[사설]The second and fourth countermeasures for the private sector excluded

Yesterday, the government built 836,000 houses nationwide and put out a ‘2·4 housing supply plan’ that will supply them by 2025. This is the current government’s 25th real estate measure. There are traces of efforts made by President Moon Jae-in to meet the “special supply measures that exceed market expectations” announced at the New Year’s press conference.

The government plans to supply 93,000 houses to Seoul through public-led redevelopment and reconstruction, and 78,000 houses through high-density development in the station area, which is also led by the public. The 323,000 units planned to be built in Seoul are currently equal to the total number of apartments in Gangnam 3 district. Although there are limitations to the measures the government came up with in the fifth year, it is a’great turnaround’ for the government, which repeatedly said, “There is no shortage of housing supply.”

If only two-thirds of the members agreed, the Korea Land and Housing Corporation (LH) and Seoul Housing and Urban Corporation (SH) decided to complete the maintenance project, which usually takes 13 years, within five years as reconstruction and redevelopment implementers. It is said that if public initiative is accepted, the floor area ratio is increased and the two-year residency obligation for reconstruction union members and the burden of excess profits for reconstruction are exempted to increase profitability. With this measure, the redevelopment of some areas, which was stagnant due to disagreement among residents and lack of business feasibility, will accelerate. However, as the proportion of disapproved members increases, the backlash from those who feel that their property is being forcibly accepted may increase. It is also difficult for the public to solve the complicated relationship of rights in the high-density development of station areas, semi-industrial areas, and low-rise residential areas. For these reasons, if privately-owned land is not secured in time, housing supply will inevitably be much later than planned or destroyed. In terms of quantity, this measure will have the effect of reducing the anxiety of homeless end users about their home arrangements. However, it is difficult to avoid criticism of’public universalism’ in that the deregulation of private reconstruction, which is the fastest way to increase quality housing, is intentionally excluded and supply is increased only by public initiative. There are no measures for tenants who are suffering from the lack of a private house to live in right now. Even from now on, the government should prepare measures to ease transaction tax to induce multi-homed people to put their homes on the market to open the breath of the market suffering from supply shortages.