Check this out:


www.new-songdocity.co.kr

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ubiquitous_city

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/05/technolo...amp;oref=slogin



About the New Songdo City.....
and English as the official language????

so, gale international(american company) believes it to be quote "the next american city"
despite its location in korea, they promote it as the gateway to northeast asia for the americans....
makes it seem as if korea has a minimal role in this

what do you guys think about that?

The city is being built with the intention of attracting multinational corporations and international investors, so promotion of the city as an interntional city with English as the official language is something I wouldn't mind at all.

Wow. English in what would be a predominately (well over 95%+) native South Korean city is a recipe for disaster. Honestly, this would at best turn out to be a mere offshoot of Seoul. No way would this ever hope to be en par with the likes of heavy weights Tokyo, Hong Kong, Singapore, Shanghai, etc.

Your statement just fell apart, right there. If you can't even distinguish between cities, provinces and even entire countries, I suggest you to shut the fu-k up and go away, for you have absolutely no credibility whatsoever.

They all share the same characteristics as major global cities. And please enlighten me which of the cities above actually constitutes as a "province". And by the way, this is a public forum, I do as I please. You got a problem? Deal with it.

Hahaha! You are saying that Singapore, which is an entire country no matter how small it is, is actually comparable to a major city when it has its own government, as well as social, financial and service systems, not to mention saying how Hong Kong is comparable to a city when it has its own legal, financial and a whole bunch of other systems different from the other regions in China.

Oh, and, this is a public forum, and I've merely gave out a suggestion. (Not like I commanded you to do it, but I guess you can't even distinguish between the two.) Don't like what I've said? Then you can go hide under the bed and cry about it all you want, but it's not going to change the fact that you are incapable of distinguishing between the two.

Oh wow, aren't you the smart alec? Ever heard of the term city-state? What about Singapura (AKA. Lion City)? No? Then how about shutting your mouth, fool. And Hong Kong isn't a city? God, you're dumber than I thought.

Oh, and why don't you answer my question. Where's the province, huh? Go back to elementary school.

Even if this project fails as an international financial center, with all the environmental designs and technology being implemented in the city, the project will be a significant stepping stone for urban development in Korea.

So, Singapore, by your definition, which has total control of its economy, legal systems, law enforcements, government institutions, social sectors and military, not to mention Hong Kong, with its own set of systems that differs from every other regions in China that makes it much more of a province than a city, are actually comparable to other cities within countries that has just about everything bound to the country itself? Stop being such a hypocrite and look at yourself in the mirror before even thinking about calling anyone, other than yourself, to be dumb, because it only highlights the fact how retarded you look.

Unfortunately, I get the gut feeling that this project is more geared towards "Westernization" as opposed to a local form of urbanization. Without unique Asian-style architecture, it would simply be another city without a soul (so much for "Korea's got Seoul," no pun intended). But it'd be interesting to see how this turns out.



Let me ask you this: Does it matter? Even if they aren't cities (which they are, however, for the sake of argument and your education...), did I mention they were to begin with? No. In fact, you simply ASSUMED I did. But I think I'll go and prove you wrong just for kicks anyway:

1) The Republic of Singapore is by definition, a nation (or city-state), with Singapore City as its capital. Both essentially mean the exact same thing.

2) Hong Kong is one of two Special Administrative Regions (SAR) of the People's Republic of China, the other being Macau (there goes your "differs from every other regions in China" theory).

3) The only financial center/city named above that has any remote resemblance to a province is the City of Shanghai (which is its formal name), which by definition is a municipality.

4) Tokyo itself is a prefecture of Japan, but is also the capital city of Japan. Tokyo Metropolis used to be part of Tokyo City, before its expansion to include other municipalities.

Regardless, the above four cities are all major Asian financial centers. And there you go. GG. Better luck next time, amateur. (Oh, and where's my province? )

Let me quote what you've said before, just because you seem to be incapable of detecting your own errors;



Why would you even put all four of them in the same sentence when they aren't comparable to begin with, dumb @$$? And Singapore, no matter how hard you want to deny it, is a nation. Period. You can go on and on trying to argue your way out and attempt to cover your @$$ by calling it a city-state, but the fact that itself is a sovereign country makes all the difference. Oh, yeah, and as for Hong Kong and province, I've laid out the reason in my previous post, which you seem to have utterly ignored for no other apparent reasons than your illiteracy and/or stupidity. Let me even quote it for you so you can find the answer;



There you go, moron. Try thinking by yourself once in a while instead of repeating what someone else wrote on the Internet, and maybe you might have a chance to call anyone to be "uneducated", other than yourself, with justification.

You sir, are a complete dumbfu-k. If you think they aren't comparable as cities or financial centers, then you need to go back and receive some real education instead talking straight out of your @$$. Ever read a book where they have all the major cities written on the front (e.g. New York, Paris, London, Tokyo, Hong Kong, Shanghai, Singapore, Milan etc.). Singapore City is an actual entity, but is also a Republic at the same time. Hong Kong SAR is treated as an autonomous entity (as dictated by the "One Country, Two Systems"), and in NO WAY does it have any resemblance to a Chinese province. $hit for brains.

First of all, Singapore is. . . . because . . . . . city-state isn't . . . . but nation is also . . . . The next time you want call me out, try doing so with. . . . . because it seems that your dumb. . . .. HK can only be defined . . . . and NOT . . . you're so fu-king . . . . . .. Why do you think . . . . . also . . . . fu-king idiot.

Aww... How so sad, only being able to follow up on what someone else says and not even being able to think for yourself. Seriously, do you really think that Hong Kong and Singapore, both of which manages most of and all, respectively, aspect of economy, legal systems, and other various things can actually be compared to that of a city inside a country that has most of the things bound to the nation itself? Think again, dumb @$$. And, speaking of "$hit", I wouldn't have to do but to squeeze your head to get some. Pathetic, no?

You're right, they are not cities, nor are they financial centers. You should be nominated for "Dumbfu-k of the Year" award, if there ever was one.

Seoul has plenty of "local form of urbanization". Songdo, part of IFEZ(Incheon Free Economic Zone) is a city within a city(Seoul) specializing in interantional financial services. If it is necessary to "westernize", like Singapore and Hong Kong, to attract international investors, then that is precisely what it needs.

IFEZ is South Korea's attempt to emulate certain conditions that lead to the success of HK and Singapore as internatinal financial cities. Much like what Enomoshiki's been saying, a city bound by the laws of an entire nation, like Seoul and Tokyo, have limitations that hinder growth as an international financial city, even if the two cities are massive "heavyweights"(Tokyo is the largest city in the world, and Seoul comes either second or third). HK and Singapore, on the other hand, being small independent(or semi-independent) city-states, can exercise much more flexibility in policies, laws and regulations. IFEZ, which Songdo is a part of, will have an independent set of laws and regulations different from those of South Korea to be more accommodating to internatinal investors. So in other words, what South Korea is doing is creating a "HK/Singapore" within Seoul.

And you don't need to build skyscrapers with "unique Asian-style architecture" to have a city with a soul. Actually, there is nothing really "uniquely" Asian in modern architecture, nor is there "uniquely" European modern architecture.

Nah. You would be able to win that award without even being nominated, so dim is your intelligence.

Not really. Both HK and Singapore (to a lesser extent, Shanghai and Tokyo as well) being former British colonies have a history of dealing with Westerners. Singapore for example, is situated in the strategically-important Malacca Strait handling enormous amounts of trade traffic (which is why the British used to maintain its largest military base there, so-called the impregnable "Fortress Singapore") stands to benefit from this experience. HK on the other hand, was able to surge ahead because of Britain's laissez-faire economic policies and the influx of Shanghai industrialists and corporations after the Communist revolution. South Korea on the other hand, does not have much expertise in this area. Whereas many Hong Kongers and Singaporeans are fluent in English, Koreans are not. Nor is South Korea situated in a strategically important region like the South China Sea or the Malacca Strait and does not have a significant inland population base to back it up. In short, the New Songdo City lacks the type of investment atmosphere that cities like HK and Singapore can provide.

Like I said earlier, I think it would simply be wishful thinking to consider this "New Songdo City" to be another "Hong Kong," "Singapore," and so on. In fact, when the officials tried to contact the American developers to support the project, most rejected the offer calling it a "pipe dream". However, credit should be given where its due since Seoul itself is a major city in its own right.

"Modern architecture" has always been dictated by Westerners to suit their own cultural tastes. Asians have always been quick to accept this fact. If you look at cities like Tokyo, HK, Singapore, Seoul, Hanoi, Saigon, Kuala Lumpur, Jakarta, Beijing, Shanghai, Busan, Yokohama, Osaka, and so on. They are all filled with rows upon rows of massive apartment blocks with huge skyscrapers lurking in the background. In many ways, Asians have beat Westerners in their own game to "Westernize" their cities. In the West, you can still see quite a lot of local European-style churches, house and buildings, but what about Asia? There are barely any Pagodas or anything of such nature lying around. I'm not saying that buildings ought to have Asian-style roofs on top, but even in the interior, there is nothing of any resemblance to traditional culture. Its a really sad state of affairs, really.

^ Isn't HK & Singapore are not Cities like Seoul, Beijing or Tokyo.

HK & Singapore are indeed mega-port city, but comparing HK & Singapore against to Seoul or Tokyo is out of question. I don't think HK & Singapore can match against to capital cities of the world which have much more history & culture and natural assets.

Btw, HK is now part of new China's special economic zone but Singapore isn't. Singapore is now little baby state and will not last long given its neighbors are much bigger & stronger. If you studied world history, I've never seen Singapore like little state last long, I'm afraid Singapore will be part of either Greater China or Malaysia.

As a city Singapore lacks many valuable assets, like parks, rivers, mountains (no freakin wildlife), and cultures, so it won't become major tourist destination, and because of fast economic changes in East Asia, soon western banks & financial institutions will leave for better opportunities at aboard.

Songdo would also be located in a strategically important location in Northeastern Asia, surrounded by Japan, Russia and China. As for economic policies and English proficiency, well, you gotta start somewhere, right? And that's Songdo.



Korea has a lot of Buddhist temples as well as historical architectures like royal palaces in central Seoul. Even in modern architecture, most residential buildings have ondol heating, a very old and unique Korean cultural tradition. Oh, and recently built Korean churches are pretty unique and modern too.

I don't think so. For one thing, both of the region's biggest powers, namely China and Japan (as well as South Korea) relies heavily on the Malacca Strait and the South China Sea for energy resources and trade. If there is any disruption in the volatile region, you could be sure that would set off massive panic in Beijing and Tokyo. What happens in Southeast Asia is an enormous factor in Chinese and Japanese foreign policies (just look at the ODA contributions and alliances in SEA). The two powers already have a strong foothold in Northeast Asia, and unless they go to war, Northeast Asia would be at the bottom of their agenda.

Besides, its not like as if there aren't other major/more significant cities in the region striving to become the next financial center.



I heard that Seoul was especially notorious for the endless rows of similar apartment blocks and high rises. Well, I personally like the Japanese way of doing things (e.g. sleeping on traditiona tatami and the simple, yet elegant rooms w/ fusuma doors).

BTW, I heard that the Kyongbok Palace was destroyed by the Japanese during their rule of the peninsula several decades ago and that the color scheme of the buildings were lost, so they had to make it up. Is it true?

That would explain for the strategic importance from a political point of view. But what Songdo strives to be is an economic center, especially in IT and BT industries, and it has plenty of major cities and industrial regions within its radius to become one.

And yeah, there is competition, but that doesn't mean we have to give up, right?




Yes, such aprtment blocks are called "match boxes" in Korea. And well, Japanese use tatamis, and Koreans use ondol and yo(mattresses to sleep on the floor). Though some houses utilize sliding doors, they don't have much of a merit.

Much of Kyongbuk Palace was destroyed by the Japanese for urban development, but not all of it as you can see today.

Songdo's tallest tower ( the North East Asia Trade Center) looks a lot like Shanghai World Trade Center. Refer this building as SWTC's ugly brother.



Anyway, it's a nice project nonetheless.

Soon Korea & Japan will be using the North-West passage, not Malacca strait, I'm afraid that Singapore won't be economic power house in SE Asia in near future given other neighbors are technically much bigger & have more potential to grow.

Don't know if South Korean re-built most of their lost palaces or castles & fortresses. But I've heard Seoul have around 4 or 5 Palaces, and 2 or 3 fortresses. It gives idea how big & grand Seoul was and still one of the biggest City in the world. How can we compare Seoul that host Olympic, World Cup and many International festivals, and home for over 10 millions people to Singapore. Even Seoul have grand river and mountain, and also subways & railways. Comparing Seoul to Singapore or HK is little joke.

Seoul is only ~600 km squared in size. Surprisingly Hong Kong is almost twice as large at 1104 square km.

seoul is like 50x denser, tho

Yeah, but that 600km packs in more population than Hong Kong, and Seoul's metro area has a population of more than 20 million dwarfing any other cities in eastern Asia with the exception of Tokyo.

This city is SICK. It is perfectly planned to be picturesc! When finished, it will be one of the most High-tech cities in the world. A perfect place to live for second gen Koreans like myself.

I think you are betting wrong idea about actual size, HK size that you have mentioned is not actual metro size, trust me I have been to Hong Kong & Singapore my self, not big. If Seoul that includes nearby ports and other suburbs then it much bigger than HK.

Apparently, new Songdo city is to be built on only 6km^2 of reclaimed land. With such limitation, any future significance as an international city is at least questionable let alone comparable or expecting to be on-par with hyper-eficient and already established hub-cities Honk Kong or Singapore.

Built on 6km of reclaimed land within the metro area of Seoul.

Here are live-cam shots of the construction that's well under way.

http://www.songdo.com/Default.aspx?p=1941

http://www.songdo.com/Default.aspx?p=1937

http://www.songdo.com/Default.aspx?p=1942

I don't think Songdo will become hub city over night once completed, but it will be part of Greater Seoul.
Actually SK govt is trying to down sizing Seoul and move people to other newly built cities in affort to increase investment outside of Seoul.

Too much conecntration can produce pollution and some times there is need to be worry about crowed metros, traffics, air quality, infastructures, servicing industry and control.

If you guys visisted Sydney, there is sevral smaller cities builted on outside of Sydney CBD areas such as Parramatta City which is located in Sydney but they called it city, and I think Songdo is just another small city within big city.