Low-rise residential area in Heukseok-dong, Dongjak-gu, Seoul. Senior reporter Kim Bong-gyu [email protected]
“It’s smart.” This is a summary of the evaluations made by various experts on the 2·4 supply plan. Despite radical deregulation, public participation was conditional to prevent privatization of development profits, and while promoting urban development, the’Hansu of God’ caught both rabbits by giving priority to apartment supply only to the owner as of the date of the announcement of the measures, blocking access to speculative demand. It is an evaluation. In fact, the 2·4 supply plan suggested a new supply model called’city center public development’, which is a kind of utopia for now. No specific candidates have been announced, and the supply is close to estimates for now. It means that there are many mountains that must be overcome in order to lead to actual supply, so it can be a’handshake’ rather than a’hands out of God’. Can urban public development really remain in the history of Korean real estate policy as a’hands of God’? I looked for the answer in the field.
① If you find a way for public development to take the place of the market
Last January, we visited the new zone 1 in Jongno-gu and Yangpyeong 14 zone in Yeongdeungpo-gu, which were selected as candidates for public redevelopment. There were many similarities between the two areas, but first of all, the residential environment was poor enough to have a’side room’. In Yangpyeong 13 district, there was an old jokbang village that used shared toilets, and even though it wasn’t a shared toilet in the new district 1, there was a place where a house was divided into 8 rooms with a toilet and was rented like a private room. This landlord lived in one of the eight rooms, but the rest of the room was empty because even tenants could not find it. Another thing in common was that the residents who are promoting redevelopment are almost eighty-old. One resident who was introduced to be the most active in promoting public redevelopment with the general secretary of the Redevelopment Promotion Committee meeting in the newly established District 1 was born in the 1940s and entered the 80s this year, and those who are acting on behalf of the Redevelopment Promotion Committee in Yangpyeong 14 District were born in the 1940s and in their 70s. It was the second half. He said about the reason he became acting as an acting chairman, saying, “After the previous chairman passed away, I decided to take over the chairman in the order of elders.” Existing private redevelopment is a method led by a cooperative, a council of residents.In both areas, the residents themselves are required to carry out complex and specialized procedures such as the promotion committee, establishment of the cooperative, approval for project implementation, selection of contractors, establishment of relocation measures, and approval for management disposition. I was wondering if it would be possible. According to the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport, private redevelopment usually takes 13 years to move in, but 2034, 13 years from now, is a far-off future for older residents. That’s why they leave redevelopment to the’public’. In downtown Seoul, there are many old residential areas where elderly residents live. The new zone 1 and Yangpyeong 14 zones are designated as maintenance business zones, so the circumstances are better. The situation is worse for 393’undesignated’ sites that have been lifted from the new town business and maintenance business (redevelopment and reconstruction) area since 2012 due to the real estate economic downturn. In the Seoul Institute’s 2018 report,’Analysis of New Town Redevelopment Areas and Housing Regeneration Direction’, 393 aging indices (for youths aged 0-14 years old) that were lifted in New Town and maintenance projects (redevelopment and reconstruction) areas since 2012. The proportion of the elderly people aged 65 or older) was 239.2%, which is significantly higher than the average of 97.2% in Seoul. About 140 out of 393 were old residential areas with more than 60% of old buildings over 30 years old. In a briefing on the 4th, Minister of Land, Infrastructure and Transport Byun Chang-heum mentioned “a region where the possibility of development is low because of limited infrastructure such as narrow roads, which makes it difficult for integrated development, but it is difficult for residents to agree on and lack of business potential” as a candidate for public development. If an underdeveloped place where the market doesn’t look awkward becomes a high-quality residential space through public development, the 2·4 supply plan can become a’hands of God’.
② If only landlords’ profits are guaranteed and tenants are neglected
When I visited New Zone 1 in January, the resident Mr. O (81) said that the wish of a resident was’not being driven out’. He said, “If you have 18 pyeong, you will be given an 18 pyeong apartment, and if you have a 20 pyeong apartment, you will be able to persuade all the opposing residents.” Mr. A (80), general secretary of the Promotion Committee next to him, said, “I thought that if I only looked at Eunpyeong New Town, I would have to get the apartment sold for compensation, but I had to throw out more money.” “I have anxiety that the residents here might be kicked out like that.” The New Town Project in the 2000s showed that the old grammar of becoming rich when redeveloped, was a naive illusion. A study by the Seoul Institute of Government Administration (formerly Seoul Institute) that the rate of resettlement of indigenous peoples in the Newtown area was only 17.1% came out. In the case of Eunpyeong New Town, 29.8% of the exclusive area was less than 84㎡, which was less than half of 70.2% of the proportion of medium-sized and large-sized units of 101㎡ or more. It was analyzed that it was done. This is why the new town project was labeled as a’resident replacement project’. The government said that through the 2·4 supply measures, land owners guarantee a 10 to 30 percentage point higher rate of return through public development than when implementing projects by themselves and give priority to apartments and shopping malls. A plan was also made to provide housing for real-owned landlords who are unable to bear development costs, who can own apartments at a lower cost than pre-sale housing. Landlords are unlikely to be driven out like in Newtown. Tenant protection measures aren’t as specific as the landowner’s income guarantee measures. Protection measures were put in place for tenants in the entire development process, such as moving fees, housing transfer fees, temporary residences, and resettlement public leases, but the most important resettlement public rentals seem to be insufficient. The government is in a position to secure up to 50% of the supply of public leases for tenants, but the amount of public leases itself is only 20-30%. Moreover, since 20-30% includes public private housing supplied to low-income landlords, the share of public leases is likely to decrease further. This is why civil society organizations such as the Public Lease Double Solidarity are strongly criticizing that 70-80% of them are distributed to public sales and only 20-30% of public rentals are provided. Older dwellings that will be subject to public development have no choice but to have a high percentage of tenants, and 20-30% of them cannot accommodate all of them. In fact, Yongdu District 3, which is an off-site Newtown area, has an 85% tenant ratio. Tenant households accounted for 70% of the 147,000 households in the 2nd New Town pilot district, with 107,000 households. However, a study found that the rental housing provided at the time only accommodated 19% of the tenants’ households. As of now, 20-30% of the public lease ratio of the 2nd and 4th supply measures is slightly better than that of Newtown. If this is the case, wouldn’t it be difficult for tenants to become’the hand of God’?
By Jin Myung-sun, staff reporter [email protected]