[Seoul's Future] "Let's Find Seoul's Identity Through 'Architecture' Not 'Construction'"

[Asia Economy Reporter Tae-min Ryu] "Seoul is a city without public order." Professor Sangheon Lee of the Graduate School of Architecture at Konkuk University, who recently published the book Seoul Urbanism analyzing the urban form of Seoul, evaluated the "city of Seoul" in this way. Although there are numerous complex regulations more than in any other city, it lacks consistency and identity in its urban landscape. Professor Lee said, "Because we have not properly understood Seoul's potential order, Seoul is gradually losing its identity."

In particular, he pointed out, "Despite the continuous creation of numerous urban plans and complex regulations, the city is not managed consistently," adding, "This is because there is no established theory about Seoul's urban form." For example, he argues that district unit plans should be based on interpretations and visions of Seoul's urban structure and landscape. Professor Lee emphasized, "Plans that are not based on a clear understanding and outlook of urban form will inevitably be less effective, no matter how many are produced."

On the 18th, we met Professor Lee at his research office in the Architecture Building at Konkuk University, Hwayang-dong, Gwangjin-gu, Seoul. The following is a Q&A.

The Need for Urban Form Identity... Creating ‘Seoul Urbanism’

- What do you want to convey through your new book Seoul Urbanism?

▲ The theme of Seoul Urbanism can be summed up as reading the urban form of Seoul. Seoul is a city with a unique urban form. Even compared to cities in Western countries, it hides many distinctive features. However, it was not built orderly within any grand formal framework during its development. Instead, buildings were constructed based on individual unit plans each time, so there is no tradition or theory of urban form planning. Considering this, the goal of this book is to find the identity of what kind of urban form Seoul should develop in the future.

- What is ‘Urbanism’?

▲ It is translated into Korean as ‘urban design,’ ‘urban planning,’ or ‘urban architecture.’ The term was first used by Ildefons Cerd?, the engineer who planned Barcelona. It refers to theories, plans, and strategies on how to build cities in response to rapid urban expansion and social, economic, and technological changes since the 19th century. For example, when you think of Barcelona or Berlin, the immediately recognizable urban forms are their urbanism.

- Why has Seoul lacked identity?

▲ Because buildings have been constructed based on ‘construction’ and ‘real estate’ rather than ‘architecture.’ Currently, Seoul has been shaped more by abstract regional plans and flat urban development rather than specific form design. Construction and real estate focus on pursuing development profits. As a result, there was a strong tendency to build whatever was most profitable first and think about form later, without preparing a three-dimensional big picture forecasting the city’s future form. However, Seoul’s urban development has now almost reached saturation. The task before us is to refine the roughly built urban spaces and create a better environment by organizing the relationship between architecture and the city more closely.

Examining Seoul’s Uniqueness Creates ‘Urban Context’

Sangheon Lee, Professor at Konkuk University Graduate School of Architecture / Photo by Taemin Ryu

- How can Seoul Urbanism be established?

▲ We need to closely examine Seoul’s characteristics. Seoul was a feudal walled city for over 500 years but rapidly expanded in the 20th century with modernization. Unlike European metropolises, it was not created consistently through a clear expansion plan but developed fragmentarily. However, Seoul also hides principles and cultures of urban formation that have continued over time. Through critique and sharing, we need to discover and discourse these to create a theory of Seoul’s urban form. Based on this theory, systematic urban design should be carried out on the foundation of ‘public norms’ to find Seoul’s identity.

- What values are important when establishing ‘public norms’?

▲ Urban context. This can be understood as a kind of traditional order. For example, when a building is constructed, it is a potential order that can judge whether it will have a positive or negative impact on the overall urban form. Western cities have such orders, so their urban forms have developed to be instantly recognizable. Conversely, Seoul lacks socially shared urban context, making architecture ‘individualistic.’ This is a result of a social atmosphere that has tolerated arbitrary construction. Such order must be established according to regional characteristics. Seoul differs depending on whether it is north or south of the Han River. We need to find urban context considering such factors. Another important element is gradual change. Seoul cannot be rebuilt from scratch like a new town. Efforts are needed to gradually improve Seoul’s harmony by imposing certain orders on future buildings.

- Should European metropolises be used as role models?

▲ No. Not only do Seoul and European cities look very different externally, but the principles of their formation also differ greatly. European cities generally form blocks by grouping land parcels, and buildings on these parcels form building blocks. In contrast, Seoul’s parcels do not form blocks by grouping but extend irregularly like tree branches, with parcels adjacent to roads. Buildings on parcels are also independent in form. This is called ‘parcel freedom.’ Therefore, we must interpret Seoul’s unique urban structure well to overcome its weaknesses and build identity by leveraging its strengths.

Creating ‘Big Picture’ Standards Will Facilitate Policy Making

Sangheon Lee, Professor at Konkuk University Graduate School of Architecture / Photo by Taemin Ryu

- What should be emphasized in redevelopment, reconstruction, and urban regeneration projects that refine Seoul’s urban space?

▲ We must preserve the superblock well. A superblock generally refers to a large urban block with sides ranging from 300m to 1km. Seoul is a city of superblocks divided by a large grid system of arterial roads. The average size of superblocks in Seoul’s old city is about 500m per side. In Gangnam, some exceed 800m per side. Compared to Manhattan’s block long side of only 180m, Seoul’s superblocks are very large. However, current redevelopment projects are carried out fragmentarily without regard to these superblock units. As a result, even within the same neighborhood, forms are reconstructed incongruously. To achieve harmony, a big-picture plan for the entire superblock must be established, and detailed matters decided within that framework.

- What is your view on the recent abolition process of Seoul’s ‘35-floor rule’?

▲ It is regrettable that there is no standard everyone can accept. The abolition of the ‘35-floor rule’ itself is not a matter of good or bad. There was insufficient explanation about the basis for limiting the maximum height of riverside apartments to 35 floors and the principles behind its abolition. This is an extension of the lack of a big-picture urban plan. Height and absolute height restrictions must have clear and objective criteria to be persuasive. For example, all citizens would agree that nature is Seoul’s most important scenic element. Then, by selecting important public points in Seoul and regulating building heights flexibly and reasonably through landscape simulations, it would be easier to gain public consent.

Professor Sangheon Lee has been a professor at the Graduate School of Architecture at Konkuk University since 1998, exploring practical architectural and urban theories suited to Korea’s reality. He graduated from Seoul National University’s Department of Architecture and its graduate school and earned a Ph.D. in architectural history, theory, and criticism from MIT in the United States. He has worked at Ilgun, Junglim Architecture, and Inwoo Architecture and holds architectural licenses in Korea and the U.S. His publications include There Is No Architecture in Korea and The Identity of Korean Architecture. He focuses on writing that analyzes fundamental problems of modern Korean architecture and cities and proposes solutions.