Skip to content

Invest1 publisher3 min readPublished

Yongsan says no, and Seoul's housing plan is left bidding on land it does not control

The land ministry put all 3.03 million square metres of Yongsan Park in play. The district, the city government and the park's own special act all stand in the way.

The Investor · Invest desk

Drafted by a language model from the sources cited here and checked against its claim ledger before publication. How we use AISend a correction

Photograph accompanying Yongsan says no, and Seoul's housing plan is left bidding on land it does not control
Photo: en.sedaily.com

What happened

  • Seoul's Yongsan District voiced opposition to the government's proposal to consider Yongsan Park as a candidate site for new housing, in a statement released on the 15th.
  • The report carrying the Yongsan District statement was published on August 15, 2026, so the statement dated 'the 15th' is August 15, 2026.
  • Yongsan District is currently led by Mayor Kim Kyung-dae of the People Power Party.
  • The district said it 'deeply regrets the land minister's announcement that he would consider not only the Children's Garden within Yongsan Park but the entire park as a candidate site for housing supply, and strongly opposes this direction.'
  • Yongsan Park spans 3.03 million square metres.

Compiled by The InvestorSomething wrong?How this is made

Why it matters

Yongsan District formally opposed the central government's proposal to treat Yongsan Park as a candidate site for new housing, in a statement issued on August 15 [1][18]. That puts the district, run by People Power Party Mayor Kim Kyung-dae [2], and the Seoul Metropolitan Government [12] on the same side against a land ministry that has just widened its ambition from a garden to an entire national park.

The trigger was Land Minister Kim Yoon-duk, who at a press conference marking his first year in office was asked about a supply plan using the Yongsan Children's Garden and replied that "the Children's Garden is a narrow concept; we are considering the entire Yongsan Park" [10]. The press conference was the day before the district's statement [11]. Seoul city hall responded within hours, calling the park "not merely idle land but a precious national asset" that must be handed to future generations intact [12].

The scale explains the reaction. Yongsan Park covers 3.03 million square metres [4], against 3.41 million for New York's Central Park [5], which makes it roughly 89 percent of the size of the best-known urban park in the world [6]. Yongsan District called it the last large-scale national park in central Seoul, returning to the public after 120 years [7], and argued that housing can be supplied additionally elsewhere while a park, once damaged, cannot be restored [8]. Its counter-proposal is unglamorous and specific: revive rebuilding and redevelopment in existing urban areas and expand supply through improvement projects [9]. Local resident opposition to large housing complexes inside the park is also reported to be considerable [17].

The interesting part is not the rhetoric but the process map. Under the special act on the creation of Yongsan Park, the returned base is designated for development as a national park, so the housing idea requires a revision of the law [13]. The site also still depends on the return of the U.S. military base and on soil decontamination for existing pollution [14]. And consultation with both Seoul city and Yongsan District is essential, with both currently opposed [15]. Some observers say the government may struggle to push the plan through given how many hurdles remain [16].

Read that as a supply pipeline diagnosis. A ministry with uncontested land available does not float a national park designated by statute, contaminated by decades of military use, and not yet fully in Korean hands. What is left on the board are conversions: sites whose availability depends on a legislative amendment, an environmental cleanup, and the consent of two governments that have publicly refused. Each of those is a veto point with its own calendar, and none of them produces a completed apartment quickly. Meanwhile the district's alternative, redevelopment of existing neighbourhoods, is the option that does not need a new law.

What to watch: whether the ministry names specific parcels rather than the whole park, whether anyone actually introduces an amendment to the Yongsan Park special act [13], and the timetable for base return and decontamination [14], which sets the earliest possible date for any construction regardless of who wins the argument.

Loading claim ledger
Loading source directory links
Loading share composer
Loading topic controls
Loading related stories