Yangpyeong Expressway, “Kim Keon-hee Line” was never included in any preliminary feasibility study

On July 9, placards calling for the government to resume the construction of the Seoul-Yangpyeong Expressway are displayed in Yangpyeong-gun, Gyeonggi, after Minister of Land, Infrastructure and Transport Won Hee-ryong scrapped the project following allegations that the route was changed to pass through land owned by the wife of President Yoon Suk-yeol, first lady Kim Keon-hee. Yangpyeong, Kwon Do-hyun

Coverage by the Kyunghyang Shinmun on July 10 confirmed that two private construction companies had each tried to promote the construction of an expressway from Seoul to Yangpyeong, which the government has been promoting to alleviate the congestion on National Highway 6 and the Capital Region First Ring Expressway. When the private construction companies tried to build the expressway, the road ended in Yangseo-myeon.

According to the “Private Investment Road Project from Hanam to Yangpyeong,” a report which a consortium led by Hanshin Engineering & Construction Co. submitted to Gyeonggi-do in 2008, the project stretched from Macheon-dong, Songpa-gu in Seoul to Dogok-ri, Yangpyeong-gun in Gyeonggi-do. Dogok-ri lies in Yangseo-myeon. When Daewoo E&C tried to build the expressway with private investment in 2018, the expressway also ended in Yangseo-myeon.

Even in the projects funded by private investment, which strive to earn maximum profit with minimum costs, the Seoul-Yangpyeong Expressway ended in Yangseo-myeon and not Gangsang-myeon.

In May 2021, the Korea Development Institute (KDI) released a report on the 2021 preliminary feasibility study of the Seoul-Yangpyeong Expressway construction project. The report not once mentioned Gangsang-myeon as the end point of the expressway. A pre-feasibility study designates a project area and conducts a simple feasibility test, such as a cost-benefit analysis, only in the area in question. But the Gangsang-myeon route, which never underwent a pre-feasibility study, suddenly, after the presidential election, emerged as a more profitable end point than Yangseo-myeon and as a route that did less damage to the environment.

According to the report of the pre-feasibility study, the benefit/cost (B/C) analysis only presented two scenarios depending on whether they constructed the Sangsachang interchange (IC) along the Seoul-Yangpyeong Expressway that terminated in Yangseo-myeon. Gangsang-myeon was nowhere to be found in the report.

The Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport argued, “Even when the road was planned as a project funded by private investment, Gangsang-myeon was discussed as an alternative end point, but Yangseo-myeon was chosen as the terminus in the final plan, that is all.” In other words, Gangsang-myeon was just not selected as the final terminus, but it was discussed internally.

According to the information presented by the land ministry, Gangsang-myeon first appeared as the terminus shortly after the presidential election in May 2022. According to the ministry, in March 2022, Yangpyeong-gun launched a feasibility study and after examining the project through a research institute, it presented a new plan with Gangsang-myeon as the end point during a report in the initial stages of the study in May 2022.

Second Vice Minister of Land, Infrastructure and Transport Baek Won-kug briefed the press at the National Agency for Administrative City Construction in Sejong-si Monday and said, “Many experts took part in a feasibility study that started in March, and after discussions with the local government and related agencies, they found the Gangsang-myeon route as an alternative that could effectively handle the volume of traffic, minimize damage to the environment and allow for the construction of the Yangpyeong IC, which the local residents had wanted.”

According to data that the land ministry collected independently, if they build the expressway according to the route presented in the pre-feasibility study, the expressway can handle up to 15,800 vehicles a day, whereas the alternative Gangsang-myeon route can handle up to 22,300 vehicles a day, nearly 6,000 more than the previous plan. The ministry argued that the Gangsang-myeon route was highly profitable.

Vice Minister Baek said, “If we opt for the alternative route, the budget for the entire project will increase by 14 billion won. But since the volume of traffic will increase by 40%, overall, the alternative route is better.” He further argued, “The silver, bronze medalists that follow are meaningless.” However, the figures he presented were not based on a separate preliminary feasibility study, which the Yangseo-myeon plan had been subject to.

The land ministry did not give a clear answer on why the Yangseo-myeon route was subject to the pre-feasibility study instead of the Gangsang-myeon route, which they claim is much more profitable.

A representative of the Korea Expressway Corporation who was present Monday said, “The final route is determined in the basic study, and a pre-feasibility study has its uncertainties.” He added, “Since 1999, fourteen of the 24 routes that underwent a feasibility study on newly constructed expressways (not including extensions) had their starting or end points changed in the process of the feasibility study.”

So even if Yangseo-myeon was the terminus in the pre-feasibility study, if in the process of the feasibility study, they discover a better alternative, they can change the course of the road.

In particular, if they are to construct the Yangpyeong IC, a long-held wish of the Yangpyeong-gun residents, there is no better route other than to end the expressway in Gangsang-myeon when considering the distance between the interchange and the junction, according to the ministry.

When asked, “Are you saying that you found the best alternative, and the land owned by first lady Kim Keon-hee’s family just happened to be there?” the vice minister answered, “Who would have known they had land there?” and explained, “When conducting the feasibility study, we cannot know things like the distribution of landowners. That is something we find out when drawing up a list to prepare for land compensation.”

On Monday, the ministry maintained its position that it could not resume the project. Baek said, “It’s foggy” when describing the time when the project would be resumed and added, “We will only know when we can resume the project when the fog clears up after the truth of the allegations is revealed.” Some people have criticized the ministry for overreacting by scrapping a government project that had been promoted for a long time just because allegations linked to the first lady were raised.