【作者】 陈越峰；

【导师】 朱芒；

【作者基本信息】 上海交通大学 ， 宪法学与行政法学， 2010， 博士

【摘要】 在房地产日益成为我国城镇居民财产的最重要组成部分,而实际掌握着城市规划权的城市政府又极度依赖“土地财政”的格局下,土地上的私权利和对其进行限制的城市规划权之间形成了极具张力的关系。如何对城市规划权进行法律控制已经成为重要而紧迫的课题。这就首先需要对实然层面的城市规划和土地开发的关系、城市规划权的构成和运作以及城市规划权法律控制的方式形成清晰而准确的认识。我国城市规划主要由以项目建设为目的、表现为具体指令的项目建设式规划和以土地开发为目的、表现为普遍规则的普遍规制式规划这两种形式构成。由此形成城市规划对土地开发的两种规制方式:附随规制和普遍规制。它们既是在不同历史阶段分别形成的,也是现实并存的。中央集权和直接干预是项目建设式规划的权力构成和作用方式的主要表现。地方自主和间接干预则是普遍规制式规划的权力构成和作用方式的主要表现。此后,以权力分享与合作决策为表现形式的分权参与式规划又逐渐露出端倪,以集权与监督为表现形式的规划督察也呈现新的趋势。在国家集权和中央集权以及地方分权和社会分权的背景下,对城市规划权的法律控制分别形成了两种主要方式:政治主导和群众路线以及经济主导和法律治理。前者表现为工业化建设中政治方针的主导和群众的广泛参与;后者表现为追求经济增长的经济政策主导和通过法律的治理。但是,这两种方式都还没有完全解决权力控制的问题。因此,在实践中又出现合作决策和权力分享以及规划督察和权力监督这两种新的权力控制方式。合作决策和权力分享由决策者中立的构成和多元的立场所形成,并由法定、羁束的决策程序加以保障,它体现着社会分权的深化;规划督察和权力监督则由监督者专业的构成和外部监督的立场所支撑,并以过程性和裁量性的监督程序加以实施,它预示着中央集权的回归。这就在城市规划法领域形成了前现代、现代和后现代法律制度并存的多元形态。在这一背景下,探究城市规划权法律控制方式在应然层面的建构,确立目标、选择路径是为至要。规划中立和法治主义应当是最重要的阶段性目标,分门别类进行渐进性改革则是可行的实施路径。更多还原

【Abstract】 Real estate has become increasingly the most important component of China’s urban residents’ property, while the city government who has the power of urban planning relies heavily on "Land Finance ". This conflict between the private right on land and the power of urban planning amounts to a relationship full of tension which makes the legal control over the power of urban planning an important and urgent task. To achieve that goal, it is necessary to establish a clear and accurate understanding from the practical perspective, as a prerequisite, on the nexus between urban planning and land development, the constitution and operation of the power of urban planning and the way of legal control over it.The urban planning in China consists of two main models: the model of project construction planning for the purpose of project construction, embodied by specific instructions and the model of general regulatory planning for the purpose of land development, embodied by general regulatory rules. These two models formed in different historical periods respectively and coexist in practice. The centralization of power and direct intervention are characteristics of power structure and function of construction planning while local Autonomy and indirect interference are characteristics of general regulatory planning. In recent years, a new planning model characterized by power sharing and cooperative decision, namely participatory planning gradually emerged. The planning supervision characterized by centralization of power and inspection also displayed a new trend.Under the context of centralization of power at the state level and decentralization of power at the local level, two major ways of legal control over the power of urban planning have formed: political orientation plus the mass line and economic orientation plus legal control. The former reflected as political orientation in industrialization and participation of the masses; the latter aimed at economic growth and the pursuit of rule by law. However, both of them failed to completely solve the problem of power control. As a result, two new modes of legal control emerged: the mode of cooperative decision plus power sharing as well as planning supervision plus inspection of the power of urban planning. The former mode is constituted by impartial and diverse-positioned decision makers, supported by legal, restrained procedure of decision-making, reflecting the deepening of decentralization of power of the society. The latter mode is based on professional supervisors and outside inspection, implementing through a specific procedure. It indicates the return of centralization of the government.This leads to a diverse field of urban planning law with pre-modern, modern and post-modern legal systems. Under this background, it should be the first priority to do research on legal control over the power of urban planning from a realistic perspective, set a goal and select a path. The neutrality of planning and the rule of law should be the most important initial target while the gradual implementation of the reform is the feasible path.更多还原