Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.5659/AIKAR.2020.22.4.145

Flexible Zoning and Mixed Use in Seoul, Korea Planning Implications of Seoul's Zoning Model  

Kim, Jeeyeop (Department of Architecture, Sungkyunkwan University)
Potter, Cuz (Division of International Studies, Korea University)
Cho, A-ra (Department of Convergence for Future City, Sungkyunkwan University)
Publication Information
Architectural research / v.22, no.4, 2020 , pp. 145-154 More about this Journal
Abstract
Zoning has long been criticized for its negative effects and has been taken for granted that zoning works as a hurdle to urban diversity. Responses in the US have emphasized more fine-grained zoning approaches that plan mixed use. This paper introduces and evaluates Seoul's zoning system as a possible alternative. While US zoning regulations have relied on distinguishing ever larger numbers of land use zoning categories, Seoul has opted to integrate new land uses into existing classifications, allowing for greater flexibility of use in each zone. Using municipal building records to evaluate land use in three mid-density residential districts, this paper demonstrates that Seoul's flexible zoning is capable of producing diverse mixed use neighborhoods. It then highlights the potential downside of this approach, showing that flexibility allows for the commercialization and sectoral gentrification of residential districts. It concludes by suggesting that a combination of flexible zones and more fine-grained plans would capture the advantages of both US and Korean planning.
Keywords
zoning; land use; mixed use; diversity; gentrification;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Benevolo, L. (1967). The Origins of Modern Town Plan. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
2 NYC Department of City Planning, Zoning Handbook, 2011 Edition
3 Seoul Metropolitan Government (2014). 2030 Seoul Plan,
4 Fainstein, S. (2010). The Just City. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
5 Grant, J. (2002). Mixed use in theory and practice: Canadian experience with implementing a planning principle. J. Am. Plann. Assoc. 68, 71-84, 1.   DOI
6 Hall, P. (2002). Cities of Tomorrow: An Intellectual History of Urban Planning and Design in the Twentieth Century. 3rd ed. Oxford, UK ; Malden, MA: Blackwell Pub.
7 Hirt, S. (2016). Rooting out mixed use: Revisiting the original rationales. Land Use Policy 50(2016) 134-147.   DOI
8 Jacobs, J. (1961). The Death and Life of Great American Cities. New York: Random House.
9 Lim, H.J., Kim, J.Y.,Potter, C., & Bae, W.K. (2013). Urban Regeneration and Gentrification: Land Use Impacts of the Cheonggye Stream Restoration Project on the Seoul's Central Business District. Habitat International, Habitat International, 39 (1): 192200. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2012.12.004.   DOI
10 Potter, C., & Danielle L. (2020). Gentrification Or? Injustice in Large-Scale Residential Projects in Hanoi. Urban Studies, Urban Studies, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098020949035.   DOI
11 Reynard, P. (2002). Public order and privilege: eighteenth-century French roots of environmental regulation. Technol. Cult. 43(1), 1-28.   DOI
12 Talen, E. (2012). Zoning and Diversity in Historical Perspective. Journal of Planning History. 11(4) 330-347.   DOI
13 Talen, E.,Anselin, L., &et. al, (2016). Looking for logic: The zoning-land use mismatch. Landscape and Urban Planning 152(2016) 27-38.   DOI
14 Korean Statistical Information Service, http://kosis.kr/eng/index/index.do (accessed on 12 02 2019).
15 Williams, F. (1914). Building Regulation by Districts: The Lesson of Berlin. National Housing Association Publications, New York.