project viability for private redevelopment.
Seoul Mayor Oh Se-hoon added on social media on November 4, “Ignoring the role and importance of private development is tantamount to overlooking the core of housing supply.”
The speed of public redevelopment projects is also a contentious issue. Seoul City pointed out that while the government promised in 2020 to reduce the project duration from over 10 years to around 5 years, no public redevelopment projects have commenced in Seoul after six years since the introduction.
In response, LH countered that a public redevelopment project in 22 zones in the metropolitan area, comprising 39,000 units, is progressing as planned, from designation to commencement within five years. They plan to start construction sequentially from the newly established Zone 1 in 2027, asserting that public implementation will accelerate project timelines and reduce opportunities for corruption.
Disagreements also arose regarding the cancellation of candidate sites and the transition to private redevelopment. Seoul City claimed that three public redevelopment candidate sites were canceled due to resident opposition and viability issues, with some areas shifting from public to private redevelopment.
Conversely, LH argued that while there were instances where residents canceled two candidate sites due to conflicts, there have been no transitions to private redevelopment zones.
There is also a divergence of views regarding the viability of the Jangwi 9 zone. Seoul City contended that Jangwi New Town, visited by the President, is not a success story of public redevelopment but rather a case where redevelopment was stalled due to the dissolution of the maintenance zone, delaying improvements in living conditions. They noted that newly constructed complexes and aging residential areas released from maintenance are contrasted across a single road.
In contrast, LH claimed that applying public redevelopment to the Jangwi 9 zone could increase the floor area ratio compared to private methods, potentially adding over 200 housing units and reducing resident contributions by more than 50 million won per household. They also argued that the proportion of public contribution housing is similar to that of private methods.
Furthermore, while private associations manage projects through service companies, LH stated that specialized staff receiving 3% of project costs directly oversee design reviews, cost estimations, and construction management. They plan to reduce the fee to 1% of project costs for new zones in the future.
* This article has been translated by AI.
Copyright ⓒ Aju Press All rights reserved.