People Power Party’s Woo Jaejun: “Cannot Understand Why Daegu City Insists on AGT System for Urban Railway Line 4 Despite Public Opposition”

Side Effects Such as Noise and Landscape Damage
Political Calls for Review Ignored

On April 23, People Power Party lawmaker Woo Jaejun (Daegu Buk-gu Gap) strongly raised questions regarding the process by which Daegu City is pushing forward with the AGT (Automated Guideway Transit) system for Urban Railway Line 4 (EXCO Line). Daegu Line 4 is a 12.6-kilometer urban railway connecting Suseong District Citizens’ Sports Complex to Ishiapolis. Although it was initially planned to be constructed as a monorail, following Line 3, in March 2023, the city finalized the decision to use an elevated AGT system with steel wheels.

Since then, both the local community and the political sphere have continuously pointed out issues with Daegu City’s decision to use the elevated AGT system. At the Daegu City?People Power Party budget policy meeting last October, lawmakers representing Daegu constituencies recommended a complete review of the Line 4 system. In December, the Daegu City Council also raised questions during a city administration Q&A session, urging a reconsideration of the monorail system.

People Power Party Woo Jaejun

Additionally, in a survey conducted by the Daegu Safety Life Practice Association (Daegu Anshilryeon) from March 22 to April 4, 603 citizens were asked about the AGT steel-wheeled vehicle system. Of the respondents, 579 people (96%) answered that “the AGT steel-wheeled system should never be installed and should be reconsidered before any installation,” while only 24 people (4%) supported installing the AGT system as per the city’s plan, showing an overwhelmingly higher opposition.

Despite this controversy, Daegu City has maintained that it is impossible to proceed with the original monorail system. The reasons cited are that the monorail manufacturer (Hitachi) expressed concerns about the potential leakage of patented technology during the type approval verification process required by the revised Railway Safety Act, and that all other companies capable of manufacturing monorails besides Hitachi declined to participate even at the vehicle manufacturing review request stage.

However, according to a response received by Woo Jaejun’s office from Hitachi, the manufacturer of Daegu Line 3’s monorail, in February, Hitachi stated, “Our company has never previously raised concerns about the possibility of technology leakage arising from the type approval process under the domestic Railway Safety Act,” dismissing the controversy over technology leakage concerns.

Furthermore, Hitachi clarified its position by stating, “As part of considering the adoption of Hitachi’s monorail system, it is also possible for Hitachi to cooperate in providing technical information on existing monorail vehicles,” and, “It is also possible for a Korean vehicle manufacturer to participate as the main contractor, with our company supporting the project as a subcontractor by transferring technology and supplying key components for Hitachi’s monorail vehicle system.”

Woo Jaejun emphasized, “Hitachi’s position has not changed at all from July 2022, when it consulted with Daegu City, until now,” and added, “Despite there being sufficient ways to proceed with the monorail system, I am deeply concerned that Daegu City may not have conducted additional reviews simply to adhere to the AGT system.”

He also pointed out, “The AGT system, with its elevated viaduct structures similar to overpasses, can cause issues such as infringement of sunlight rights, damage to the urban landscape, slumification along the project section, and noise problems.” He criticized, “It is a serious problem for Daegu City to continue pushing the project forward while ignoring local opposition, simply citing ‘project delays’ as the reason.”

Woo Jaejun had previously proposed the monorail or partial undergrounding (from Suseong District Citizens’ Sports Complex to Bokhyeon Five-way Intersection, 8 km) as alternatives to the AGT system. In the case of partial underground construction, it is expected that an additional budget of about 247.7 billion KRW would be required compared to the existing elevated AGT’s 940.9 billion KRW, which, he explained, contradicts some claims that subway construction costs are astronomically higher than those for above-ground railways.