Seoul Mayor Oh Se-hoon expressed his opposition to housing construction in Yongsan Park during a Cabinet meeting at the Blue House on August 18.
However, he firmly opposed the idea of utilizing Yongsan Park, the last large green space in central Seoul, for housing development. His reasoning is that while housing can be built elsewhere, once urban green spaces are lost, they are difficult to recreate.
Oh highlighted the figure of 5.7 square meters of 'walkable park area per person' in Seoul. Although the city appears to have abundant green space due to its mountainous areas like Bukhansan and Gwanaksan, the actual amount of park space accessible for daily use is minimal, according to Oh.
When comparing park statistics with major cities worldwide, caution is advised. Seoul primarily uses the area of parks included in walkable zones divided by the population, while cities in the U.S. and the U.K. focus on the percentage of residents who can walk to a park within 10 minutes. Despite the different calculation methods, both approaches aim to measure how easily citizens can access green spaces in their daily lives.
Washington, D.C., is a prime example of a city with excellent park accessibility. According to the U.S. Public Land Trust, 99% of D.C. residents can walk to a park within 10 minutes, with 21% of the city's total area designated for parks and recreational spaces. This is significantly higher than the average 76% accessibility rate for parks in the 100 largest U.S. cities.
D.C. enhances accessibility not only through large green spaces like the National Mall and Rock Creek Park but also by evenly distributing small parks, plazas, and playgrounds within residential areas.
New York City also boasts that 99% of its residents live within a 10-minute walk of a park. The city's park competitiveness is not solely based on Central Park; it has developed numerous small parks, playgrounds, and waterfront parks in densely populated areas. Accessibility rates remain around 99% across different income and age groups.
In London, approximately 20% of the city area consists of public green spaces accessible to citizens. The city government preserves large parks like Hyde Park and Regent's Park as historical assets while implementing policies to ensure all Londoners can reach green spaces within 10 minutes of their homes.
While there are variations in green space accessibility across different areas in London, the city has not opted to convert large urban parks into residential land due to development pressures.
Paris, similar to Seoul, faces challenges as a high-density city. Excluding the Bois de Boulogne and Bois de Vincennes, the per capita park and green space area in central Paris is about 1.6 square meters. Including the two forests raises this figure to around 10 square meters, demonstrating how statistics can vary significantly based on whether large outer forests are included.
In response, the Paris city government is pursuing a plan to secure an additional 300 hectares of green space, aiming for 10 square meters of green space per person, particularly targeting low-income neighborhoods vulnerable to heat waves.
These examples from major cities worldwide illustrate that simply increasing the total area of parks is not sufficient. It is essential to preserve large symbolic parks while also ensuring that small parks accessible to all residents are distributed throughout neighborhoods. Parks serve not only as recreational spaces but also as urban infrastructure that mitigates heat and absorbs rainwater during heavy downpours.
From this perspective, Yongsan Park is distinct from typical idle public land. Spanning approximately 3 million square meters, Yongsan Park is a crucial green corridor connecting Namsan and the Han River in central Seoul. Converting even a portion of it into housing would not only reduce the area but also impact the continuity of the urban ecological axis and landscape.
Why President Lee Jae-myung Cannot Abandon Yongsan Park
So why does President Lee Jae-myung continue to consider housing supply in Yongsan Park?It is premature to conclude that the president is unilaterally insisting on this policy. Reports indicate that President Lee has stated, "If the Seoul city government opposes, we should first discuss it." He has also emphasized the need for housing supply in Yongsan, a favored area for young people and newlyweds in Seoul.
The primary reason the government cannot easily exclude Yongsan Park from consideration is the scarcity of large land available for housing supply in central Seoul. Yongsan Park is a large state-owned site, allowing for public housing projects without land acquisition costs. The ability to provide housing for young people and newlyweds in a densely populated urban area with ample job and transportation facilities is also an attractive condition for the government.
Political pressure regarding the housing supply shortage is significant. In the first half of this year, the number of completed apartments in Seoul was 12,251, a sharp decline from 29,420 during the same period last year. The government is under pressure to propose notable large-scale housing supply sites to stabilize housing prices.
There is also a belief that relying solely on redevelopment and reconstruction will not allow the government to supply housing at the desired time and price. Conflicts within associations, issues of shared costs, relocation and compensation, and construction costs often delay actual occupancy. By supplying public housing on state-owned land, the government can more easily determine sale and rental prices and target demographics.
However, whether Yongsan Park can serve as a short-term solution for housing supply remains questionable. To build housing, amendments to the Yongsan Park Creation Special Act are necessary, along with changes to urban planning, soil contamination cleanup, and the expansion of infrastructure such as transportation and schools.
Considering the strong opposition from the Seoul city government and local residents, it is likely that significant time will pass before actual construction begins. The areas under consideration for development and the amount of housing supply have not yet been finalized.
For these reasons, the government should transparently disclose the number of housing units that could be secured through the development of Yongsan Park, the timeline for construction, and the climate and environmental costs associated with the loss of green space.
The Seoul city government must also go beyond merely asserting its commitment to preserving the park and demonstrate, through timelines and quantities, that it can supply more housing more quickly by easing redevelopment and reconstruction regulations than by developing Yongsan Park.
The debate over Yongsan Park is not merely a choice between "parks or apartments." It is a matter of balancing the housing insecurity faced by the current generation with the environmental assets for future generations, and neither should be pushed aside for political slogans.
This issue must be weighed against why major global cities have preserved large urban parks for centuries and the urgent housing crisis faced by Seoul's citizens.
* This article has been translated by AI.
Copyright ⓒ Aju Press All rights reserved.