On Korea's Jigsaw, Urban Footprint, and Urban Replanning

If you're a frequent flyer on my Korean errlines, you've had your fill of rants about recurring blunders in urban planning, the persistence of obsolete visions of urbanism, or (re)development equations that totally ignore plummeting demographics.

Well criticizing is easy. Urban harmony is like life or democracy: a very delicate, dynamic balance of power, a complex, evolutive system of checks and balances. No one will ever achieve perfection, and that's the beauty of it.

Besides, I see some glimmers of hope. Korea has eventually started worrying seriously about its shrinking population, seeking more inter-regional solidarity and cooperation, thinking about reviving ailing city centers in smarter ways... 

Korea is starting to realize that the real estate paradigm it's been addicted to for decades has become a Ponzi scheme, a sub-zero sum game where eventually everybody loses, even the wealthy ones who won't be able to resell their 'luxury condos' with a profit after paying much more for them than they would have for the most outrageous Manhattan penthouses.

Korea is starting to realize that it can't afford 'affordable housing' if that means building apartment blocks in greenbelt areas, that when a 'new town' succeeds somewhere, it means that somewhere else, an older town in depleting.

Korea is starting to realize that it can't keep adding new non-matching pieces to an ever growing jigsaw puzzle on an ever shrinking table, that these absurd urban footprint dynamics can't be sustained any longer.

The 5th Comprehensive National Territorial Plan, which covers the most critical 2020-2040 period, already mentions sustainability and other sound principles, but all is not set in marble and a lot has happened since it was released 5 years ago: rural desertification and fertility rate diminution accelerated dramatically, the GTX and other projects reshuffled whole decks... So a revised version is expected next year, for the 2026-2040 period.

Improving inter-regional solidarity and cooperation remains a key goal, particularly where they prove already challenging at the intra-regional level because of political divisions or fierce city rivalries. 

In addition to their autonomy, such special self-governing provinces as Jeollabuk-do or the recently upgraded 'Gangwon State' don't have to deal with special cities punching holes in their maps. In comparison, Gyeonggi-do must cope not only with giant neighbors nesting in its midst (Seoul and Incheon*), but also with a complex history of city creation explaining odd administrative shapes, or new towns stretching over different cities (e.g. Dongtan).

Granting a special status to a local government was generally done without much concern for the impacts around, which prevented all parties from reaching their full potential.

Wherever you stand on the fierce political fight over the creation of Sejong City (the left wanted to move the capital city to a new, central location to balance development across South Korea - the right refused to undermine Seoul and maintained part of the government there), you have to admit that from an urbanism point of view, things could have been done a bit better.

We're not talking Brasilia or Nusantara, a new capital erected far away from existing hubs: Sejong City seats right* next to the metropolitan city of Daejeon, South Korea's 5th largest cit, its central hub, and already the seat of several  central administrations, and right next to Cheongju, Chungcheongnam-do's capital.

Daejeon lies less than one hour away from Seoul via KTX but no, Sejong City must not enjoy express connectivity with the 'old' capital because then civil servants would commute instead of moving to Sejong**. And no, Daejeon's subway shouldn't come all the way to Sejong's vital parts. At its inception, it's almost as if Sejong City was designed as a local competitor instead of a national facilitator.

17 years after its creation, Sejong claims 400k souls, Daejeon remains around 1.5M, and Cheongju inched up from 650 to 720k. Common sense would have led to something more  rational, even simply two cities instead of three: the regional capital Cheongju and a-name-it-whatever-you-fancy-as-long-as-you-spare-local-susceptibilities national capital bis. If arranged harmoniously, I bet the latter would be today a thriving 2.5-3M strong metropolis.

Mind you, both Daejeon and Sejong are faring relatively well nowadays, but I'm not surprised to see the Sejong City - Daejeon - Chungnam - Chungbuk ensemble included in the potential revisions to Korea's 5th CNTP. Some consistency would clearly make the meta-region more competitive internationally - with the caveat that it wouldn't present an official one-stop front. 

Same with 'sudogwon', the capital region (Seoul-Incheon-Gyeonggi-do): unlike say the Ile de France region that encompasses Paris and its surroundings, it doesn't really exist as an official entity with representatives. It does make sense for the national government to be directly involved in an area representing half the nation's population and GDP, but the World's 4th metropolitan bloc can't fully leverage its potential. Of course, adding another administrative layer and the tensions that go with them, particularly with dwindling resources, may not necessarily be the panacea. Some even envision Daejeon + Sejong + Chungnam + Chungbuk as an 'ultra-wide megacity' - at least that would avoid the ego problem of who gets to be granted the regional capital status...

The debates promise to be complex and animated, but it's important to get every stakeholder involved, to identify all the impacts of each option, to learn from past mistakes, to minimize / optimize the urban footprint, to think urbanism beyond cities, towns, and other labels, wherever humans decided to settle or to build (be it a road, a remote factory, a farm, or even a field), and not to build for builders' sake.

Seoul Village 2024
Welcome to our Korean Errlines! Follow Seoul Village on Facebook and Twitter, follow me on Instagram.
Download 'Seoul VillageS' (free ebook - short fictions now adapted into short films)

 

* If the cities are administratively continuous, there's no actual urban continuum... but then again, few cities in Korea excel at urban continuity.

** Likewise, I still can't stomach the fact that the railway from Seoul to Incheon Airport was deliberately delayed until a few years after inauguration because that would have hurt taxi businesses. Or that Songdo didn't have a subway from day one (hello? a ginormous polder built from scratch?). At least nowadays, if new big fat greenfield 'new towns' keep popping up, most of them include a railway connection.

GTXtension(s) - fast transit rather than mass commuting?

In case you missed it, three new projects of GTX (Great Train eXpress) lines were announced earlier this year. Since we're getting closer to the inauguration of the first section on March 30 (GTX-A from Suseo to Dongtan), but also to key elections on April 10, I'll spare you all the wonderful urban development pledges that have popped up from all sides (I guess merging Gimpo with Seoul was one of the most radical), and talk a bit more about these Great Train extensions and GTX-tensions.

By stretching ABC and adding DEF, the network reaches further North, South, West, and East, and draws a first ring around Seoul and across Gyeonggi-do (GTX-F):

If GTX clearly brings places closer together, dividing by 3 the time to join Suseo and Dongtan, and if it reaches relatively fast speeds (105 km/h in its inaugural section, with peaks at 180 km/h), the system is 'express' in the sense that it makes few stops. And so far, it has more or less managed to resist intense pressure to add intermediary stations, particularly within Seoul. 

Which makes the success of seamless multimodal transport hubs even more critical, and I'm not sure that will be the case from day one. 'Luckily', the traffic shall not be too massive, because as it is conceived now, GTX can't really handle mass commuting. 

Beyond the limited number of trains per hour, their shortness is an issue, and commuters may struggle to find a spot to hop in, particularly in intermediary stations. I've experienced rush hour on Paris region's RER, with its long, double-decker trains, and that's not always pleasant... We may not see scenes similar to Line 9 saturation on steroids, but expect at least significant frustration from a lot of people who were expecting GTX as the instant panacea.

GTX provides fast transit before mass transit, it shortens connections before coping with mass commuting, and that's already something big. Even if you won't commute to work there, simply knowing that you can go to Seoul very quickly for lunch, dinner, or on a weekend can make moving far away less alienating. 

These massive and costly extensions do add Gangwon-do (Chuncheon and Wonju) and Chungcheongnam-do (Cheonan) to the equation, but also risk of further widening the gaps between sudogwon (Seoul-Incheon-Gyeonggi) and the rest of Korea as well as within the capital region and within the capital itself. With its relatively cheap fees (KRW 3.2K + 250 per 5 km), GTX may even cannibalize such alternatives as KTX.

The choices of routes and stations is always debatable and many areas within and beyond Seoul will remain underserved, but I always welcome transversal approaches in transport, and cooperation within the capital region. Nowadays, Seoul is collaborating much closer with Gyeonggi-do, including for its Climate Card now, and a ring bringing Gyeonggi closer together and bypassing the capital altogether marks a significant step.

Somehow, GTX is forcing the emergenceof  the grand vision, the great debate that's always been lacking. The way this whole region keeps developing remains a litany of missed opportunities, particularly since most of this urban and transport development (or lack of) relied on new towns built from scratch. And you know how often I complain about so much urban planning without urbanism or planning.

Now we're hearing about covering the Gyeongin Expressway and the rift between the Eastern and Western sides of Dongtan new town, and both will cost a fortune, but the Seoul-Inchon axis dates from ages ago, and that rift should have been solved from Dongtan's very conception. As demographics plummet and finances shrink, Korea can't afford not to get it right from the beginning. 

This nation is so great at alphabets, it should contemplate beyond ABCDEF.

Seoul Village 2024
Welcome to our Korean Errlines! Follow Seoul Village on Facebook and Twitter, follow me on Instagram.
Download 'Seoul VillageS', the free ebook.

7 Seoul subway / railway updates

MK published yesterday an interesting article* on the impact of 7 recent or upcoming subway / railway developments on real estate, which allows us to see of these old friends have fared since their announcements**.

The Maeil Kyeongje's 7 projects (NB our focus below doesn't follow these numbers)

 . Line 1 extension Northwards from Soyosan Station (3 new stations - Choseong-ri, Jeongok, and Yeoncheon): 

Since this extension mostly doubles an existing train, the article logically mentions a low impact on real estate. but it does make commuting more seamless for densely inhabited parts of Yeoncheon-gun, and allows Seoulites to venture further up the Dongducheon valley (not necessarily closer to the DMZ, though: it follows the same axis in this area).

 . Line 4 extension Eastwards from Danggogae Station (3 new stations - Byeollae Byeolgaram, Onam, and Jinjeop):

To be inaugurated next March, this 14.9 km extension is a game changer for this section of Namyangju dotted with major new towns (Byeollae and Jinjeop-eup). But as usual, what a shame that such major clusters were not connected to the grid from day one. 

Of course, this means more commuter traffic for a line already supporting older generation bed towns, but it will also help one of them, Nowon, grow as a cultural hub in Northeast Seoul. Furthermore, the article reminds us of two other projects that will help cope with the flow:

• Seoul considers doubling Line 4 with an express service for the 31.7 km section within city limits, between Danggogae and Namtaeryeong, with potentially 12 more stations concerned (all the ones connected to other lines). That would leave 12 stations with only the standard service, along with the ones in Gyeonggi-do.
• The extension of Line 8 Northwards from Amsa Station to Byeollae Station (Gyeongchun Line) by the end of 2023 could later be prolonged to Byeollae Byeolgaram Station via a new station, Byeollae Jungang, further anchoring Byeollae to the South, and making it a transport hub east of Seoul around a decent 'Byeollae Line' backbone.
  

 . Inauguration of Namwirye Station (Line 8):

Located between Bokjeong and Sanseong Stations in Seongnam, Namwirye doesn't really support Wirye New Town which, as the author mentions, would have much more impact. But he's not taking into account a tramway bound to deliver the goods: the construction of the Wirye Line is just starting these days.

'#Seoul about to start the construction of its first #tramway in decades (#WiryeLine - 12 stations, 5.4 km - to open i 2025). Line announced 8 years ago (http://seoulvillage.blogspot.com/2013/08/seoul-lrt-projects-update-part-22.html) #transports' (20211220 - @theseoulvillage)

 . Gyeongui Jungang Line extension Northeastwards from Imjingang Station to Dorasan Station: 

In this part of Paju, as the article confirms, 'nothing to do with real estate'. This line is simply inching further towards Kaesong, now a reasonable walk away... provided of course you've got all the papers to enter the DMZ at that most strategic point. For the moment, you're mostly connecting Seoul to a giant, empty parking lot: doesn't look like many workers will commute any time soon to the Kaesong Industrial Complex... Let's hope that some day, this dead end will be prolonged into a friendlier North Korea.

 . Seohae Line extension Northwards from Sosa Station to Wonjong Station (via Bucheon Stadium Station): 

As we've already seen (in "Twice upon a time in the West"), there's a lot going on around Bucheon. This vertical will split much earlier the traffic to/from Seoul between the North (Line 1) and the South (Line 7). And it will later be prolonged not only to Gimpo Airport, but also across the river, to Line 3 (Daegok Station, after a stop in Neunggok Station).

If Daegok seems a bit isolated between Goyang's 'old and new' New Towns (Ilsan to the West, Hwajeong to the East), Line 3 leads to more glamorous sites: downtown Seoul and Gangnam. And I wouldn't be surprised to see this new, vertical airport line that will go from Goyang to Hwaseong (for now, Ansan remains the Southern limit) venture further to the North-Northeast and connect to more New Towns.

 . Sillim Line inauguration (from Gwanaksan Station to Saetgang Station): 

Thanks to this precious new vertical connected to Line 9 (Saetbang), Line 1 (Daebang), Line 7 (Boramae), Line 2 (Sillim), 'I live in Bongcheon-dong' will sound a lot more uplifting. But in parallel to this LRT,  Western Seoul needs more verticals (Gangnam-gu already getting it's fourth!), starting with Seobu Line...

 . Shinbundang Line Northwards extension from Gangnam Station to Sinsa Station:  

The article made its headline on the star extension because it's about real estate and money, and we're talking expensive real estate (Gangnam-daero), and expensive stations: Gangnam on Line 2, Sinnonhyeon on Line 9, Nonhyeon on Line 7, and Sinsa-dong on Line 3. No new stations, but hopefully fewer cars on the Hannam Bridge once Sinbundang's next profitable extension to the North will lead across the river and Yongsan, all the way to Yongsan Station.

*

Beyond railway and subway projects, Maeil Kyeongje also mentioned work on more sections of the capital region's Second Ring Expressway, which will definitely have some impact. But what the region needs is more public transportation, and a better dialog within Gyeonggi-do, beyond the usual Seoul-suburbs dialog.

It's always good to connect existing dots, and the Ansan-Bucheon-Goyang axis is very welcome, but no new major urban projects should be allowed without a direct connection to the network.

The problem is that Gyeonggi-do is poorly managed, and this has something to do with the way big cities compete with each other without a real regional authority. Only the State has the potential to force some collaboration, or at least more coopetition and less competition within Gyeonggi-do. The lack of political will and strategic vision results in the multiplication of projects cannibalizing each other, a suicidal rat race as the population ages and declines. Clearly, there are countless ways of spending less, better, and still generating much more value for everyone.

 
Seoul Village 2021
Welcome to our Korean Errlines! Follow Seoul Village on Facebook and Twitter, follow me on Instagram.
Download 'Seoul VillageS', the free ebook.

* ""딱 역 3개인데, 폭발력 엄청나다"…판교 분당 부동산 난리난 이유" (Maeil Business Newspaper 20211226)
** see "Seoul subway to gain 89 km by 2025" (June 2015), "Seoul LRT Projects Update (Part 1/2)" and "Seoul LRT Projects Update (Part 2/2)" (August 2013, following "If you ain't broke, fix it: Seoul, Welfare and Railways Deficits" - July 2013). See also all subway related posts.

From zombie maeul to seed village - from fake startup communities to real Communities-as-a-Startup

As far as train wrecks go, the demographic ones are the easiest to predict. And Korea's bullet train is not exactly slowing down.

Last year, the nation officially posted its first negative growth on record, but COVID-19 had little to do with it. Yes, the pandemic claimed over one thousand lives and that's far too many, but that's also only a fraction of what most countries experienced. Yes, it hindered Foreign influx, but it also drew many members of the Korean diaspora back to the motherland. Yes, it will also impact future births, but last year only prolonged distressing trends: 2020's record low fertility rate (0.84) was preceded by an already scary one (0.92 in 2019).

If you think 2020 was bad, 2021 starts even worse...

... and the previous years already showed how bballi bballi Korea was aging even before the pandemic

In this sub-zero-sum game, the only regions that progressed spectacularly, Sejong and Gyeonggi-do, did it often at the expense of Seoul: the former benefiting from the transfer of governmental administrations, the latter from suicidal real estate policies that further accelerated the capital's decline (now well below the 10 M threshold it passed for the first time in 1988). Yet in March 2021, even Gyeonggi-do posted its first population decrease since the 1980s.

All over the nation, more rural localities are facing extinction*, and Korea continues its urbanistic nonsense, adding more dwellings to an already overflowing market because decision makers don't know any other translation of 'make homes more affordable' (what it needs) than 'build new homes' (which it doesn't need). I'll just repost below part of the rant I wrote five years ago (see "Seoul summerscapes: death, taxes, and budongsan" - 20160917, and all previous posts related to demography):

Now, the pandemic did act a bit like a catalyst at some level. If, so far, the nation hasn't implemented a real lockdown (except for Daegu), many have experienced remote working or remote learning at home in confined conditions. Like everywhere, many are dreaming of individual homes, more private space, a greener environment, many are reassessing their priorities, the rat race. And like everywhere, more city dwellers are considering rural lives. 

Of course, if there's always been a market for the Larzac / flower power fringes, most people wouldn't give up a certain level of services. And the 'winning' regions end up losing their souls when they pour concrete over their pristine shores to lure more city slickers (e.g. Jeju).

Can and should all rural communities be saved? I don't think so. But rural desertification can and should be prevented where it makes sense in a sustainable way.

Spontaneous grassroots initiatives can work, but local authorities can also play a role. What matters is that no one should play it selfishly, or with a short-term vision. Regional and national authorities an also help, particularly in order to mutualize and share resources and to make sure that as few people as possible fall out of the grid on key services and infrastructures.

Take the digital divide, for instance. Broadband coverage being strategic, it has become rather common for regulators and local authorities to push for network sharing schemes between operators, just like SK Telecom, KT Mobile, and LG U+ did last week: the government selected 131 rural and coastal areas which will then be covered by all 3 players, even if it wouldn't have made economic sense for any of them otherwise.

That's a good example on how a macro approach can help prioritize and focus the efforts. Local authorities should also pool to help prevent the closure of such essential infrastructures as hospitals or schools, which often accelerate the down spiral and seal the fate of several localities.

Education is paramount, and recent innovations and changes of habits could help change the equation for endangered institutions. We know that remote learning can become part of the mix, but also that some level of physical presence is essential for pupils. In order to maintain schools with a good level of education, why not have for instance confirmed teachers teach in parallel in different classrooms, with a junior assistant in each? 

Some worry about the absence of cultural life, but in Korea, I've already seen artists move their studios to very rural settings, or an old, remote industrial site converted into an art residence. And more fundamentally, there is no such thing as a cultural desert where a community is alive. Involving existing communities guarantees a cultural continuum, a transmission of the knowledge of the land and its history, but this is the ideal opportunity to bring more diversity. In Europe, quite a few rural communities have been revived by Foreigners who came to love them, and felt the love in return. A dying Italian village was repopulated with refugees and there as well, essential services could reopen. 

To help tilt the balance in the right direction, authorities can subsidize essential services. It's good to make sure that within a certain radius there's at least one store that can also provide basic postal / logistical services (not just a mini local platform for the pervasive delivery services). Once you enter a virtuous cycle of organic revival, other infrastructures can be envisioned - e.v. charging station, mini shuttle operations...

You don't want to build something as artificial as these cult-like life-on-Mars simulator bubbles, but grow reasonably ambitious, sustainable, local, impact projects. Transform zombie villages into seed villages where you want to enjoy life and why not, have kids. 

I realize that the concept of 'seed village' is already used for something very different, less inclusive. I was also into startup references. When I observe Korea's and not just Seoul's startup ecosystem, I see a lot of zombie startups that don't make sense, have no business model or future, and only exist and survive because they know how to milk the blind cows of public subsidies (and more than a few private funds, mind you).

I strongly believe that every region claiming to be the next startup magnet (in other words, this being Korea, all regions) should devote a portion of its startup budget to not-necessarily-tech, communities-as-startups approaches. If they manage to build clusters that's great, but in parallel it would be nice for Korea to build a grid of such CaaS (not Containers as a Service but Communities as a Startup). A human network, a community of communities sharing best practices instead of local authorities competing with each others.

It shouldn't be just a Bring-your-own-job party for young entrepreneurs, but an attractive alternative for people of all backgrounds and vocations. And the perfect occasion to fulfill overlooked yet strategic land-oriented missions: for instance, Korea needs to improve its forest maintenance, and to reduce its agricultural goods / food dependency through a more sustainable farming.

Now seems the time to seriously give it a try.

Seoul Village 2021
Welcome to our Korean Errlines! Follow Seoul Village on Facebook and Twitter, follow me on Instagram.
Download 'Seoul VillageS', the free ebook.

* see interesting data about the local extinction risk index in "Korea Is Aging Rapidly" (The Dongguk Post 20210412)

Twice upon a time in the West

The Minister of Land, Transport and Tourism came up with a new batch of developments for the capital region*, including new public transport projects, and unfortunately more instances of Korea's failed 'New Town' model, at the very moment the country experiences a slump in housing prices, and an oversupply of dwellings. The aim is actually to make sure the prices remain low for a while, which doesn't seem a bad idea, except that in Korea's speculative zero sum game, this necessarily means more losers, and more dead neighborhoods in the short, medium, and long term.

2 'New Towns', 26 small-to-medium-sized developments, 1 BRT, 1 subway line:

Following the first three announced last year (Incheon Gyeyang, Namyangju Wangsuk, Hanam Gyosan - in blue on the map below, which also shows future GTX lines), two more 'Greenfield New Towns'** will be created one kilometer West of Seoul, one on each side of the Han River (in red):

• Goyang Changneung: 38,000 households in Deokyang-gu, Goyang (Yongdu-dong, Hwajeon-dong)
• Bucheon Daejang: 20,000 households in Ojeong-gu, Bucheon (Daejang-dong, Wonjong-dong)

In a more acupunctural approach, 26 small and medium-sized residential projects shall add 51,517 households in already developed neighborhoods:

• 19 locations in Seoul (10,000 households), including in Jayang-dong, Gwangjin-gu (1,300 households), Sadang Station, Dongjak-gu (1200 households), Daebang-dong base, Dongjak-gu (1,000 households), Chang-dong Station, Dobong-gu (300 households), Wangsimni, Seongdong-gu (299 households), Magok, Gangseo-gu (30 households)
• 7 locations in Gyeonggi-do (42,000 households)

 

Transports-wise, the government's package proposes two new public transport lines, and road extensions:

• a 17.3 km-long "S-BRT" line (NB does 'Super - Bus Rapid Transit' mean super dedicated infrastructures for buses?) between Gimpo Airport Station and Bucheon Sports Complex Station, around Gimpo Airport, with connections to subway lines 5, 9, and even 7 (Bucheon Stadium Station). It will also reach Cheongna BRT.
• a new subway line will connect Goyang City Hall to Saejeol Station (Line 6), and intersect with Line 3, GTX-A, and Gyeongui Line at Daegok Station.
• A new motorway will connect Baekseok-dong (Ilsan) to the Seoul - Munsan expressway (Gogang, Seoun interchanges).
• Susaek-ro (already hosting 3 of the new housing projects judging by the map), and Worldcup-ro shall gain layers to cope with a growing traffic towards downtown Seoul as well as towards Yeouido and Gangnam.

Bucheon's new S-BRT line around Gimpo Airport

Goyang's new subway line

The good, the bad, and the ugly:


Overall, if you consider the three announcements made since last December, the State plans to sell 73,000 homes by 2022, 67,000 in 2023, 58,000 in 2024, 61,000 in 2025, and 44,000 in 2026, which may provide more options for affordable housing, but also amplify Korea's oversupply of dwellings. The only clear winner seems to be IKEA Goyang, today an outpost, but tomorrow ideally located to serve the new town.

At least, for a change,...:

• ... Seoul intra-muros is spared from more of the large-scale New Towns that destroyed so many of its neighborhoods (including the seven buried under Gyonam New Town). 
• ... a 'Greenfield New Town'** adds some urban continuity instead of pushing urban sprawl further afield: on paper, Goyang Changneung shall better tie Ilsan to the capital.
• ... transports, including public ones, are better phased and synced with new major developments (new subway, BRT, GTX lines around Goyang and Bucheon new towns, respectively top and bottom):

This remains an absurd case where we add commuting traffic before solving existing problems upstream and downstream. Yes, commuters from the latest new town will reach Seoul faster, but they will slow down commuters from Ilsan's 'older new town', and more cars will flock into Seoul's Western bottlenecks, even if some cosmetic touches are added along Susaek-ro. Urban planners went as far in the irony as to name their concrete monstruosity after the Joseon Royal Tomb*** it will deface.

In this young millenium, any new project should aim at the very least at zero emission and zero increase in car traffic, and this is obviously not the case. I nonetheless appreciate the new public transport lines: the BRT will add some verticality and fluidity across Bucheon, and Goyang will better split its commuters between line 3 and 6.

All this also means that the construction of Seobu Line / Seobuseon becomes even more urgent (see "Seobu Line confirmed as Seoul's LRT top priority"). Just months ago, the project was delayed because SNU wanted to prolong the line further into its campus, and now a boost comes from the other end of the line, the national government speeding up the agenda, and footing the bill for the first 7 stations. Because actually, this new Goyang line constitutes the new beginning of the most defining project for the Western half of Seoul's subway network. Now hopefully, the whole line should be completed by 2026.

On the other side of the Han River, Bucheon will clearly benefit from a denser public transportation network. How the new town will coopete with Magok District or Gyeyang Techno Valley remains to be seen....


Seoul Village 2019
Welcome to our Korean Errlines! Follow Seoul Village on Facebook and Twitter, follow me on Instagram.

Add this page to your favorites

* see for instance in Today's Chosun Ilbo: "3기신도시 고양 창릉·부천 대장동 등에 11만가구 공급", "새절역~고양시청 철도, 김포공항역~부천종합운동장역 BRT 신설", or in Today's Joongang Ilbo: "집값 다시 뛸라...집값 약세 둔화에 3기 신도시 '기습 발표'" (UPDATE 20190508 "To cool real estate, gov’t plans two new towns")
** as defined in "Wet eyes for wetlands and urban mirages"
*** see "Royal Joseon Tombs Become UNESCO World Heritage Properties" 
**** and by the way, these latest developments make even more irrelevant the Gangbuk Line project drafted a couple of months ago - see "Gangbuk LRT - Naebu v. Seobu, or PARK v. OH?")

Seoul Power Play: One Less Nuclear Plant, One More Coal Plant

I almost choked the other day at the ICLEI World Congress. Not because of air quality (around Seoul's New Normal, in the mid 40s PPM), but because of the answer I received from an official about the convenient untruth I mentioned in my previous post. ICYMI (see "Cough Potato"): not only do Korea and Seoul lie when they say that most of the pollution in the capital is generated overseas, but hiding beyond China's growing fumes, they also shamelessly give in to coal and diesel lobbies.

ICLEI World Congress at the Seoul DDP - on time for the cherry blossom

The official came from the same institute as the suspect quoted in that post (NB: again, this controversial institute holds views that are not shared by all Seoul officials). His presentation, which also included a focus on the February 23 peak, was all about the city's efforts to curb pollution, and the importance of particles coming from Gyeonggi, Incheon, China, and Mongolia.

To my question how can Korea and Seoul fight against high PPM levels and at the same time open the doors to diesel cars and new coal power plants, he answered that Seoul was indeed building an new coal power plant, but with limited emissions, and outside of its city limits! So beyond the now usual 'clean coal' imposture, we were told the trick that helps Seoul magically record improvements: our city lets Gyeonggi-do carry its dirtiest footprints, and the blame that comes with them. At this rate, Seoul's objective of reducing its CO2 emissions by 40% by 2030 from the 2005 level will be a breeze.

Imagine my reaction minutes later, as I returned to the DDP's main hall, precisely when the giant screens were displaying Seoul's successful campaign for 'One Less Nuclear Plant'! What's the point of cutting energy consumption by 2 million TOE (Tons of Oil Equivalent) if you build One More Coal Plant?

twitter.com/theseoulvillage/status/586085207129726976

If this carbon offset made me carbon upset enough to call it a day, I can't say that I'm really surprised. After all, countries too try to export their sources of pollution and get away with it as good environmentalists... and this city already proved that it could at the same time remove ugly elevated roads and build new ones. Once more, feel good politics wins over good politics.

A lot of politicians were on stage at the ICLEI, because that's an alliance of over 1,000 Local Governments for Sustainability. They elected PARK Won-soon as their new president until the next world congress in 2018, even if he's not as fluent in English as his brilliant predecessor David CADMAN; maybe a C40-suite mayor is more likely than a former Vancouver councilor to give more weight to the Seoul Declaration adopted ahead of COP21 in Paris.

The Paris conference is expected to set new targets for the UN members in the fight against climate change, and in their non-binding Seoul Declaration, local governments pledged to do their share: cities account for over 50% of the world population (a proportion expected to reach 90% by the end of the century), and 70% of today's pollution.

Of course, as the co-author of 'The Limits of Growth' in 1972, Professor Jorgen Sanders, put it on stage, much more needs to be done than this 'toothless' declaration. In his 2012 predictions for 2052, he expects the climate crisis to hit really hard, even if politicians manage to do the minimum, which would be reallocating 2% of the GDP from 'dirty' to 'clean' activities.

I had a quick chat with Jorgen Sanders after his lecture - and this interview. In his radical views, visionary authoritarian regimes have a better chance to succeed than corrupt democracies in forcing change. Well you could mention Park Chung-hee's tree planting program as a great success, but environment was not on top of his agenda as far as industries were concerned...

Nevertheless, this ICLEI World Congress will probably be remembered as a success. And lively workshops made for an endless opening ceremony featuring too many empty congratulatory speeches, only interrupted by surreal apparitions of 'Little Angels'. It took five minutes - too late in the afternoon, alas - for a couple of ICLEI execs to break the ice by inviting each member of the audience to stand up and introduce themselves to two unknown people.

Yodeling on stage, the "Little Angels" added a surreal Pyongyang touch to the show
twitter.com/theseoulvillage/status/585722800767377408

Reaching out is the answer. Preferably not just to export your waste.

How to make a difference with micro-projects under USD 3,000 and 'big projects' under USD 40,000? Kirtee Shah proved it was even scalable across 19 countries at the CITINET workshop on affordable housing in urban environments (twitter.com/theseoulvillage/status/585617017262178305)

Seoul Village 2015
Welcome to our Korean Errlines! Follow Seoul Village on Facebook and Twitter

Add this page to your favorites
.