Naju-si Explains Controversy Over Special Privileges in Land Use Change of Buyeong Golf Course

[Naju=Asia Economy Honam Reporting Headquarters Reporter Kim Yukbong] Naju City, Jeollanam-do (Mayor Kang In-gyu) is drawing attention by directly refuting the controversy over preferential treatment in the land use change of Booyoung Golf Course raised by civic groups (Citizen Movement Headquarters) in the Gwangju and Jeonnam areas.

According to the city on the 24th, the city posted a clarification statement regarding media reports on the city hall website and issued an explanatory position on the factual relationship of the statement recently announced by the Citizen Movement Headquarters.

Regarding the controversy over the inadequacy of the Strategic Environmental Impact Assessment (draft) raised by the Citizen Movement Headquarters, the city said, "It is a premature judgment to unilaterally claim the summarized assessment posted due to excessive electronic file size as a poor assessment and to issue a statement."

Regarding the claim that the electronic public hearing was conducted by irregular means and forcibly to provide preferential treatment to Booyoung Housing, the city also refuted the related suspicions point by point, saying, "This is completely different from the facts."

The Citizen Movement Headquarters recently claimed in a statement, "In the urban planning decision process for large-scale apartment construction and land use change of the Booyoung Housing golf course site except for the site provided by Korea Energy Engineering University, the city is providing preferential treatment to Booyoung Housing through inadequate assessment reports and irregular and forced electronic public hearings."

The city explained, "The 13-page assessment report pointed out as inadequate is a summary assessment that extracts only the main contents due to excessive electronic file size," and "the main assessment report, which includes essential items such as the appropriateness of the basic development plan, is available for anyone, including the Citizen Movement Headquarters, to view at the city hall Urban Division and Bitgaram-dong Administrative Welfare Center."

It added, "It is understood that there has been no application to view the main assessment report from the Citizen Movement Headquarters or related parties so far," and "it is inappropriate to brand the summarized assessment report as inadequate without viewing the main assessment report."

The city also clarified the claim that "the draft Strategic Environmental Impact Assessment agreed upon with the Yeongsan River Basin Environmental Office (Basin Office) should be made available for residents to review."

There is no legal requirement to consult with the Basin Office in advance when drafting the draft assessment report, and the Environmental Impact Assessment Act stipulates that opinions from both the Basin Office and residents should be heard simultaneously on the draft assessment report, so resident opinion collection is possible separately from the Basin Office consultation.

A city official said, "Consultation with the Basin Office on the draft assessment report is a procedure for collecting opinions to prepare the main assessment report, and the claims that the public hearing was canceled or that the resident opinion collection process is being forced are not true."

The city firmly denied suspicions that the electronic public hearing was conducted by irregular means and forcibly, and that administrative procedures were being rapidly completed to favor Booyoung Housing.

It also explained that the electronic public hearing procedure, which was claimed to be irregular, is an additional measure to gather broad opinions beyond the mandatory newspaper, website announcement, and viewing methods specified in relevant laws for collecting resident opinions.

According to Article 22, Paragraph 2 (Summary) of the Enforcement Decree of the National Land Planning Act, "When intending to collect residents' opinions on the drafting of city or county management plans, the main contents of the plan must be announced in two or more daily newspapers and on the city or county internet homepage, and be available for public viewing for at least 14 days."

A city official said, "The Citizen Movement Headquarters misunderstood the additional public hearings and electronic public hearings conducted beyond the legal obligation of public viewing and issued a statement," and "to expand opportunities for submitting opinions, the public viewing period was set to be twice the legally prescribed 14 days."

He added, "We will strive for objective negotiations among citizens, civic groups, and project implementers so that this urban management plan change can be decided in a way that benefits regional development including the Innovation City," and "we hope that opinions will be presented not only through statements and media reports but also through official channels such as submitting opinion letters on the public viewing and applying to be presenters at public hearings."

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.