c. Ineffective and Irrational Regulations
The lack of general and practical regulatory practices
led to dysfunctional planning. Commerce and business
were not categorized in land use, and residential areas
were coarsely classified only in two general types,
i.e., existing and future. Since FAR, height, and other
building criteria were taken as average ones in a block
bounded by streets, the regulation of a plot, or plots, in
that block depended not on statutory requirements but
on the discretion of government authorities, thereby
being vulnerable to arbitrariness. Since procedures
for determining building criteria and evaluating
development impacts were not established, decisions by
city authorities tended to favor developers.
d. Lack of Harmonization among Related Laws and
Institutions
The Law on Land, which was revised in 2003, required
the preparation of land use zoning and planning in
addition to the construction master plan which is
required by the Law on Construction. While land use
zoning and planning are revised every 10 and five years
respectively, construction master plans also include
the periodic preparation of land use plans. These two
kinds of land use plans, which were not sufficiently
harmonized with each other, caused confusion among
future land use policies