我國公共設施保留地之制度研析──兼與日本都市計畫法制之比較研究

Abstract

全台灣直至今日仍有許多人民私有土地，受到各級地方政府以都市計畫，要求其保留作為將來公共設施之用，此等土地即為公共設施保留地。正因此項都市計畫所形成之土地用益限制，導致該等人民對其土地之使用，受有嚴重限制，且現行法並未要求，各級地方政府須在一定期限內，取得該等土地，導致形成無限期之保留狀態。儘管此問題，曾經我國司法院大法官，做成釋字第336號解釋，肯認無保留期限之合憲性。惟該號解釋做成至今（2023年），已過將近三十餘載，此問題卻仍未得到妥適之解決。本文因此嘗試透過後期大法官所發展之財產權審查模式，結合國內與日本相關學說，重新檢驗上開問題，並得到現行制度，於個案上多已違反憲法對人民財產權保障之結論。基此，本文進一步思考本制度是否具有其存在之特殊性，而將我國現行法中，各級地方政府可資利用之各種公共設施用地規劃取得制度，納入探討。結論上，本文認為此一制度仍具有其獨特之都市空間規劃意義，復於文末將鄰國日本同樣處理公共設施用地規劃問題之相關制度，納為比較法參考對象，進而提出本文對於公共設施保留地制度之修法建議。

In Taiwan, a considerable amount of privately-owned land remains subject to urban planning regulations imposed by local governments, requiring its reservation for future development as public facilities. Such lands are referred to as public facilities reservation land. The land use restrictions resulting from these urban planning measures significantly limit the utilization of these properties by the owners. Moreover, existing laws do not mandate local governments at different levels to acquire these lands within a specified timeframe, leading to an indefinite state of reservation. Despite a constitutional interpretation by the Constitutional Court of Taiwan, known as Judicial Yuan Interpretation No. 336, affirming the constitutionality of reservations without a time limit, the issue remains unresolved after nearly three decades since its issuance. This study endeavors to address the matter by employing the later-developed property rights scrutiny model by the Constitutional Court. By integrating relevant perspectives from Taiwan and Japan on this issue, the paper seeks to reexamine the aforementioned problem. The conclusion drawn from this reexamination suggests that the current public facilities reservation land system often violates constitutional protections of citizens'' property rights in its application to specific cases. Building upon this analysis, the paper further explores the necessity of maintaining this system in Taiwan. It examines various land acquisition mechanisms available to local governments in the current legal framework for public facility planning. In conclusion, this paper acknowledges the continued significance of the existing system, highlighting its unique importance in urban spatial planning. Furthermore, the study compares the relevant system with Japan, a neighboring country that addresses similar issues in public facility land planning. This comparative approach is adopted as a reference point for proposing legislative amendments to the public facilities reservation land system.