Go to Content Area :::

Decisions

Home > Decisions > Docket Search > Before 2022
:::
:::
  • Interpretation
  • No.255
  • Date
  • 1990/04/04
  • Issue
    • Are the relevant interpretative directives and orders issued by the Ministry of the Interior unconstitutional to the effect that non-planned roads may be removed ex officio or upon application after the planned roads are developed and completed?
  • Holding
    •        To the extent that an urban plan is implemented, the road planning should be carried out by the competent authorities pursuant to the provisions of the Urban Planning Act.  In respect of an area where an urban plan is formulated and a detailed plan is completed according to statutory procedure, the construction and establishment of the roads for such area should then be carried out based on such plans.  In mapping out the road systems pursuant to the statutory procedure, any road not subject to such plan is simply meant to be removed and, upon completion of the planned roads, which ought to be available for public traffic, the competent authorities may ex officio or upon application have such non-planned road removed whose existence is no longer necessary for purpose of public traffic. The Directives Ref. No. (66)-TNYT-730275 and Ref. No. (67)-TNYT-759517 as issued by the Ministry of the Interior in respect of the removal of a lane or alley that is not covered by an urban plan, as well as the Notices Regarding the Application for Removal or Route Change of Lanes or Alleys Not Subject to Urban Planning by Taipei City, are in line with the intention described above and thus are not in conflict with the constitutional purpose of protecting the rights of the people.
  • Reasoning
    •        It is understood that, pursuant to Article 90 of the Land Act, any district road, ditch and other land for public use located in a city should be planned in advance in accordance with the Urban Planning Act, that a master plan should be first formulated for a city and town plan under an urban plan, pointing out the main roads and other public transportation systems, that a detailed plan should be further executed upon the announcement and implementation of the master plan, further indicating the road systems, that the said master plan and detailed plan should both be submitted to the urban planning committee of the relevant government or the township, town (or county-governed city) for its review, that such plans should be put on display for the public prior to such review, and that, during the period of public display, any citizen or group may come forward with his or their opinions for the relevant urban planning committee to review, the results of which should be reported to the immediately superior government for its approval before the announcement and implementation thereof.  The above has been clearly prescribed under Article 15, Paragraph 1, Subparagraph 6; Article 17 through 21, and Article22, Paragraph 1, Subparagraph 5, of the Urban Planning Act.  Therefore, since the planning of any road located within the scope of an implemented urban plan should be made certain by means of the statutory procedure described above, any citizen or group concerned ought to have had the opportunity to familiarize himself or themselves with the layout of the roads and render his or their opinions in respect thereof.  Once the relevant plan becomes final, it should be carried out accordingly.  In mapping out the road systems pursuant to the statutory procedure, any road not subject to such plan is simply meant to be removed and, upon completion of the planned roads, which ought to be available for public traffic, the competent authorities may ex officio or upon application have such non-planned road removed whose existence is no longer necessary for purpose of public traffic.  Such act is an administrative act that is consistent with the legislative intent of the Urban Planning Act.  The Directives Ref. No. (66)-TNYT-730275 and Ref. No. (67)-TNYT-759517 as issued by the Ministry of the Interior in respect of the removal of a lane or alley that is not covered by an urban plan, as well as the Notices Regarding the Application for Removal or Route Change of Lanes or Alleys Not Subject to Urban Planning by Taipei City, are in line with the intention described above and thus are not in conflict with the constitutional purpose of protecting the rights of the people.  Nevertheless, it should also be made clear that the act of removing any pre-existing road with public easement concerns public interest and, thus, should be unambiguously prescribed in the applicable laws and regulations related to urban planning. 
      
    • *Translated by Vincent C. Kuan
Back Top