城市规划合法性基础研究——以美国区划制度初期的公共利益判断为对象

A Study on the Legitimacy of City Planning

美国区划制度是一种对土地使用进行区别分类、基于多种指标进行综合规制并且无补偿的土地规制制度。它为解决美国几乎无限制的土地使用自由引发的问题在20世纪20年代应运而生。它由1916年纽约城市条例开启先河,此后在联邦制定的标准州区划授权法的推动下逐渐得到广泛适用。在这一过程中,有关区划制度合法性的争议不断升级,直至引发诉讼。在欧几里得镇诉安布勒不动产公司一案的判决中,联邦最高法院认为对市镇土地进行区划控制从多个层次促进公共健康和安全,它与作为区划权力来源的州规制权所要求的公共健康、安全、道德或公众福祉存在实质的联系,不存在明显的武断和不合理,从而获得合法性。该判决确立了区划制度的合法性,并且为日后区划条例的合宪性诉讼提供了基本的审查标准,由此确定的区划制度初期的合法性基础正是规制权所保护的多层次内涵的公共健康、安全等公共利益。

Based on multi -index to regulate in a comprehensive way, the zoning in the U- nited States is a kind of system of land regulation that classifies various types of land use without any compensation. It came into being in 1920＇ as an effort to resolve problems cropped up in the exer- cise of land use right almost free of any public restraints in the U. S. In 1916, New York City passed the first modern zoning ordinance. Later on, with the impetus of the federal Standard State Zoning Enabling Act, under which municipalities may adopt zoning regulations, zoning became popular. However, the constitutionality of the new zoning law had been increasingly challenged and finally led to lawsuits. In the judgment of Village of Euclid v. Ambler Realty Company, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the zoning regulation of land use by the zoning ordinance promoted public safety and health in many ways and further held that the zoning ordinance was not arbitrary and unreasonable, instead, it had a substantial relation to the public health, safety, morals, or gen- eral welfare. The zoning ordinance, thus, was not unconstitutional. The judgment rendered by the Supreme Court has established the legitimacy of the zoning regulation. Moreover, the judgment has provided a basic standard of judicial review in zoning cases concerning the constitutionality of zoning regulations. It proves that the legal basis of earlier zoning reflects exactly the multi - level public interests such as public health and safety as protected by the authority of zoning regulation.