Is Jjokbangchon a Modern Heritage Site?… Seoul City's Repeated Controversies Over 'Leaving Traces'

Seoul City's Reckless Trace Leaving Project
Residents Say "Only Painful Scars..." Fear of Blight Due to Environmental Disharmony

[Asia Economy Reporter Lee Chun-hee] Seoul City’s so-called 'leaving traces' project, promoted under the name of 'preserving modern heritage' in major development projects across the city, is facing continuous criticism for being carried out indiscriminately without clear justification. The plan includes preserving not only apartments and detention centers built in the 1970s and 1980s but also red-light districts and jjokbangchon (tiny room villages), raising concerns that such preservation could create eyesores in the urban environment due to disharmony with the surrounding areas.

According to Seoul City and the maintenance industry on the 22nd, conflicts between the city and local residents are emerging over the recently announced 'Public Housing Project Plan for Residential Environment Improvement and Urban Maintenance of Yeongdeungpo Jjokbangchon.' This is because the city expressed its intention to preserve some facilities as commemorative spaces during the explanation of the complex development plan for the jjokbangchon area. It is also reported that some civic groups supporting residents in the jjokbangchon area have demanded the 'original preservation' of the jjokbangchon.

However, officials from the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport and Yeongdeungpo District stated, "Currently, the plan is leaning towards complete demolition," and explained, "The idea is closer to creating educational or exhibition spaces inside newly constructed buildings during the detailed planning process." Nevertheless, local resident Kim (33) pointed out, "I don’t understand why they insist on preserving the jjokbangchon, which is only a painful scar for its residents," adding, "Isn’t the jjokbangchon lacking architectural value?"

In particular, criticism is growing that Seoul City’s 'leaving traces' project itself is being pursued recklessly without fundamental direction, triggered by the preservation policy for the jjokbangchon.

According to Seoul City, in various major idle land development and maintenance projects across the city, such as redevelopment in Cheongnyangni, apartment reconstruction in the Gangnam area, and development of the Seongdong Detention Center site, the city has decided to preserve some existing buildings despite residents’ opposition, causing friction with local communities.

Mayor Park Won-soon of Seoul. / Photo by Moon Ho-nam munonam@

In Cheongnyangni, which was once a red-light district known as 'Cheongnyangni 588,' redevelopment projects such as 'Cheongnyangni Station Lotte Castle SKY-L65' and 'Cheongnyangni Station Hanyang Sujain 192' are ongoing. However, controversy arose when it became known that Seoul City plans to create the 'Cheongnyangni 620 Historical Living Culture Space' in the area of 620 Jeonnong-dong, Dongdaemun-gu, right in front of Cheongnyangni Station. Concerns were raised that the space might be used to commemorate the past as a red-light district.

Among the 16 buildings to be used for the space, one was identified as having been an actual sex work establishment, which further fueled residents’ dissatisfaction. Seoul City drew a clear line by stating, "This is not about preserving a red-light district but focusing on historically valuable aspects such as modern history and urban hanok (traditional Korean houses)." However, the building that sparked suspicion was ultimately decided to be demolished. A Seoul City official reaffirmed, "The plan was to create a space completely unrelated to sex work," adding, "Nevertheless, related controversies continued, and due to the severe deterioration of the building, demolition was decided."

Seoul City is even demanding residents preserve chimneys and apartment buildings of old apartments built in the 1970s and 1980s under the pretext of 'heritage.' In Gaepo-dong, Gangnam-gu, where sales were conducted last year, construction is ongoing without demolishing two of the original 58 buildings due to the city’s demands. The reason given is that these are 'future cultural heritage' according to Seoul City’s policy. One member of the apartment association expressed dissatisfaction, saying, "Leaving an old five-story apartment next to newly built high-rise apartments will become an eyesore." An industry insider also criticized, "Many of the 'heritage' buildings Seoul City wants to preserve are eyesores hastily built during the era of development dictatorship without proper urban planning," and pointed out, "The city is placing excessive value on preserving buildings that lack significant historical meaning."

▲ Jamsil Jugong 5-danji, Songpa-gu, Seoul. (Photo by Lee Chunhee)

The Joo-gong 5 Complex in Jamsil-dong, Songpa-gu, a representative mid-rise reconstruction project in the Gangnam area, is also in a situation where some buildings must be preserved due to Seoul City’s demands to retain existing structures. The city claimed preservation value as the first complex to introduce central heating and required leaving the chimney and one apartment building (Building 523). Eventually, due to strong opposition from residents, the chimney preservation was dropped, but the city decided to keep part of one apartment building intact.

Seoul City’s stance to preserve some original parts of the old detention center built in the late 1970s is even stirring controversy. While promoting complex development including 1,300 housing units on the Seongdong Detention Center site, the city plans to keep the existing watchtower and fence. The reason given for preservation is 'cultural assets explaining modern correctional policies.' Due to residents’ opposition, the project’s groundbreaking has been delayed.

Experts are also expressing doubts about the city’s policy. An industry insider criticized, "It is surprising that Seoul City considers the 1970s as 'modern.' By that standard, almost all buildings in Seoul should be preserved and restored in their original form," criticizing the approach.