No More Unsustainable Recreational Facilities
Special Law on Waterfront Area comes into effect in late April. The opposition party went so far as to criticize sharply this law as ‘law tailored to K-Water Corporation’ and ‘law thoughtlessly rooting up the ground’. Some media called it as ‘law for deliberately unsustainable development’. However, it is not true. It is a law for systematical development and management based on viability for rivers. Let us check one by one what is inside.
The intent of this law can be largely arranged into four subcategories. First, it defines the area limitation of waterfront area up to 4 km inward in both sides. Second, developments under high pressure of profit return or concern of unsustainability would be phased in. Third, developments should be implemented mainly with public organizations so to recapture profits. Fourth, for project implementation, incumbent authority puts on ‘Waterfront Area Mediation Committee’ and supervises designation of sites to develop and implementation procedures.
So far as this eco-innovative law concerned, the Ministry of Land, Transportation and Maritime Affairs adopts a high profile. It is obvious. That is, when riverside areas are neatly arranged and environment is widely improved after completion of the Four Major Rivers Restoration Project, it is easily expected undesirable rushes for development would be rampant, so it is to prevent those run-aways. In fact, present riverside facilities which had settled long ago are allegedly liable for the feasible contamination on water source. Therefore, unless we stop the illegality, past environmental disruption might become recurrent as a vicious circle.
The restored riparian areas in the four rivers basin will be maintained by public organization including K-Water with having development profits recaptured to be invested for public purpose. Establishing this virtuous circle is the main intent of the special law on waterfront area.
Waterfront Areas to be designated at the end of the year
Area within 2 km from the boundaries of the river shore can be designated as ‘waterfront area’ (both sides of the river shore becomes total 4 km in the width). Be that as it may, all the 4 km area is not admitted for development. Actually, developing whole the four major rivers with total length of 1,700 km is not possible and cannot be acceptable either. “Adding all length of tributaries into 1,700 km-long main streams, it becomes 3,000 km. Apparently some media insist that 24% of the nation land is under development. However, it is ridiculously false report. Some waterfront areas are overlapped and considerable sites are of no necessity of further development.” Mr. JEONG Byeong-Yun, a high official of Water Resources Policy, the Ministry of Land, Transportation and Maritime Affairs, said. Government is going to make prudent policy decision. It is apt to be listed as proposed site: area with high needs for development, outer rim of highly dense urban area, existing riparian areas having room for accommodating additional facilities. Nowhere has been decided. Through field investigation and feasibility study, optimal area will be designated later. It is a law for systematical development and management based on viability for rivers. Let us check one by one what is inside.
Supplement policies to prevent manipulating development needed
Even though waterfront area’s width is decided within 2 km inward from the shore, in unavoidable geographical case, it can conditionally permit the range to exceed than 2 km. To compensating this exception, given the exclave waterfront area is distant from the river shore; it must include more than 50% of riparian zone within.
However, about this complementary measure, a few presses assert respective 4 km width feasibly can be changed into 8km in sum under manipulation. The plausible theory they have based on is like following. In case the land is longish in terrestrial shape, if 2km in width area is set over 2km legally empty geographical barrier, it is tantamount to 8km width in the manipulating theoretical calculation. However all that worries is overanxiety with low probability.
90 % of development profit to return for rivers management fund
In the regulation for Waterfront Area, it defines public organization as its main agents. Because the development profits are generated from public assets - the natural outgrowth of taxpayers’ precious money, it must be returned to them. In the enforcement ordinance, it is stipulated that 90% of the development profit should be clawed back into state coffers. District for the enterprise would be determined after deliberation, if working bodies (the nation, local municipalities, K-Water Corporation, LH Corporation and so forth) applies the proposal documents to the ‘Waterfront Area Promotion
Committee’. Even though some insist that it is the incomplete law biased toward K-Water Corporation, government’s stance is that is wrongful insistence far from the truth.
Mr. JEONG Byeong-Yun, a high official of Water Resources Policy said, “K-Water has poured enormous budget into the Four Major Rivers Restoration Project, and most of all, it has highly competitive specialty in water resource management. Hence, it is obvious the K-Water is designated as a priority applicant”, he underlined. Clawback profit is meant to be invested into ‘River Management Funds’. Mr. JEONG Byeong-Yun continues, “Even after completion of the Project, maintenance expenditure is needed regularly. Therefore, we plan to inject profits from development profits into Rivers Management Fundraising to use for maintenance of facilities and R&D expenses.”
