探討都市更新條例第25條之1實施方式-以臺北市都市更新案例為中心-

A Study of Methods of Implementation for Article 25-1 of Urban Renewal Act - A Study focuses on the urban renewal in Taipei City-

鄭旭劭(Hsu-Shao Cheng)

指導教授 ： 黃俊杰

國立中正大學/管理學院/會計資訊與法律數位學習碩士在職專班/碩士(2015年)

摘要

本研究以臺北市永春社區都市更新案為中心，探討實施者依據都市更新條例第25條之1解決未同意戶抗爭事件之利弊得失，以作為修改本法之建議。依據都市更新條例第25條之1的基本精神，即要加速完成都市更新程序，讓實施者在協議合建的基礎下，以「多數決」方式實施都市更新。本研究經由文獻分析與比較發現，原都市更新條例第25條之1部分內容中，實施者得以對未同意戶以徵收方式執行都市更新程序，然如此常造成激烈抗爭，並恐有侵犯人民財產權之虞，爰此，行政院提出都市更新條例修正草案，擬將都市更新條例第25條之1整條全數刪除。然經本研究進一步探討，建議無須刪除本法，只須調整造成人民財產權受威脅而有不對等之嫌的徵收方式，採用「多數協議合建、少數權利變換」之實施方式，同時提高同意比率至90%以上，如此除可符合都市更新條例「多數決」之基本精神外，並得以協議合建的實施方式來保障多數同意戶權益，又能以採用權利變換之實施方式以透明、公正、公開方式來保障少數未同意戶之權益，讓都市更新能持續向前，達成政府、實施者以及住戶三贏。

關鍵字

權利變換 ； 實施方式 ； 都市更新條例第25條之1 ； 實施者 ； 協議合建

並列摘要

This study focuses on the urban renewal of Yongchun community in Taipei City in discussing the advantages and disadvantages of the actions taken by implementers, based on Article 25-1 of Urban Renewal Act, on settling the opponents’ protests. Such discussion serves as the foundation for suggestions to amend the law. Based on the spirit of Article 25-1 of Urban Renewal Act, in order to facilitate the completion of urban renewal process, implementers may proceed with the renewal by “majority verdict” in joint construction agreement. Through literature analysis and comparisons, this study finds that the original statement of Article 25-1 of Urban Renewal Act allows implementers to proceed with urban renewal procedures using expropriation method. However, violent protests, accompanied by possible doubts on property rights violation, are often resulted from such implementation. Therefore, The Executive Yuan proposed draft amendments to Urban Renewal Act suggesting a complete repeal of Article 25-1 of Urban Renewal Act. Nevertheless, this study further discusses and suggests that such repeal is unnecessary. Adjustment on expropriation method that threatens people’s property rights and raises doubts on inequality is the only change that needs to be made. Such adjustment may be accomplished through a method described as “joint construction agreement by majority and rights transformation for minority” and by simultaneously raising the agreement ratio to over 90%. This strategy not only upholds the merit of “majority verdict” of Urban Renewal Act by adopting joint construction agreement method to secure majority rights, but also protects the interests of the minority through transparent, just, and open rights transformation method. As a result, urban renewal may continue to move forward and achieve a trip-win situation for the government, implementers, and residents.

並列關鍵字

Rights Transformation ； Methods of Implementation ； Article 25-1 of Urban Renewal Act ； Implementers ； Joint Construction Agreement

參考文獻

黃俊杰（2006）。行政程序法。臺北市:元照出版社。

張雨新（2007）。都市更新條例權利變換調解調處制度初探。土地問題研究季刊，6(2)，81-86。

陳立夫（2005）。都市更新與土地徵收-都市更新條例第二十五條之一修正條文之闡釋。土地問題研究季刊，4(4)，37-50。

游振輝（2004）。都市更新權利變換前價值評估之探討。土地問題研究季刊，3(4)，129-136。

王鴻源（2003）。都市更新權利變換估價方法之問題討探。土地問題研究季刊，2(3)，95-104。