Controversy Over Reintroduction of Parking Lot Ordinance Deferred by Asan City Council Last Year

Entertainment facilities such as singing practice rooms, massage parlors, and Danran pubs allowed
Concerns over the decline of parking lots into means of use and worsening parking shortages

Asan City Council's "Partial Amendment to the Asan City Parking Lot Ordinance," which was withheld last year due to concerns about preferential treatment, has been submitted again as an agenda item, raising prospects of controversy.

The Asan City Council in Chungnam is expected to face controversy again as the 'Partial Amendment to the Asan City Parking Lot Ordinance,' which was withheld last year due to concerns over preferential treatment, has been resubmitted for review.

According to the Asan City Council, the Construction and Urban Committee is scheduled to review the 'Partial Amendment to the Asan City Parking Lot Ordinance' on the 26th.

This ordinance was previously discussed once during the 242nd extraordinary session in May last year and was primarily proposed by Assemblyman Hong Seong-pyo of the Democratic Party of Korea.

The ordinance aims to expand the range of facilities that can be installed in off-street parking lots from the current retail stores, rest restaurants, and automobile repair businesses to include Type 1 and Type 2 neighborhood living facilities, automobile-related facilities, office facilities, sports facilities, cultural and assembly facilities, and sales facilities.

Assemblyman Hong Seong-pyo, the proposer at the time, explained the reason for the amendment: "The current ordinance limits the types and range of facilities to those permissible within land-use zones under Article 76 of the Framework Act on National Land Planning and Utilization, which is narrower compared to other local governments. By adding more types of facilities that can be installed in off-street parking lots, we aim to allow the private sector to develop parking lot sites more smoothly, thereby securing efficiency in parking lot management and promoting user convenience."

However, during the review process, there was significant opposition from some council members, including those from Asan City.

In particular, concerns were raised about fairness issues if parking lot sites, which are cheaper than general land, are purchased and developed since both Type 1 and Type 2 neighborhood living facilities would be allowed. Additionally, there is a high possibility that sites meant for public parking lots could effectively be converted into attached parking lots for facilities.

Furthermore, the ordinance would allow the installation of entertainment facilities such as karaoke rooms, massage parlors, and nightclubs, raising concerns that parking lot sites could be used as a means to generate profit rather than for public purposes, which could further exacerbate the parking shortage problem.

Accordingly, the Construction and Urban Committee held several recesses to discuss an amendment that would prohibit the installation of some entertainment facilities like nightclubs, but no consensus was reached, and the ordinance was ultimately withheld.

However, the ordinance, which was withheld for in-depth review, has been resubmitted in its original form without any progress from last year's discussions, making allegations of preferential treatment unavoidable once again.

Kim Mi-young, Chairperson of the Construction and Urban Committee, stated, "There are no changes in the ordinance to be reviewed on the 26th compared to last year's review. However, we have requested plans and data from the administration regarding the utilization of parking lots to conduct a more in-depth discussion."

She added, "Regarding the prohibition of entertainment business installations, since some are allowed and some are not within the same category, concerns about administrative lawsuits are growing, and a review of this issue is underway."