| 摘要: | 實務上，都市更新常因土地所有權人眾多、權利關係錯綜複雜及意見整合困難，導致推動歷程曠日廢時，「公辦都市更新」被視為提升更新意願與民眾信賴度的推動方式。然而，根據本研究統計，公辦都更案件仍面臨多次流標的困境，因此，藉由分析不同區位的公辦都市更新案之推動歷程，歸納出影響選商的三項關鍵問題分別為：主辦機關難以掌握不動產市場動態、主辦機關與潛在廠商缺乏有效溝通機制、以及議約程序未能發揮協商效能。因此，本研究參考政府採購法關於公開徵求參考資料與公開閱覽、促參法中議約程序之實務指引，以及歐盟「競爭性對話」機制中，透過多輪對談並允許修正提案的精神，提出公辦都更選商流程修正建議。
本研究亦訪談多位曾實際參與公辦都更選商程序之專業人員，檢視修正建議的可行性。結果發現，多數受訪者支持於準備階段採政府採購法中公開徵求參考資料的方式，並建議於評選文件公告前至少辦理一次廠商說明會，以增加雙方溝通機會及程序透明度；而對於選商階段引入「競爭性對話」機制、多次評選及允許廠商調整提案，則意見分歧。部分受訪者認為此作法雖可減少後續修正及提高方案契合度，但亦增加廠商備標成本。至於議約階段，雖設置第三方議約小組有助化解歧見，但若前階段溝通與意見整合已臻完善，則議約程序的重要性相對降低。期望本研究能提供流程檢討的實務建議，作為精進未來推動公辦都市更新之參考，進一步提升都市更新推動效率。
;Urban renewal projects often face prolonged delays due to the fragmented nature of land ownership, complex rights relationships, and difficulties in reaching stakeholder consensus. To enhance public trust and participation, a public-sector-led urban renewal (public urban redevelopment) has been seen as an effective approach. However, many urban renewal projects still suffer from repeated bidding failures, significantly affecting project timelines. This research analyzes the implementation process of public urban redevelopment projects in various districts, identifying three critical challenges in the developer selection stage: the lead agency’s limited grasp of real estate market trends, the lack of effective communication channels between the lead agency and potential developers, and the ineffectiveness of negotiation procedures. Drawing on practices from the Government Procurement Act (such as the public request for information), the Act for Promotion of Private Participation in Infrastructure Projects (PPIP), and the European Union′s Competitive Dialogue procedure, which allows for multiple rounds of clarification and proposal revisions, this study targets on process improvements for the selection phase of public urban redevelopment.
Through interviews with professionals who have participated in public urban renewal tendering processes, this study assesses the feasibility of the proposed improvements. Most interviewees supported incorporating a public request for reference information during the preparation phase and holding at least one pre-bid explanatory meeting to enhance transparency and communication. However, opinions were divided to adopting elements of competitive dialogue, such as multiple evaluation rounds and allowing developers to revise proposals, during the selection phase. While such mechanisms could help clarify expectations and reduce the need for post-award adjustments, they might also increase developers′ bid preparation costs, potentially raising the risk of failed tenders. As for the negotiation phase, although forming a third-party negotiation committee may help resolve disputes, its necessity diminishes if sufficient dialogue and consensus-building are achieved during earlier phases. The outcomes of this study could be a reference for improving current operational processes, thereby accelerating the pace and improving the effectiveness of public-sector-led urban renewal initiatives. |
