| Summary: | 碩士 === 國立成功大學 === 都巿計畫學系 === 85 === The idea of planning obligation has been taken
intopractice for a period of time. People and the
governmentdon''t exactly know what it is and how to use it
properly.The study first defined the planning obligation from
severalpoints of view and then used it to be the base concept
onthe developing of an Industrial and Business Park which is
anew policy in Taiwan. The study also examine the situation
of execution of thenew policy in order to know the problem of
the negotiationsof planning obligation. The main problem is
the mechanismwhich makes negotiations between the government
and thedeveloper doesn''t work. The study gave some suggestions
tomake it work better. Under the hypothesis of the
negotiation mechanismworking, the study built a set of models
to calculate thereasonable planning obligation. One is to
calculate how muchmoney the developer could earn in
windfall in thedevelopment. The other is to calculate how
much social costpeople or the government would pay for the
development. Thegovernment should ensure the social must not
pay anythinginto the developer''s pocket, on the other hand
he shouldalso promise the developer could earn reasonable
benefit. Sothat the developer would be willing to develop
and thesocial could take some advantage. The calculation
modelscould give the local government some information
whilenegotiations, and maintain social justice. The models
wasbuilt in the proving of the present value model, and set
NPVas the standard of the planning obligation.
Bycapitalization, the planning obligation could be implementedby
different types, e.g. Donation or construction
ofinfrastructure at any time. It can make the
planningobligati on more flexible and useful. At last, a
selected case, Tainan Ren-De Industrial andBusiness Park, was
tested by the models. The solution of thereasonable amount of
the planning obligation should bebetween 1,286.21 million
and 2070.62 million NT dollars''NPV, but the regulation and the
local government asked only28.23 million. It is unfair and
unjust for the localgovernment to do so, because the social
will pay the socialcost, and it will become the developer''s
benefit.
|
|---|
