[Reporter’s Notebook] The Changing Status of Integrated Reconstruction

The first time I encountered the term "integrated reconstruction" was three years ago when I saw the exterior wall of an apartment building while riding a bus. A large banner with a red background caught my eye, reading, "What do you mean by integrated reconstruction?" Until then, integrated reconstruction did not particularly pique my interest. Even officials promoting reconstruction responded, "Is it really necessary (to do integrated reconstruction)?"

Recently, the status of integrated reconstruction has changed. "I am 94 years old this year. My knees are not in good shape, so it’s hard to walk. But still, we have to do (integrated reconstruction). Even if moving is inconvenient, we have to do it. The atmosphere is that everyone wants to do it," said an elderly woman I met in Bundang, Seongnam City, Gyeonggi Province, describing the mood on site. It has become deeply embedded in daily life to the extent that even seniors who were reluctant about reconstruction can empathize.

The increase in complexes pursuing integrated reconstruction is largely due to government inducement. Especially for the first-generation new towns, it is difficult to secure the feasibility of reconstruction projects without the ‘No-Teukbeop (Act on the Maintenance and Support of Aging Planned Cities),’ which is premised on integration. Therefore, the atmosphere of integrating and proceeding with reconstruction has become natural. Some places have voluntarily pursued integrated reconstruction to enjoy its benefits, but others have stepped into it involuntarily due to such external circumstances.

In Seoul, as the construction market worsens, some complexes are seeking a way out through integrated reconstruction. Small complexes, in particular, which find it difficult to secure contractors, are attempting integrated reconstruction by lowering project costs and considering the value of the complex after reconstruction. Like Apgujeong Hyundai Apartments, the city sometimes effectively designates districts to induce integration. The attempts have clearly increased.

Although it has undoubtedly become a new genre in the maintenance industry, the outcome cannot be guaranteed. It is not easy to demolish and rebuild a single old apartment complex, and combining multiple complexes is even more difficult. In fact, even in first-generation new towns with strong integration intentions, there have been many cases where discussions broke down. A chairman of an integrated reconstruction promotion committee once said, "It is no exaggeration to say that every complex pursuing integration faces at least one difficulty."

Experts unanimously say it is "several times more difficult work." Despite the clear advantages of reducing project costs and increasing the value of the complex after integration, they predict that pursuing it may lead to more conflicts.

All complexes where integrated reconstruction is progressing smoothly share common traits. They value the benefits to be gained after integration rather than focusing on individual complex profits. Instead of rushing integration, they have gained sufficient consensus through communication with residents and proactively considered potential future issues. The promotion committee chairperson or union leader communicated transparently with residents, equipped with sufficient prior knowledge.

Can integrated reconstruction become a new path for maintenance projects beyond the first-generation new towns? A related person I met during reporting said, "It’s not easy, but I don’t think it’s impossible. If everyone compromises without greed, a win-win outcome can be created." It is a moment that makes one curious about the future of integrated reconstruction.