The document discusses the transformation of Seoul, South Korea from a non-urban area to a smart and sustainable city through proactive urban planning and land management. It provides background on the rapid urbanization of Seoul in the 1960s-1980s, and how the city addressed challenges of housing shortages, congestion, and environmental issues through master plans, new towns like Gangnam and Bundang, and redevelopment projects like Cheonggyecheon. The restoration of Cheonggyecheon creek in central Seoul improved safety, environment, culture and the local economy by removing an elevated highway and creating a public green space.

1. Smart and Sustainable City
Case of Urban Transformation of Seoul
Professor of Urban and Regional Planning, University of Seoul
Former Director-General of International Urban Development Collaboration, Seoul Metropolitan Government
mkangcity@gmail.com

2. WHY SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT?
WHY CITY?
Global Urbanization with Rapid Population Growth
2

3. Why Cities? – Poverty & Climate
• Cities are the engine of growth to eradicate poverty
and key to sustainable world to solve climate change problem.
• Cities cover only 2 percent of land area of the world. However,
they hold 50 percent of population and are responsible for up
to 70 percent of greenhouse-gas emissions [and production].
(UN-HABITAT, 2011, Cities and Climate Change: Global Report
on Human Settlements )
• "Cities are responsible for the majority of our harmful
greenhouse gases. But they are also places where the greatest
efficiencies can be made. This makes it imperative that we
understand the form and content of urbanization so that we
can reduce our footprint," said Joan Clos Executive Director of
UN-HABITAT.

4. Global Urbanization is Surging
2010 2030 2050 2010-2050
World
Pop (Billion) 6.90 8.32 9.31 2.41
Urban Pop (B) 3.56 4.98 6.25 2.69
Urban Rate(%) 51.6 59.9 67.2 -
Developed
Countries
Pop 1.24 1.30 1.31 0.07
Urban Pop 0.96 1.06 1.13 0.17
Urban Rate(%) 77.5 82.1 85.9 -
Developing
Countries
Pop 5.66 7.03 8.00 2.34
Urban Pop 2.60 3.92 5.12 2.52
Urban Rate(%) 46.0 55.8 64.1 -
Asia Urban Pop 1.85 2.70 3.31 1.46
Africa Urban Pop 0.40 0.74 1.26 0.86
S. America Urban Pop 0.57 0.59 0.65 0.08
Magnitude and Speed of Urbanization do matter
Two
Chinas
Nine
USA’s

5. 5
The world’s megacities, 2007 and
2025

6. Benefit of Agglomeration
• Why people agglomerate?
Agglomeration Economies
Productivity* increases by
– Trade
– Economies of Scale
– Division of Labor
– Knowledge
Environmental
Protection
Current
U$
Constant
2005 U$
1960 156 1,107
1970 292 1,782
1980 1,778 3,926
1990 6,642 8,829
2000 11,948 15,162
2010 22,151 22,236
* Productivity is
the fundamental
basis of quality of
life.

7. Invisible Beauty of Seoul:
Green by “Proactive” Urban Planning

8. Cost of Congestion
• Dis-economies: Challenges to be solved
can’t be solved “naturally”
– Congestion
– Pollution
– Water supply shortage
– Waste
– …

9. Jakarta Metro Area
(Pseudo Urbanization has been happeinng)
10

10. Technology alone can’t stop Global Warming
Impact = f(Pop, Prod, Tech, etc)

11. Poverty / Slum
12

12. God made the Country,
Man made the Town.
(in order for more people, all
together, to live better).
*word by William Cowper

13. Three Major Challenges and Corresponding Goals:
Maximize the Benefit and Minimize the Cost of Urb.
14
Poverty /
Low Productivity
Pollution /
Climate Change
Inequality
Growth
Green
Justice
City is the key;
Smart and Sustainable City Building

14. BACKGROUND ON SEOUL & KOREA
15

15. 16

16. 17

17. 18
Seoul Today

18. 19
Seoul, approx. 50 years ago

19. SEOUL TRANSFORMATION BEGAN
From non-urban or pseudo-urban to city
20

20. Explosive Growth of Seoul
• 270,000 people per year (22,000 people per month)
for 3 decades, 1960-1990

21. School
Shanty
houses
Shanty houses with
common toilets by
Cheonggyechoen
Shanty houses
down to Han River
(Flood)
Shanty houses
climbing up to mountains

22. Urban Land & Housing Solution Until mid 1960’s
• Restoration Housing, Prosperity Housing, Hope Housing, City Housing, Public
Housing, Welfare Housing, …
• Welfare Housing: an affordable housing for mid- and low-class
청량리 부흥주택 (1966) 용두동 후생주택 (1958)
23

23. Urban Land & Housing Solution until mid-1960’s
24

24. 3,000 vs. 300,000
1 housing unit per 100 people
(existing housing shortage of 1M aside)
Housing Supply and Demand early 1960’s
Problem #1: Supply Shortage
Problem #2: Land Consumption, Sprawl, Transportation, public service

25. CHANGE OF APPROACH
From sprawl to compact; Smart and Sustainable Seoul
26

26. Spatial Pattern: Two ways to go
27
Explosion of
Pop.
Low- or hyper-density
Large land consumption
and/or Inefficiency
High-density
Small land consumption
Market (individual freedom)
Planning + Market
Personal vs. Social Interest
Tension btw landlords vs. tenants
Tension btw selected vs. non-selected
Sprawl and/or Chaotic Over-crowd
Not sustainable
Controlled Development
Uncontrolled Expansion
Compact
Transit-Oriented
Eco-Friendly
Figures from UN-HABITAT (2013)

27. Which one is greener?
28
(a) (b)

28. 29
Source: UN-HABITAT (2013)

29. Invisible Beauty of Seoul:
Green by “Proactive” Urban Planning

30. Walkable City
• Spatial Framework
(Land Use, Density,
Location, Public
Space) does matter
31
Source: UN-HABITAT (2013)

31. MASTER PLAN, 1966
Making a plan for sustainable future development 1962-1965
32

32. 33
1988 20051957 1972
Began with Urban Planning
Seoul Metro Area Master Plan (1965)
Visioning the
future:
Time, space,
people, scope
were not
limited by
then situation
as was the
future growth
7 New Towns

33. 7 New Towns
Master Plan (1965) Master Plan (Revised 1970)
Change
New Town
Pop.
Plan
Area New Town
Pop.
Plan
Eunpyung 400 7.6 Eunpyung 300 Down
Sungin 400 14.9 Miah 300 Down
Mangwoo 150 6.9 Cheongryangri 400 Up
Cheonho 300 8.6 Cheonho 400 Up
Yungdong (Gangnam) 600 59.0 Yungdong(Gangnam) 600 Same
Yungdungpo 800 8.6 Yungdungpo 800 Same
- - - Gimpo 200 New
Total 2,650 105.7 Total 3,000
34
(unit: 1,000 persons, km2)
Source: Kwon (2013)

34. HOW TO REALIZE:
GANGNAM & BUNDANG CASES
Land Readjustment, 1960’s-1970’s
37

35. Transforming Land from non-urban
to Sustainable Urban Form
38
Road is not only
surface
for cars but also
artery (public
space for public
services) for a city.
Water,
Sewage
Energy , Gas,
Electricity
Communication
Heat, Cooling,
Subway, etc.

36. Land Readjustment: Transforming Land Valuable
Build Together, Benefit Together (BT2)
94
1,300 W/㎡
36.8%
63.2%
6,200 W
9,750 W/㎡

37. Expansion of Boundaries
Date Area(㎢)
1946. 10. 18 136.00
1949. 08. 13 288.35
1963. 01. 01 613.04
1973. 07. 01 627.06
1988. 01. 01 605.40*
*the area did not shrink, but was
merely readjusted by survey
 Seoul doubled its
administrative area in
1963 to resolve the urban
problems, including
southern area of Han
river
(In Korean, Gang means
river and Nam means
south)
Gangnam was a New Town outside Seoul
39
Gangnam

38. ▲ 강남 1974년
Gangnam Development
• Envisioning vs. Forecasting
• 30 years of development from an idea to
completion
Source: Lee (2006
▲ 강남 1988년▲ 강남 1957년

39. Urban Planning: Vision, Framework and Process
1976년 19951987년
출처:서울연구원 (2009)
Government Planning and Private Development
출처:서울시 (2013)
1972년 19881980년

40. 사진출처: 서울역사박물관, 2011, 강남 40년 영동에서 강남으
▲ AID아파트 미국 국제개발처(AID)자금을 들여와 논현동과 삼성동에 아파트를 지어 분양함
▲1971. 12. 28 공무원아파트 준공(자료 : 국가기록원)
Gangnam Development
Phasing Issues due to Financing

41. • Set Land Use Framework
as the Ground of Future
Growth
• Secure Public Space for
Public Services
(e.g., Transit, Water)
• Set Growth Limit for
Protecting Nature from
Sprawl and Citizens from
Disasters (e.g., Flood)
• Provide Urban Land and
Infrastructures for the
Life, Work, and Play of
Citizens
Achievements
45
Pop in 1960: 2.45 M
1970 1976 1981
Population (Thousand) 5,509 7,150 7,500
Income per cap (KRW) 138,810 189,580 268,240
Urban Land (㎢) 130 201.7 261.7
Housing (Unit) 593,370 863,970
1,300,00
0
Hosing Supply Rate (%) 56.8 56.3 56.1
Housing Area per cap (㎡) 6.8 8.2 10.1
Water Prod (10T t/day) 111 210 302
Road Area (㎢) 34.85 44.57 55.69
Road Rate (%) 9.5 12.0 15.0
No. of Cars 61,000 170,000 315,000
Subway (km) - 26.5 64.0
Green/Park per cap (㎡) 4.04 5.73 6.60

42. Ⅱ. 토지구획정리사업의 전개과정 및 유형화 도출
46
Sum By Gov’t By Association By Housing Corp
No of Sites Area(㎢) No of Sites Area(㎢) No of Sites Area(㎢) No of Sites Area(㎢)
Sum 58 140 51 131.2 4 5.8 3 3
 140㎢ (40% of Urban Area in Seoul) developed through Land Readjustment
unit : year
1930’s 1940’s 1950’s 1960’s 1970’s 1980’s 1990’s Avg
Avg 19.8 19.4 13.8 7.0 6.2 6.3 4.4 7.4
Public 19.8 19.4 13.8 7.0 6.5 6.3 4.2 8.3
Assoc. 5.7 5.6 6.8 4.5 5.6
출처 : 토지구획 정리사업의 고찰과 개선방안, 김동욱, 국토연구원
자료 : 건설교통부 도시관리과(1995. 6. 현재)
 140㎢ (40% of Urban Area in Seoul) developed through Land Readjustment

43. 47
1st
Phase Total
Area 50 K㎡
Pop 1.2 M
Housing
292,000
(Condo 281,000)
5 New Towns in 1990’s
In the late 1980s, as the
situation of housing shortages
became worse and the
existing available land for
large-scale urban
development was nearly
exhausted, the population
began to spillover beyond the
green belt.
Faced with limitations in land
supply for urban development,
the central government began
to build several new towns in
the Seoul Metropolitan Region
including Bundang in
Sungnam, Ilsan in Goyang,
Pyeongchon in Anyang,
Sanbon in Gunpo, and
Jungdong in Bucheon.

44. Land Use Plan
48
Total % Bundang Ilsan
Pyung-
chon
Sanbon
Jung-
dong
Total 50,140 100.0 19,639 15,736 5,106 4,203 5,456
Residential 17,230 34.4 6,350 5,261 1,931 1,811 1,877
Commercial 3,866 7.7 1,640 1,233 247 178 568
Public 29,044 57.9 11,649 9,242 2,928 2,214 3,011
Road 10,388 20.7 3,860 3,290 1,187 639 1,412
Green 9,548 19.0 3,810 3,705 801 649 583
Gov't 676 1.3 166 92 150 100 168
School 2,402 4.8 732 584 343 327 416
Etc. 6,030 12.0 3,081 1,571 447 499 432
(unit: thousand ㎡, %)

45. Bundang
49
Urban Development
Protects Environment

46. Seoul – Smart and Sustainable City

47. CHENGGYECHEON RESTORATION
Urban Regeneration
51

48. 52

49. 7/2/2015 53
Cheonggyecheon, 1960’s

50. 7/2/2015 54

51. 7/2/2015 55

52. 7/2/2015 56

53. Cheonggyecheon Elevated Highway
57

54. 7/2/2015 59

55. Rising Congestion and Its Cost
• Decreasing Average Travel Speed:
30.8 km/h in 1980 -> 13.6 km/h in 2004
• Increasing Socio-economic congestion cost:
over KRW 7 trillion in 2007 (five times that of 1991)
58

56. Motivations
• Safety: Fundamental Solution to Safety Problem Related to Cheonggye Expressway and
Covering Road (re-building express highway was scheduled in 2001)
• Environment: Creation of Nature and Human-centered Environment-Friendly City Space
– Provision for citizens’ clear river and relaxation space by restoring Cheonggyecheon as a
natural stream with bright sunshine and clean air and by developing the nearby area as
an ecological park
• Culture: Recovery of Seoul’s 600-year-old Historical and Cultural Importance as Capital
– Restoration of cultural relics in Cheonggyecheon such as Gwanggyo(Bridge) and
Supyogyo(Bridge); Reincarnation of traditional cultures including Supyogyo(Bridge) tread
and lotus lantern festival; Reestablishment of Seoul’s history and cultural identity by
creating cultural space linked to cultural relics within 4 great gates; Utilization of
Cheonggyecheon as representative cultural tour resource in Seoul
• Economy: Induction to Revitalization of Downtown Area’s Underdeveloped Area
– Inducement to reorganize the industrial structure around the underdeveloped
Cheonggyecheon area and invigorate the depressed downtown economy due to the
lagging development for some 50 years since the Independence.
7/2/2015 60

57. Before-Restoration Situation
• Characteristics
– located in densely populated area
– the area nearby is deteriorated
– dried : natural water circulation system is blocked
– various interest group
• Functions
– flood control
– environmental and ecological space
– historical and cultural place
7/2/2015 61

58. Key Issues in Engineering & Design
7/2/2015 62
Lake type
Natural type
Urban type
preferable
Types of Waterfront

59. Key Issues in Engineering & Design
7/2/2015 63
An example of modification:
storm water diversion
Urban type Natural type
Requires pumping station
and maintenance facilities
Diversion
tunnel
Sustainable ?

60. Key Issues in Engineering & Design
7/2/2015 64
Allocation of Space
Ecological space
or a space for human ?
?
Space for
Human
Ecological
Space
“limited access” “free access”
optimal allocation
Left side :
for human activity
Right side :
mainly for ecology

61. Construction Process
7/2/2015 65

62. Cross-section of Cheonggyecheon
7/2/2015 66

63. 67
Urban Regeneration throu
Cheonggyecheon Restorati

64. Green: Env. Sustainability
68

65. Cheonggyecheon: Place for People and Activity
7/2/2015 69

66. Cultural Assets and Green (Pedestrian) Network
7/2/2015 70

67. Change in Pedestrian Volume
before (April 2003) and after (April 2006)
7/2/2015 71
Weekdays
Sunday

68. Revitalizing Old Downtown
7/2/2015 73

69. Growth: Competitive City
74
New Developments
Office Rent Increase
Usage Changes: 44 during 2002~2005년; 895 during 2006~2009년
Land Price Increase

70. Cost
7/2/2015 75
Project Time Scale Cost ($) Cost/km ($)
Cheonggyecheon
Seoul, Korea
2003-2005 5.8 km
345M
(KRW 380B)
59M
The High Line
(Section 1,2)
New York, NY
2003- 1.6 km 152M 95M
The Big Dig
Boston, MA
1982-2007 12 km 22B 1,833M
Sanjicheon
Jeju, Korea
1997-2002 474 m
33M
(KRW 36B)
69M

71. SMART CITY
76

72. What is Smart City?
Increase
the Benefit of
Agglomeration
Decrease the
Cost of Congestion
Infrastructure
Technology
Information
Technology
Next
Technology
Smart City
Quality of Life
Industrial Age
Information Age

73. Urbanization
Phase 1
Urbanization
Phase 2
Urbanization
Phase
Infrastructure
Technology
Information
Technology
Major Tech
Quantity (Capacity) QualityMajor Issue

74. Development of Urban Transportation System in Seoul
Phase 1: Quantity - Infrastructure Technology
1. Buses
2. Roads
3. Rails (Subways)

75. Development of Urban Transportation System in Seoul
Phase 2: Quality - Information Technology
Smart management

76. Achievement: Output
• the speed of bus in the peak time increased by 30% on average (10 ~ 80%
depending on the section)
• The citizens’ public transportation fee decreased by 30% on average.
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
1974
1976
1978
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006
2008
2010
2012

77. Achievements: Outcome
• Seoul’s PM10 decreased from over 75㎍/㎥ in 2002 to 44㎍/㎥ in 2013.
NO₂ also decreased from 0.037ppm in 2001 to 0.033ppm in 2013.
• Public transit ridership showed an increase by 5.5% during the period of
July 2004 to June 2005.
• The satisfaction rate increased from 14.2% to 36.9% after the reform.
Major factors for the satisfaction were ‘discounted transfer fare’ and
‘integration of subway and bus.
Mode
Share

78. Phase 1: Quantity
Infrastructure Technology
Tukdo
0.5 M m3/d Amsa
1.6 M m3/d
Gui
0.25 M m3/d
Kang Book
1.0 M m3/d
YDP
0.6 M m3/d
Kwang Am
0.4 M m3/d
[Tukdo WTP] [YoungDeungPo WTP]
[Gui WTP] [AmSa WTP]

79. Phase 2: Quality
Information Technology
Flow monitoring system : 437 flow meters
RWR Increase
 DB for pipes of 9,844km
 DB of 1.44 million
attributes of the facilities
GIS system
- Production cost reduction: Source water, chemicals, energy
※ 1.64 M. $ of direct cost reduction by RWR 1% increase
Reduced direct cost
- Reducing construction cost and capacity
·9 WTP’s with 7,300,000㎥/day (1999)
·Closed 4 WTP’s and supply reduction by 1,900,000 ㎥/day
Reduced indirect cost
 Monitoring water flow using flow meters installed at water supply
points, districts, mid-scale blocks, reservoirs, and booster stations.
 Systematic and scientific management of data
 Appropriate decision making and utilities investment
 Scientific maintenance of utilities

80. Category 1960 1970 1980 19891) 2012
Pop. Served (1,000) 1,462 4,738 7,756 10,507 10,442
Water post (1,000) 107 329 724 1,5042) 2,024
Service rate (%) 59.8 85.6 92.7 99.3 100
Ave. production (103 m3/d) 30 81 223 448 321
Supply (L/d/capita) 163 171 395 426 303
Pipe network (km) 564 6,518 13,942 18,084 13,801
RWR (%) 38.2 55.63) 51.5 55.2 94.3
Output
1) Office of Waterworks started its service, 2) as of 1990, 3) as of 1969
Quantity Resolved w/
Infrastructure Technology
Quality Resolved w/
Information Technology

81. Urban Planning Information System (UPIS)
Foundation

82. E-Governance
• More Participation and Bi- or Multi-lateral Collab. (Democracy)
• Faster Process and Response (Efficiency)
• Transparency

83. SUMMARY
89

84. Urbanization is an Opportunity
Source: Bloom and Khanna (2007)

85. 1966 Seoul Metro Area Master Plan:
Sustainable Development Guide to
Compact, Transit-oriented, Eco-Friendly Seoul
90
1960
1975
1990
Greenbelt
Old Center
Pop: 2.4M
Density: 91 인/ha
Area: 268 km2
Priority: Spatial Framework, Public Space, Water
Pop: 6.9M
Density: 110 인/ha
Area: 600 km2
Priority: Urban Land, Urban Rail, Sewage
Pop: 10.6M
Density: 175 인/ha (Net Density 265 인/ha)
Area: 600 km2 (developed Land 400 km2)
Priority: Compact, Smart, Urban Transit, e-Gov
(Density, Location)
Environment Protection by Proper Development
(Roads, Schools, Parks, etc.)

86. 1M
Creative Economy
People and Nature10MIndustrial Economy
Quantity and Efficiency
Decline
Regeneration by Creative of (Public) Space
92
Cheonggyecheon
Destruction
Re-creation

87. What to do to become a Smart and Sustainable City
1. Supply urban land (new towns, if necessary)
2. Transform land from non-urban to urban form
3. Secure Public Space (Roads, Green, Schools, Public facilities, etc.)
• Quantity – at least 40% of urban land
• Quality – Good Network
4. Urban Structure: Sub-centers (new towns) and Public Transportation
5. Density: 1st 100 people/ha (public transp.), 2nd 200 people/ha (walk)
6. IT Technology for Smarter City
7. Green, Blue (Water), and Sustainability for our children
7/2/2015 91

88. Action without Vision is only passing time,
Vision without Action is merely day dreaming, but
Vision with Action can change the world.
Dream don’t work, unless YOU DO.
– Nelson Mandela –
June 2015
Myounggu Kang, Ph.D.
Professor of Urban and Regional Planning, University of Seoul
Former Director-General of International Urban Development Collaboration,
Seoul Metropolitan Government
mkangcity@gmail.com