Damage to Landscapes near Mountains, Rivers and Historic and Cultural Properties Caused by Reckless Development in the 1970s and 1980s
 

Housing Supply-Centered Policy in Development & Growth Periods

Seoul underwent dramatic changes due to economic development in the 1960s, and started to focus on supplying houses in the 1970-80s. Based on the "Housing Construction Promotion Act" enacted in 1972, houses were supplied on a massive scale. This was followed by the enactment of the "Housing Site Development Promotion Act," which was designed to effectively promote large-scale housing site development in the 1980s. Thereafter, a number of large apartment complexes were built across Seoul. In particular, the hilly areas overcrowded with dilapidated houses were released from the restrictions which were imposed on scenic areas, so that apartments could be built in those areas on a grand scale. High-rise, high-density apartment developments grew more fiercely due to the deregulation of building controls, including an increase in both the floor area ratio and the building coverage ratio of apartments, and a lower pitch of buildings according to the housing construction promotion plan issued in 1985. However, the construction of high-rise, high-density apartments around mountains and rivers began to damage the urban landscape as a whole, producing an overwhelmingly standardized view.

 

Downtown Redevelopment Policy for Modernization of Urban Functions

The "Urban Redevelopment Act" was enacted in 1976, followed by the establishment of the first "Basic Plan for Urban Redevelopment" in 1978. Then, the SMG complemented this basic plan and implemented active urban development by relaxing the restrictions imposed on the floor area ratio and the building coverage ratio for residential complex development. This urban redevelopment policy brought about the modernization of urban existence, such as the construction of modern-style buildings, the improvement of road networks, and the expansion of parks and parking lots. However, it fell short of considering the historic and cultural characteristics of downtown areas, which in turn led to many cultural heritages and urban structures across the city being destroyed by large-scale urban development.

 

Natural Landscape Management with the Removal of "Namsan Oein Apartment" as the Momentum

In 1991, the "Basic Plan for the Recovery of Namsan Mountain" proposed to transfer or remove ten encroaching facilities including the U.S. army facilities and the capital defense command (CDC), and to transform the territory into a park. Subsequently, the Namsan Oein apartments were torn down in 1994 through measures taken by the "Namsan Recovery Committee." The apartment concerned was originally built for the purpose of accommodating many of the foreigners who had been invited to Korea to pass on advanced technology when the economic development plan of the late 1960s was in full swing. It stood high at the foot of Namsan Mountain, so it could be seen easily from everywhere in the city, blocking out the original scenic view of the mountain. At that time, its demolition was aired live on TV and served as an opportunity to raise public awareness about the value of the city’s landscape.

 

<Figure 1> Demolition of the Namsan Oein Apartments (1994)

Implementation of the Scenic Conservation Act with the Focus on Inducement and Support

In the early 1990s, the SMG and academic circles began to recognize the need to manage the urban landscape, and established several plans for limiting the height and scale of buildings. By doing so, they intended to secure the scenic views of mountains and rivers, which corresponded to the landscape frameworks. However, the regulation-oriented landscape plan was non-statutory, without an applicable law, thus limiting the execution of the plans based on related laws. Furthermore, the urban landscape is generally formed by measures set forth in urban plans of which the scope includes buildings, parks, green areas and the like, all of which are managed and operated according to individual laws (such as the Land Planning and Utilization Act, Building Act, and Act on Urban Parks, Greenbelts, etc.). Therefore, for the realization of landscape management, there was a growing need to implement an applicable law that would cover all of the landscape targets to be managed. Accordingly, the Scenic Conservation Act was enacted in 2007 to lay the institutional groundwork for the preservation, management and formation of landscape resources by, for example, establishing landscape plans, executing landscape projects, and concluding a landscape agreement with land owners along with their support. The SMG established its statutory landscape plans for the first time as a local government based on the landscape ordinance in 2008 and the Scenic Conservation Act in 2009. Then, it mapped out specific landscape plans for each type of landscape: natural green spaces, waterside areas, history and culture zones, nightlife areas, and streets.

 

1st Period: Start of Protection and Management of Damaged Urban Landscapes

 Seoul is a city with its own unique urban identity that has been formed by the landscape framework, including its four inner mountains (Bugaksan, Naksan, Namsan and Inwangsan), four outer mountains (Bukhansan, Gwanaksan, Yongmasan/Achasan and Deokyangsan), the Han River, and four streams (Hongjecheon, Jungrangcheon, Anyangcheon and Tancheon), as well as downtown palaces, the ancient Hanyang City Wall, traditional Korean-style houses, and diverse historic cultural properties. Therefore, when demand arose for greater efforts to manage damaged urban landscapes and protect Seoul's own unique landscapes in the early 1990s, concerted efforts led by related academic societies and research institutes were made to secure the scenic views of natural landscapes. At the same time, relevant laws were enacted and amended to lay the institutional groundwork for the realization of landscape management. Although the city’s historic and cultural landscapes constituted a key element in forming the identity of Seoul along with its natural landscapes, the SMG was not very interested in protecting and managing unlisted historic and cultural resources, preferring to focus only on listed historic and cultural properties.
 

Securing Scenic Views of Natural Landscape Resources such as Mountains and Rivers

￮ In many studies, it was suggested that a view should be selected based on theoretical backgrounds and that how a view is secured between buildings must be regulated, so that people could view the landscape above the fifth to seventh ridges of mountains. To realize landscape management, they also suggested the designation of scenic districts and the application of deliberation standards, etc. However, in the case of designating scenic districts, which might lead to an infringement of property rights, it is necessary to first win public consensus. When it comes to the height of buildings, which were defined by the existing system used by districts and setback regulations, there is a limit to regulating the height based on only landscape plans, which have no recourse to an applicable law. As such, the methods of securing a view suggested in many studies have not yet been executed.
 

Protection and Formation of Historic and Cultural Landscapes through District Unit Planning

￮ Historic and cultural landscape resources such as ancient palaces and the Hanyang City Wall constitute a key element in forming the identity of Seoul, along with its natural landscape formed of mountains and rivers. Nevertheless, there have been virtually no studies conducted with the aim of protecting and managing such landscapes to date. Listed historic and cultural properties have been protected by the designation as a cultural heritage protection area, elevation control, etc., but there is still a limit to forming the landscape of adjacent areas in consideration of the corresponding cultural properties. Most of the unlisted historic and cultural landscape resources were also excluded from protection and management.
 

￮ There was growing demand to protect and manage the historic and cultural resources and landscapes which had been damaged or lost during the period of rapid urban development. The SMG started to map out its district unit plans, centering on the city’s characteristic centers of historic and cultural resources, such as Bukchon, Insa-dong and Myeong-dong. The purpose of the district unit planning of these characteristic centers was not only to protect and manage historic and cultural landscapes, but also to contribute to their maintenance through detailed planning.
 

Laying the Institutional Groundwork for Landscape Management

￮ Seoul Architectural Committee Rules on Apartment House Design Review

- At a time when the reconstruction of large-scale apartments was proceeding apace, the SMG had no means to conduct city management. Then, it temporarily succeeded in enacting the "Seoul Architectural Committee Rules on Apartment House Design Review" in 1999. These rules on apartment house design review were classified into indexical deliberation criteria and derivative deliberation criteria. The former includes the elevation area, elevation blockage ratio, height limit on hills, outdoor living space, sidewalk ratio and roadway ratio. The latter includes the complex formation and layout plan, cutting/banking ratio, land deformation ratio, building type and number of stories, circulation planning in complex, structural plan, landscape plan, existing tree preservation, color plan and underground excavation. The rules on apartment house review were enacted according to the "Land Planning and Utilization Act" in order to manage the scale of apartment houses, including the local floor area ratio, number of stories, maximum height, and building layout and type. However, it was abolished in 2008 with the enactment of the "Apartment House Architectural Design Review Standards," which aimed to secure a diversity of designs and form high-quality residential environments.
 

￮ Landscape Areas

- As the "Urban Planning Act" was completely revised in 2000, the SMG subdivided landscape areas into natural landscapes, visual landscapes, waterfront landscapes, cultural heritage landscapes, street landscapes, and scenic landscapes through an amendment to the urban planning ordinances. On that basis, of the twenty-four scenic areas designated according to the Joseon Street Planning Act in 1941, twenty were changed into natural landscape areas and four were changed into visual landscape areas. Then, according to the "Land Planning and Utilization Act" enacted in 2003, which allowed the designation of natural landscape, waterfront landscape and street landscape areas, the SMG permitted the designation of visual landscape, cultural heritage landscape and scenic landscape areas through a revision of the urban planning ordinances.

- However, it was difficult to designate additional new landscape areas owing to the fact that people living in the existing natural landscape areas continued to raise civil complaints against the designations as it infringed on their property rights. Accordingly, the city council decided to exempt several districts from designation because they had neither been designated before nor produced any actual benefits from separate regulations. Therefore, the scenic landscape and cultural heritage landscape areas were deleted in 2009. At present, the SMG is allowed to designate natural landscape, waterfront landscape and street landscape areas according to the Land Planning and Utilization Act and to designate visual landscape areas under the urban planning ordinance. As of 2013, the total size of landscape areas amounted to 13.1km2, with only natural and visual landscape areas designated.
 

￮ Average Number of Stories

- Due to compulsory rental housing reconstruction in 2006, the floor area ratio was increased by 10-30%, making a change inevitable in the height limit of buildings in type II general residential areas, whose floor area ratio and number of stories were limited to 200% and 12-15, respectively. Furthermore, due to the previous limit on the maximum number of stories, the city landscape of housing areas began to look too uniform and standardized. In addition, a continuous stream of civil complaints was raised regarding the poor residential environment caused by the difference in building heights from other nearby areas with lower height limits. Against this background, to create a variable skyline and a better urban landscape, the SMG set the average number of stories (the number of stories obtained by dividing the ground area of apartments by a reference area, under Clause 2, Article 28 of the Seoul Urban Planning Ordinance) for the first time as a local government through a revision of the Seoul Urban Planning Ordinance.

- In the case of building apartments in the District Unit Planning Areas and Renewal Areas, the average number of stories was alleviated and raised to 11 for type II general residential areas (previously 7 stories or lower) and to 16 for type II general residential areas (previously 12 stories or lower) in consideration of their contribution to the public interest through land donations for public sites and their potential to improve the landscapes of adjacent areas.

- Then, in 2009, there was an attempt to compensate the issue of hills, which formed a uniform and standardized landscape view due to the application of an absolute number of stories without considering the local geographical characteristics. Therefore, the type II general residential areas were divided into hilly areas and flatland areas, to which differential criteria for alleviating the limit on the number of stories were then applied after taking the regional characteristics into account, while maintaining the framework of the subdivision (7 and 12 stories) of type II general residential areas. Conversely, districts in need of landscape management were excluded from the alleviation of the limit on the number of floors. In this way, the government set a strict restriction on the simple upgrading of building stories in specific use districts. However, if an architectural plan (special landscape design, etc.) for hills was made through a design competition or if there was consultation with the committee in advance, the government could apply a separate criterion to that case within a scope of 18 stories on average, thus enabling the architectural planning of various designs in practice. Meanwhile, in the case of building apartments with a structure capable of easy remodeling, the average number of stories could be relaxed to within 20% of the corresponding standard. In so doing, the government had taken measures to prevent reckless reconstruction from causing any environmental damage and waste of resources.
 

<Table 3> Improvement Proposal for Average Number of Stories (2009)

Use Districts	Classification	Reference Number of Stories	Maximum Number of Stories	Infrastructure Burden Ratio
Type II General Residential Area (7 stories or less)	Hill	10 stories or less on average	13 stories or less on average	5%
	Flatland	13 stories or less on average		10%
Type II General Residential Area (12 stories or less)	Hill	15 stories or less on average	18 stories or less on average	5%
	Flatland	18 stories or less on average		10%

 

Key Word	Landscape Checklist		Evaluation
Harmony with Surroundings	To promote scale and height that harmonizes with inner/outer mountains and surrounding features	Scale and height in disharmony with surroundings (×) Scale and height in harmony with surroundings (○)
Skyline	To form a skyline that considers natural geographical features Ÿ To map out a height plan to secure the view up to the 5th ridge of the summit of mountains	Sky line without considering mountains (×) Sky line in harmony with mountains (○)
No Feeling of Oppression	To avoid excessively large and protruding buildings - Not to block a scenic view or cause a feeling of oppression by folding screen-type buildings or a group of buildings - Divide buildings and design in a slender type in harmony with surrounding landscapes	Excessively large buildings causing a feeling of oppression (×) Buildings in a segmental type (○)
Memo
※ This box is for designers to write their opinions. You can self-check each item as or use for your explanation about plans. (Related drawing, simple sketch, sentence, etc.)
Ÿ Evaluation: Fully considered → ◎ Considered → ○ Not considered → ×
Source: Seoul Map Homepage (http://gis.seoul.go.kr)

Writing Checklist for Landscape Design Guidelines, Institutionalizing Its Submission and Executing the Landscape Self-Checking System

 

Agreement on Landscapes and Promotion of Landscape Projects

<Figure 3> Gateway Landscape Formation Project (before/after project)

Specific Landscape Planning by Landscape Type

￮ The basic landscape plan is a landscape master plan that builds a large framework and outlines the processes for preserving, managing and forming Seoul City landscapes, while the specific landscape plan presents the methods of implementing the preservation, management and formation of landscapes with specific landscape types (forest, waterfront, agricultural/fishing village, history/culture, street, etc.) on the basis of specific environmental elements (nighttime landscape, color, outdoor advertisement, public facilities, etc.), and is based on the landscape plan guidelines.

￮ The SMG established a specific landscape plan for four types of landscapes (natural green, waterfront, history/culture and street areas) along with the basic landscape plans. Of these, the street landscape plan was established first in 2009, targeting streets that urgently needed landscape management and that were highly likely to show the effects of improvement. After that, it mapped out a nighttime landscape plan as a specific landscape plan for each specific element in 2009 and established a landscape plan for natural green areas, waterfronts, and history/culture zones in 2010.
 

<Figure 4> Seoul Landscape Plan System

 

<Figure 5> Strategy for Seoul Natural Green, Waterfront and Historic/Cultural Landscape Plans and Criteria for Landscape Formation

 

<Figure 6> Samil-ro View Landscape Formation Area (Seoul Natural Green Landscape Plan, 2010, p71)

<Table 4> Classification of Height Management of Waterfront Landscape Plans

Area	Management Direction	Target Areas
Height preservation area	Form a landscape that adapts itself to and harmonizes with natural topography	Mapo/Seogang, Hannam/Oksu, Heukseok/Noryangjin
Height management area	Form a landscape in harmony with surrounding areas	Landscape management areas excluding height-preserving/inducing/alleviating areas
Height induction area	Form a waterfront landscape full of vitality through the introduction of multi-purpose designs	Hapjeong, Dangsan, Ichon, Banpo, Seongsu and Guui/Jayang
Height alleviation area	Create a new landmark landscape around the waterfront area	Yongsan, Yeouido, Apgujeong and Jamsil

<Figure 7> Height Management-Applied Areas (Seoul Waterfront Landscape Plan, 2010, p55)

<Table 5> Classification of Historic Urban Organization Areas

Area	Management Direction	Target Areas
Historic Features-preserving district	Maintaining and preserving the original form of old urban organizations	Bukchon, Seochon, Insa-dong and Donhwamun-ro
Historic features-managing district	Maintaining and managing the characteristics of old urban organizations	Sejong-ro, Jeong-dong, Bukchang-dong, Myeong-dong, Gwancheol-dong and Gwangjang-dong
Small-unit maintenance district	Protecting the characteristics of old urban organizations	Gongpyeong-dong, Gwansu-dong, Chungmu-ro, Jongno 5, 6 ga-dong, Gwanghui-dong, etc.
Large-unit maintenance district	Considering and utilizing old urban organizations	Large-scale development plan areas (urban environment maintenance area, renewal promotion area, special planning area, etc.)

<Figure 8> Historical Urban Organization Areas and Examples (Seoul Historic and Cultural Landscape Plan, 2010, p62)

Landscape Project Proposals by Type

￮ The specific landscape plan presents the types of strategic landscape projects that the public sector must promote according to the strategy for each type of landscape. Each landscape project must be promoted in connection with landscape agreements so as to enable local residents to participate in the landscape management.
 

<Figure 9> Seoul Natural Green/Waterfront/Historic & Cultural Landscape Plan and Examples of Landscape Projects

The 3rd Period | Landscape Plan Renewal according to Changed Conditions

Based on the Scenic Conservation Act, the SMG constructed a framework for landscape plans and prepared its management methods for each type of landscape. However, the existing Scenic Conservation Act did not have the full power of execution for landscape plans due to its lack of management means and the fact that its overly wide scope of target business caused redundancy and confusion. Accordingly, the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport revised the Scenic Conservation Act in its entirety in 2014 and the SMG launched the renewal of landscape plans according to the changed situation. It established plans for managing the Han River skyline and the historic center around the four main gates at the same time. Thus, it is necessary to review and reflect upon the related contents in the renewal of landscape plans.
 

Laying the National Groundwork for Systematic and Integrated Landscape Management

￮ Due to the revision of the Scenic Conservation Act, the roles of the central government with regard to landscape policies were newly established. The Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport is now responsible for establishing and implementing the basic plans for landscape policies every five years, making it compulsory to establish and execute landscape plans for do/si/gun whose population exceeds 100,000, and laying the framework for the local government to secure its power of execution in landscape management.

 

<Figure 10> Main Contents of Revised Scenic Conservation Act

 ※ The shaded parts denote the contents of the Seoul landscape policy.

Han Riverside Skyline Management

<Table 6> Heights by Hangang Riverside Skyline Management Principles

Use District	Downtown/Subcenter	Region/district-centered	Other Areas
Commercial/Semi-Residential	Multipurpose: 51 stories or more, Residential: 35 stories or less	Multipurpose: 50 stories or less, Residential: 35 stories or less	Multi-purpose: 40 stories or less Residential: 35 stories or less
Semi-Industrial	Multipurpose: 50 stories or less, Residential: 35 stories or less
General Residential	General type III: 35 stories or less (residential), Residential: 35 stories or less, Multipurpose: 50 stories or less General type II: 25 stories or less		General type III: 35 stories or less General type II: 25 stories or less

 <Table 7> Promotional Details of Landscape Management Policy

Year	Established laws, systems and plans	Content
1941	Plan for Joseon streets	Scenic districts designated in order to protect natural landscapes and prevent conurbation.
1994	Demolition of Namsan Oein Apartments	Apartments demolished according to the Namsan Recovery Master Plan (1991).
1999	Seoul Architectural Committee Rules on Apartment House Construction Review	Apartment house landscapes managed based on indexical deliberation criteria and derivative deliberation criteria.
2000	Enactment of the Urban Planning Act	Landscape districts newly established.
	Revision of the ordinance on Seoul urban plans	Landscape districts subdivided into natural, visual, waterfront, cultural heritage surroundings, street, and scenic view landscape districts.
2003	Enactment of the Land Planning and Utilization Act	Landscape districts designated and subdivided; construction restricted in landscape districts.
	Revision of the ordinance on urban planning in Seoul	Landscape districts sub-divided into visual, cultural heritage surroundings, and view districts.
2005	2020 Seoul Urban Basic Plan	Landscape plan
2006	Introduction of average number of stories	Type II General residential area (7 stories or lower) up to average of 11 stories Type II General residential area (12 stories or lower) up to average of 16 stories
	Revision of Seoul's urban design ordinance	Enacted and executed (July 2006).
	Establishment of basic plans for Seoul urban design	Basic Seoul designs conceived.
2007	Enactment of the Scenic Conservation Act	Enacted (May 2007) → Executed (November 2007).
	Enactment of the Framework Act on Building	Enacted (December 2007) → Executed (June 2008).
2008	Enactment of the Seoul ordinance on landscapes	Enacted and executed (August 2008).
	Establishment and systematization of Seoul’s colors	Guidelines on Seoul colors and districts presented.
2009	Establishment of Seoul basic landscape plan	Seoul basic landscape plan, street landscape plan and nighttime landscape plan established simultaneously. Pilot operation of the landscape self-check system (April 2009 – March 2011).
	Improvement plan for average number of stories	Differential criteria (hills, etc.) applied to alleviate the number of stories, with local characteristics reflected.
2010	Establishment of specific landscape plans in Seoul	Seoul natural green landscape plan, waterfront landscape plan and historic and cultural landscape plan established.
2011	Monitoring of the landscape self-check system	Study on landscape management evaluation and improvement plans according to Seoul landscape plan, Seoul Institute (March - August 2011).
	Establishment of the Seoul basic construction plans	Top plan in the architectural policy based on the Framework Act on Building.
	Reform of the Seoul urban design basic plan	Specialized design intensive districts introduced.
2012	Implementation of the compulsory landscape self-check system	Landscape self-check system newly named and subject to compulsory execution from January 1, 2012.
2013	Improvement plan for average number of stories	7 stories or less for constructing apartments in Type II general residential areas Able to alleviate the number of stories to 13 according to land donation
	Han Riverside management direction	Skyline management principle (April 2013)
2014	2030 Seoul urban basic plan	Landscape plan
	Revision of the entire Scenic Conservation Act	Revised as a whole (August 2013) → Executed (February 2014).
	Enactment of the Seoul landscape ordinance	• Enacted as a whole and executed (May 2014).
	Seoul landscape plan under renewal	• Academic research on Seoul landscape plan renewal, Seoul Institute (May 2014 - February 2015).

Contribution to Establishing Seoul Identity

Presenting a direction for landscape plans

 

Improving urban landscapes and raising public awareness with the promotion of landscape agreement and project

• Mok Jeong-hun, 2005, “Study on How to Manage Apartment House Heights in Residential Areas: Centering on Type II General Residential Areas”, Seoul Institute
• Park Hyeon-chan, 2014, “Strategy for Landscape Policy Improvement according to Revised Scenic Conservation Act”, Seoul Institute's Policy Report 175
• Park Hyeon-chan, Min Seung-hyeon, 2014, “Study on Landscape Policy Improvement Directions in Seoul according to Revised Scenic Conservation Act," Seoul Institute
• Seoul Metropolitan City, 1991, Namsan Recovery Master Plan
• Seoul Metropolitan City, 2000, Seoul Plan for Mountain Scenic Landscape Conservation
• Seoul Metropolitan City, 2002, Seoul Plan for Mountain Viewing Landscape Conservation
• Seoul Metropolitan City, 2005, Seoul Basic Plan for Landscape Management
• Seoul Metropolitan City, 2009, Seoul Basic Landscape Plan
• Seoul Metropolitan City, 2010, Seoul Plan for Street Landscapes
• Seoul Metropolitan City, 2010, Seoul Plan for Natural Green Landscapes
• Seoul Metropolitan City, 2010, Seoul Waterfront Landscape Plan
• Seoul Metropolitan City, 2010, Seoul Plan for Historic and Cultural Landscapes
• Seoul Metropolitan City, 2012, Basic Plan for Historic and Cultural City Management in Four Gates of Seoul
• Lee Seong-chang, Park Hyeon-chan, 2011, “Study on Landscape Management Evaluation and Improvement Plans according to Seoul Landscape Plan,” Seoul Institute