Jomtien Condo Owners Sue For Sea View

[ripley]

ThaiBob- Did you have to copy/paste the whole stopvt7 msg??

[Wiresok]

Dear ThaiBob

Your quote from the court record: "If the measurement was from the construction control area prescribed by the Royal Decree B.E. 2521, the building distance obtained would be similar to the measurement from the MSL inward the land at the distance of 200 meter." This does not make sense when compared with Issue 9

Reread Issue 9: "Ministerial Regulation Issue 9: 3. To specify the area within the 200 meters measurement from the construction control line see the map. Annexed to the Royal Decree.......................in the regions of ........................at the seaside in which the following constructions shall not be built:"

You can say anything! But the records shows don't measure from construction control area (borderline) or (zone). But you measure from construction control line see the map.........at the seaside! Found on the map at MSL! This is a fact the court accepts!!

Maybe you do not understand the meaning of IF?

if >conjunction 1 introducing a conditional clause; on the condition or supposition that. 2 despite the possibility or fact that. 3 whether. 4 every time that; whenever. 5 expressing a polite request or tentative opinion. 6 expressing surprise or regret. >noun a condition or supposition.

-ORIGIN Old English.

New posted facts the Pattaya Mayors letter, dated April 4, 2007, sent to the Rayon Court. Check the Mayor letter he also uses "if".

It looks like the mayor doesn't understand how to apply Issue 9 to it's map?

Well you've managed to do it again but that shouldn't surprise anyone. I've challenged your "good logic" with specifics based on your statements and your maps but all you do is continually re-cycle your inane answers. You create smoke screens and try to divert the argument from your very questionable logic with errors of omission and taking statements out of context. The Court does not accept a 200-meter measurement from MSL. What the Court does accept is a 200-meter measurement from Construction Control Line (or the Borderline of Restricted Construction as you like to call it or the Construction Control Boundary as the SC calls it) per the annexed map. As the Dept. of Engineering report explained no measurement was made from the construction control boundary. Nobody took boat or a 100-meter swim to sea to mark the CCL. Measuring 100 meters landward from the MSL is equivalent to measuring 200 meters from the CCL. I hope you understand the difference, most people do. Please do not infer that the Court supports your 200-meter measurement from MSL or CCL=MSL because it doesn't. I view your most recent posts as those of diversion and desperation.

Well Thaibob, it really is time you stopped digging, your theory is making less sense the more you write about it.

1.By your own admission , nobody is going to take a boat out into the sea to make 200m measurements from an inacessible "construction control line",or mark it, why? , because it isnt out there.

The accessible ,issue 9 defined measuring point is MSL.

You are trying to imply that issue 9 states to measure 100m landward from MSL, It does not.

It explicitly states to measure 200m, so to comply with the regulation you have to measure 200m, not a fabricated 100m to suit your case.

The issue 9 says "to measure 200m from CCl", it does not say "to measure 200m from CCL, or 100m from MSL if you dont fancy taking a boat out to the boundary!!".

2.Your comment that there are 3 different descriptions out there for the seaward side of the restricted construction area are beyond belief.

That the Rayong court calls it the "Construction control line",

That stopvt7 call it the "Borderline of restricted construction"

That the SC calls it the "Construction control boundary"

As you can see the Rayong and SC are at odds with this.

It is interesting the SC do not use the word "line", but "boundary".

3.By your reckoning the map locates the CCL 100m out to sea from MSL, because of the arrow.However you do not recognise the CCL is there because you dont want to go there and measure 200m from it .

If you are saying it is there , you have to recognise it is there and get out there and measure from it.

You are then using issue 9 to measure 200m from there landward .

Therefore the distance you have measured in this process is 300m, where in issue 9 does it say to measure for 300m ?.

[prospero]

Well you've managed to do it again but that shouldn't surprise anyone. I've challenged your "good logic" with specifics based on your statements and your maps but all you do is continually re-cycle your inane answers. You create smoke screens and try to divert the argument from your very questionable logic with errors of omission and taking statements out of context. The Court does not accept a 200-meter measurement from MSL. What the Court does accept is a 200-meter measurement from Construction Control Line (or the Borderline of Restricted Construction as you like to call it or the Construction Control Boundary as the SC calls it) per the annexed map. As the Dept. of Engineering report explained no measurement was made from the construction control boundary. Nobody took boat or a 100-meter swim to sea to mark the CCL. Measuring 100 meters landward from the MSL is equivalent to measuring 200 meters from the CCL. I hope you understand the difference, most people do. Please do not infer that the Court supports your 200-meter measurement from MSL or CCL=MSL because it doesn't. I view your most recent posts as those of diversion and desperation.

Well Thaibob, it really is time you stopped digging, your theory is making less sense the more you write about it.

1.By your own admission , nobody is going to take a boat out into the sea to make 200m measurements from an inacessible "construction control line",or mark it, why? , because it isnt out there.

The accessible ,issue 9 defined measuring point is MSL.

You are trying to imply that issue 9 states to measure 100m landward from MSL, It does not.

It explicitly states to measure 200m, so to comply with the regulation you have to measure 200m, not a fabricated 100m to suit your case.

The issue 9 says "to measure 200m from CCl", it does not say "to measure 200m from CCL, or 100m from MSL if you dont fancy taking a boat out to the boundary!!".

2.Your comment that there are 3 different descriptions out there for the seaward side of the restricted construction area are beyond belief.

That the Rayong court calls it the "Construction control line",

That stopvt7 call it the "Borderline of restricted construction"

That the SC calls it the "Construction control boundary"

As you can see the Rayong and SC are at odds with this.

It is interesting the SC do not use the word "line", but "boundary".

3.By your reckoning the map locates the CCL 100m out to sea from MSL, because of the arrow.However you do not recognise the CCL is there because you dont want to go there and measure 200m from it .

If you are saying it is there , you have to recognise it is there and get out there and measure from it.

You are then using issue 9 to measure 200m from there landward .

Therefore the distance you have measured in this process is 300m, where in issue 9 does it say to measure for 300m ?.

The next time you come to Jomtien, Thai Bob, I suggest you hire a rowboat and some surveying equipment. You can have Jpm76 stand on the beach with a measuring stick while you use your trusty map to row out to the end of the arrow. Jpm76 will plant the rod firmly at the foot of VT7.

Then, standing in the boat, you can do a sighting. The boat may bob up and down a bit, but, no problem. It may drift in and out with the waves, but, hey, what's a few meters here and there. It may turn around so that you find yourself sighting Ko Larn -- but maybe View Talay will build a cereal box there one day.

Yes, indeed. Of course one would place a surveying line out in the middle of the water. Just the place to make an accurate measurement when you're deciding to issue a building permit.

Hey, I think your rowboat has sprung a leak!

[Gary A]

Has anyone actually taken a measurement? It certainly doesn't take a rocket scientist to drive a stake at high tide and another at low tide. Half the distance between the stakes would be very near mean sea level. Before I spent any money at all fighting VT7, I'd want to know what that physical measurement is.

[lookat]

The Supreme Administrative Court opinion is the only one that counts!

The Supreme Administrative Court said: “ Nevertheless, where No. 3 (8) under the Ministerial Regulation No. 8 (B.E. 2519) issued by the virtue of the Building Control Act B.E. 2479 amended by the Ministerial Regulation No. 9 (B.E. 2521) issued by the virtue of the Building Control Act B.E. 2479 prescribed that the 200 meter line measured from the construction control line shown in the map annexed to the Royal Decree promulgating the Building Control Act B.E. 2479 governing Tambol Bang Lamung, Tambol Nhong Plalai, Tambol Na Klue and Tambol Nhong Prue of Ampur Bang Lamung Chonburi Province B.E. 2521 on the seaside shall be restricted from constructing of any building exceeding 14 meter high from road surface.”

The Supreme Administrative Court opinion the only one that counts!

[stopvt7]

Has anyone actually taken a measurement? It certainly doesn't take a rocket scientist to drive a stake at high tide and another at low tide. Half the distance between the stakes would be very near mean sea level. Before I spent any money at all fighting VT7, I'd want to know what that physical measurement is.

VT7 is about 102 or 103 meter far from MSL depending on which side to the building.

[Gary A]

Google Earth has apparently updated their maps. They now show the VT 7 construction. If you use the ruler, it is no more than 100 meters from the shore line. If there is any justice they will be tearing that building down.

[ThaiBob]

Well Thaibob, it really is time you stopped digging, your theory is making less sense the more you write about it.

1.By your own admission , nobody is going to take a boat out into the sea to make 200m measurements from an inacessible "construction control line",or mark it, why? , because it isnt out there.

The accessible ,issue 9 defined measuring point is MSL.

You are trying to imply that issue 9 states to measure 100m landward from MSL, It does not.

It explicitly states to measure 200m, so to comply with the regulation you have to measure 200m, not a fabricated 100m to suit your case.

The issue 9 says "to measure 200m from CCl", it does not say "to measure 200m from CCL, or 100m from MSL if you dont fancy taking a boat out to the boundary!!".

2.Your comment that there are 3 different descriptions out there for the seaward side of the restricted construction area are beyond belief.

That the Rayong court calls it the "Construction control line",

That stopvt7 call it the "Borderline of restricted construction"

That the SC calls it the "Construction control boundary"

As you can see the Rayong and SC are at odds with this.

It is interesting the SC do not use the word "line", but "boundary".

3.By your reckoning the map locates the CCL 100m out to sea from MSL, because of the arrow.However you do not recognise the CCL is there because you dont want to go there and measure 200m from it .

If you are saying it is there , you have to recognise it is there and get out there and measure from it.

You are then using issue 9 to measure 200m from there landward .

Therefore the distance you have measured in this process is 300m, where in issue 9 does it say to measure for 300m ?.

1. Wiresok, you continually like to personalize this. This is not my theory it is the Court's record. I have no theory. No measurement has been fabricated. The Court ordered Dept. of Engineering surveyor's knew that 200 / 2 = 100. Apparently some farangs here don't. Hey but if you or stopVT7 want to hire a boat or go for swim and find the CCL and then measure 200 meters landward again I say “go for it”! The Thais are smarter than some farangs and took the equivalent approach and measured 100 meters from MSL. Exactly the same result! Remember now, 200 / 2 = 100.

2. I can see you are continually struggling with stopVT7's unofficial translations. I suggest you discuss them with him. I doubt though he would know that "boundary" and "borderline" are synonyms.

3. It is not my "reckoning" but the Court's "reckoning" not because of the arrows but because of the Issue 9 map which shows both the CCL and MSL. The Court recognizes the CCL "is there" because they can read the map and do NOT have to physically measure from it because they can do simple math (200/2=100).

300 meters? Huh? The Court only wants to measure 200 meters landward from the CCL as shown on the map (equivalent to 100 meters from MSL!!!) Really not clear how stopVT7 wants to measure. He says to measure 200 meters from the MSL but sometimes then neglects the CCL on the map. If he includes the CCL as shown on the map then HIS measurement is a total of 300 meters. Now that makes sense?

[ThaiBob]

The Supreme Administrative Court opinion is the only one that counts!

The Supreme Administrative Court said: “ Nevertheless, where No. 3 (8) under the Ministerial Regulation No. 8 (B.E. 2519) issued by the virtue of the Building Control Act B.E. 2479 amended by the Ministerial Regulation No. 9 (B.E. 2521) issued by the virtue of the Building Control Act B.E. 2479 prescribed that the 200 meter line measured from the construction control line shown in the map annexed to the Royal Decree promulgating the Building Control Act B.E. 2479 governing Tambol Bang Lamung, Tambol Nhong Plalai, Tambol Na Klue and Tambol Nhong Prue of Ampur Bang Lamung Chonburi Province B.E. 2521 on the seaside shall be restricted from constructing of any building exceeding 14 meter high from road surface.”

The Supreme Administrative Court opinion the only one that counts!

Thank you stopVT7 for enlightening us!!!

[ThaiBob]

......

The next time you come to Jomtien, Thai Bob, I suggest you hire a rowboat and some surveying equipment. You can have Jpm76 stand on the beach with a measuring stick while you use your trusty map to row out to the end of the arrow. Jpm76 will plant the rod firmly at the foot of VT7.

Then, standing in the boat, you can do a sighting. The boat may bob up and down a bit, but, no problem. It may drift in and out with the waves, but, hey, what's a few meters here and there. It may turn around so that you find yourself sighting Ko Larn -- but maybe View Talay will build a cereal box there one day.

Yes, indeed. Of course one would place a surveying line out in the middle of the water. Just the place to make an accurate measurement when you're deciding to issue a building permit.

Hey, I think your rowboat has sprung a leak!

Hey Prospero an excellent suggestion but we will need some help. So I am going to ask for your help. I will ask that you stand at the MSL (low tide of course) as our reference point. Of course the Thais on the beach will be asking what those dumb farangs are doing now. After we explain, they will ask "Why did ThaiBob spend a lot of baht to rent a boat? You farang “Think too much"; all you had to do to was measure from Prospero to JPM76 because Same-same". Of course, we'll look at each other red-faced, "Now why we didn't think of that"!!

Note: In reality Prospero I will have to take a rain-check since I will be back here in America actively involved in the election of Barack Obama as our next President.

[ThaiBob]

Google Earth has apparently updated their maps. They now show the VT 7 construction. If you use the ruler, it is no more than 100 meters from the shore line. If there is any justice they will be tearing that building down.

Thanks for the tip about the Google update. I also updated their software and it is great.

Yes, when you do quick eye-ball VT7 looks close to the seashore but as stopVT7 has pointed out it is slightly over 100 meters from the MSL as determined by the Court ordered survey and 200 meters from CCL as also noted by the Court. I made a simple drawing that illustrates the Court determination of the measurement and the stopVT7 argument.

Edited August 13, 2008 by ThaiBob

[stopvt7]

You missed some facts!

Reread "Ministerial Regulation Issue 9: 3. "To specify the area within the 200 meters measurement from the construction control line see the map. Annexed to the Royal Decree.......................in the regions of ........................at the seaside in which the following constructions shall not be built:"

The records shows measure from construction control line see the map.........at the seaside! On the map it located at MSL. MSL=CCL

Edited August 13, 2008 by stopvt7

[ThaiBob]

You missed some facts!

This why is I posted the drawing so that readers can get a clear, fair, unbiased representation of both sides (your’s Vs the Court's) and not be bombarded by with propaganda or your "facts". And note that I did indicate your claim that MSL = CCL.

[prospero]

......

The next time you come to Jomtien, Thai Bob, I suggest you hire a rowboat and some surveying equipment. You can have Jpm76 stand on the beach with a measuring stick while you use your trusty map to row out to the end of the arrow. Jpm76 will plant the rod firmly at the foot of VT7.

Then, standing in the boat, you can do a sighting. The boat may bob up and down a bit, but, no problem. It may drift in and out with the waves, but, hey, what's a few meters here and there. It may turn around so that you find yourself sighting Ko Larn -- but maybe View Talay will build a cereal box there one day.

Yes, indeed. Of course one would place a surveying line out in the middle of the water. Just the place to make an accurate measurement when you're deciding to issue a building permit.

Hey, I think your rowboat has sprung a leak!

Hey Prospero an excellent suggestion but we will need some help. So I am going to ask for your help. I will ask that you stand at the MSL (low tide of course) as our reference point. Of course the Thais on the beach will be asking what those dumb farangs are doing now. After we explain, they will ask "Why did ThaiBob spend a lot of baht to rent a boat? You farang "Think too much"; all you had to do to was measure from Prospero to JPM76 because Same-same". Of course, we'll look at each other red-faced, "Now why we didn't think of that"!!

Note: In reality Prospero I will have to take a rain-check since I will be back here in America actively involved in the election of Barack Obama as our next President.

Thanks very much for your enlightened suggestion, Thai Bob, but that leaves us with the questions: "What is that arrow doing on the map?" and, "Why not just say 100 meters from MSL. Why say 100 meters out and 100 meters in?" and "What are they doing banning gas stations from being built over the water?" Etcetera.

I am glad you are remaining in the United States to work for Barack, although you could come to Pattaya and join our local chapter of Democrats Abroad. As I'm sure you know, Americans overseas can vote if they are registered, and that is not difficult to do. Just go to votefromabroad.org.

One of the reasons I have been a life-long Democrat is because it is the party most likely to protect our environment from rapacious developers. At this very moment, Nancy Pelosi (you've heard of her) is leading the fight to block oil drilling off the east and west coasts. Democrats are far likelier to protect and preserve beachfront, wilderness, and even the urban environment from destruction, environmental damage, and uglification. I find it telling that you are actively involved in supporting the Democrats in the United States, while you are actively invloved in backing a developer here in Jomtien that only a Republican could love.

[stopvt7]

You missed some facts!

This why is I posted the drawing so that readers can get a clear, fair, unbiased representation of both sides (your's Vs the Court's) and not be bombarded by with propaganda or your "facts". And note that I did indicate your claim that MSL = CCL.

Dear ThaiBob / OhdLover

Your drawing added a lot of words to a clear well written regulation called Issue 9.

1. Such as measure into the sea 100 meters.

2 divide the 200 meter measurement in half and apply 100 meters on each side on MSL

3 Measure fom MSL to the “Borderline of the Construction Control Area” (the regulated area map outline) before you measure onto the land.

4. Thaibob is not measuring from MSL but he measures across it?

Pleases show me where you get this information? It is not in the regulation or on the map?

Or are you like city hall lawyer? When asked, said the arrow from the sea pointing toward the land on the map means you measure from MSL into the sea 100 meters. When asked in court where is this explained? He said “I just know!”

Please keep to the FACTS! Maybe this picture will help you understand the facts!!

[ThaiBob]

....

Thanks very much for your enlightened suggestion, Thai Bob, but that leaves us with the questions: "What is that arrow doing on the map?" and, "Why not just say 100 meters from MSL. Why say 100 meters out and 100 meters in?" and "What are they doing banning gas stations from being built over the water?" Etcetera.

I am glad you are remaining in the United States to work for Barack, although you could come to Pattaya and join our local chapter of Democrats Abroad. As I'm sure you know, Americans overseas can vote if they are registered, and that is not difficult to do. Just go to votefromabroad.org.

One of the reasons I have been a life-long Democrat is because it is the party most likely to protect our environment from rapacious developers. At this very moment, Nancy Pelosi (you've heard of her) is leading the fight to block oil drilling off the east and west coasts. Democrats are far likelier to protect and preserve beachfront, wilderness, and even the urban environment from destruction, environmental damage, and uglification. I find it telling that you are actively involved in supporting the Democrats in the United States, while you are actively invloved in backing a developer here in Jomtien that only a Republican could love.

The arrows indicate the distance between the MSL and CCL (or stopVT7's Borderline of Restricted Construction)

It's 200 meters in from the CCL but remember we got smart and followed the Thai's suggestion and measured 100 in from the MSL. Don't you remember? The Thai’s were smiling and saying, "See, Same-same" and thinking "maybe farang not so dumb after all"

StopVT7's old lawyer (maybe his new one too) could probably answer this question (gas stations). But gasoline/oil was stored at the Naklua market over the water. A little imagination, and envision oil spills both minor and potentially major into the water.

I have volunteered to drive seniors, people with no cars, etc., to the polls on Election Day. I think I can have more impact here (in America) than in Pattaya at this time but please continue your efforts to defeat McBush there in Pattaya. Democrats are changing their views on offshore drilling unfortunately (about 50-50). Sorry I just don't see stopVT7 as a defender of Thailand's beaches and an environmental crusader but a defender of his personal sea views. However, let's not get off-track and bore other posters with American politics, but Good Luck with Democrats Abroad!

[ThaiBob]

You missed some facts!

This why is I posted the drawing so that readers can get a clear, fair, unbiased representation of both sides (your's Vs the Court's) and not be bombarded by with propaganda or your "facts". And note that I did indicate your claim that MSL = CCL.

Dear ThaiBob / OhdLover

Your drawing added a lot of words to a clear well written regulation called Issue 9.

1. Such as measure into the sea 100 meters.

2 divide the 200 meter measurement in half and apply 100 meters on each side on MSL

3 Measure fom MSL to the “Borderline of the Construction Control Area” (the regulated area map outline) before you measure onto the land.

4. Thaibob is not measuring from MSL but he measures across it?

Pleases show me where you get this information? It is not in the regulation or on the map?

Or are you like city hall lawyer? When asked, said the arrow from the sea pointing toward the land on the map means you measure from MSL into the sea 100 meters. When asked in court where is this explained? He said “I just know!”

Please keep to the FACTS! Maybe this picture will help you understand the facts!!

A guess the simple drawing got you confused or perhaps it wasn't clear. The left side represents the Court's position and right side is yours. If I graphically misstated our arguments please let me know and I will correct it. I did include your "good logic" or "facts" that the CCL and MSL are the same but I excluded any editorial comment such as "nowhere does Issue 9 say that MSL = CCL". Better yet let's try a map (attached), maybe it's easier to understand.

1. Per the Court, that's where the CCL is located.

2. That was the surveyor's methodology. I am sure you know better though. You are talented and wear many hats. Amateur lawyer and now amateur surveyor.

3. OMG!!! (Yes, stopVT7 there is dog) Wiresok, looks like stopVT7 fired his old translator and got a new one. Now you have another translation to sort out.

4. ThaiBob isn't measuring anything but the Court accepted a 200-meter from CCL across the MSL.

"Please keep to the FACTS!" Yes, please do. MSL does not equal CCL.

Edited August 14, 2008 by ThaiBob

[Gary A]

So that means that Someone can build a 14 meter high structure actually in the water. Anyway you look at it, VT7 is TOO close to the water.

[CRUNCHER]

So that means that Someone can build a 14 meter high structure actually in the water. Anyway you look at it, VT7 is TOO close to the water.

Is someone builds a 14 metre structure on land it is 14 metres above the road surface. But what if someone builds a 14 metre structure in the sea? Is that 14 metres above the sea bed or 14 metres above the sea surface? If the latter does the building have to rise and fall with the tide?

Can there have seriously have been any attempt to legislate for buildings in the sea if this sort of thing is not covered?

[prospero]

....

Thanks very much for your enlightened suggestion, Thai Bob, but that leaves us with the questions: "What is that arrow doing on the map?" and, "Why not just say 100 meters from MSL. Why say 100 meters out and 100 meters in?" and "What are they doing banning gas stations from being built over the water?" Etcetera.

I am glad you are remaining in the United States to work for Barack, although you could come to Pattaya and join our local chapter of Democrats Abroad. As I'm sure you know, Americans overseas can vote if they are registered, and that is not difficult to do. Just go to votefromabroad.org.

One of the reasons I have been a life-long Democrat is because it is the party most likely to protect our environment from rapacious developers. At this very moment, Nancy Pelosi (you've heard of her) is leading the fight to block oil drilling off the east and west coasts. Democrats are far likelier to protect and preserve beachfront, wilderness, and even the urban environment from destruction, environmental damage, and uglification. I find it telling that you are actively involved in supporting the Democrats in the United States, while you are actively invloved in backing a developer here in Jomtien that only a Republican could love.

The arrows indicate the distance between the MSL and CCL (or stopVT7's Borderline of Restricted Construction)

It's 200 meters in from the CCL but remember we got smart and followed the Thai's suggestion and measured 100 in from the MSL. Don't you remember? The Thai's were smiling and saying, "See, Same-same" and thinking "maybe farang not so dumb after all"

StopVT7's old lawyer (maybe his new one too) could probably answer this question (gas stations). But gasoline/oil was stored at the Naklua market over the water. A little imagination, and envision oil spills both minor and potentially major into the water.

I have volunteered to drive seniors, people with no cars, etc., to the polls on Election Day. I think I can have more impact here (in America) than in Pattaya at this time but please continue your efforts to defeat McBush there in Pattaya. Democrats are changing their views on offshore drilling unfortunately (about 50-50). Sorry I just don't see stopVT7 as a defender of Thailand's beaches and an environmental crusader but a defender of his personal sea views. However, let's not get off-track and bore other posters with American politics, but Good Luck with Democrats Abroad!

Thanks for the salute to Democrats Abroad. I also salute you and your work for Barack.

I do think the issue of public benefit is an important one, though, not only in the United States, but also here in Thailand.

Many residents of coastal cities on the east and west coasts are opposed to offshore drilling, not just because it might harm the environment, but because it will threaten the value of their property. A huge oil spill of the coast of, say, California, would result in ruined views and decreased land values. So people who live in those areas, like you, are fighting not only for the environment, but for their quality of life and bank accounts. This is why oil companies cannot get permission to drill of the coast of, let's say, Oakland or San Francisco, and why members of congress like, say, Nancy Pelosi, will fight to the death against Shell and Exxon.

The oil companies have investors, just like View Talay 7 has investors. They want their profits, the coast be damned.

If a developer in California wanted to erect a huge, ugly building in the middle of a settled community, blocking views and bringing added density to what had been a pleasant residential area, all hel_l would break loose! Residents, perhaps people like you would be storming city hall and litigating to the high heavens! Why? "To preserve and protect the quality of life" -- or, to put it another way, to make sure my investment does not depreciate and I still live in a nice neighborhood.

So enough of the hypocrisy. Of course VT7 wants to protect his views and investment. That means posing a legal challenge to overdevelopment, on and off shore. If he wins the case, he benefits, and the environment benefits: a win-win situation, except for the developer. That is exactly what you and Nancy Pelosi are trying to do for the State of California.

It's telling that you will fight for the California coast, but are indifferent to the one in Jomtien.

[Wiresok]

Well Thaibob, it really is time you stopped digging, your theory is making less sense the more you write about it.

1.By your own admission , nobody is going to take a boat out into the sea to make 200m measurements from an inacessible "construction control line",or mark it, why? , because it isnt out there.

The accessible ,issue 9 defined measuring point is MSL.

You are trying to imply that issue 9 states to measure 100m landward from MSL, It does not.

It explicitly states to measure 200m, so to comply with the regulation you have to measure 200m, not a fabricated 100m to suit your case.

The issue 9 says "to measure 200m from CCl", it does not say "to measure 200m from CCL, or 100m from MSL if you dont fancy taking a boat out to the boundary!!".

2.Your comment that there are 3 different descriptions out there for the seaward side of the restricted construction area are beyond belief.

That the Rayong court calls it the "Construction control line",

That stopvt7 call it the "Borderline of restricted construction"

That the SC calls it the "Construction control boundary"

As you can see the Rayong and SC are at odds with this.

It is interesting the SC do not use the word "line", but "boundary".

3.By your reckoning the map locates the CCL 100m out to sea from MSL, because of the arrow.However you do not recognise the CCL is there because you dont want to go there and measure 200m from it .

If you are saying it is there , you have to recognise it is there and get out there and measure from it.

You are then using issue 9 to measure 200m from there landward .

Therefore the distance you have measured in this process is 300m, where in issue 9 does it say to measure for 300m ?.

1. Wiresok, you continually like to personalize this. This is not my theory it is the Court's record. I have no theory. No measurement has been fabricated. The Court ordered Dept. of Engineering surveyor's knew that 200 / 2 = 100. Apparently some farangs here don't. Hey but if you or stopVT7 want to hire a boat or go for swim and find the CCL and then measure 200 meters landward again I say "go for it"! The Thais are smarter than some farangs and took the equivalent approach and measured 100 meters from MSL. Exactly the same result! Remember now, 200 / 2 = 100.

2. I can see you are continually struggling with stopVT7's unofficial translations. I suggest you discuss them with him. I doubt though he would know that "boundary" and "borderline" are synonyms.

3. It is not my "reckoning" but the Court's "reckoning" not because of the arrows but because of the Issue 9 map which shows both the CCL and MSL. The Court recognizes the CCL "is there" because they can read the map and do NOT have to physically measure from it because they can do simple math (200/2=100).

300 meters? Huh? The Court only wants to measure 200 meters landward from the CCL as shown on the map (equivalent to 100 meters from MSL!!!) Really not clear how stopVT7 wants to measure. He says to measure 200 meters from the MSL but sometimes then neglects the CCL on the map. If he includes the CCL as shown on the map then HIS measurement is a total of 300 meters. Now that makes sense?

Thaibob, you can see that your position is diluting all the time, so now you want to be a victim.

You constantly subscribe to, support, promote, and defend, the view of vt7, city hall, and the vt7 lobby(as is your right) ,so yes you have personalised this view to you, but I don't take your comment personally.

You are insisting that the CCL is out there , so you go find it, and measure 200m from it .

While you are out there mark it all the way up the coast.

I know its not out there, so why would I want to go looking for it?

Watch out while you are out there ,stop vt's battleship is out on manouvres.

I don't struggle with translations, these descriptions are a quote of your own words above.

You have gone from the sublime to the ridiculous, but next time you visit Thailand I take it you will go from America to England, back to America, then on to Thailand, in keeping with your mixed up issue 9 theory.

[Wiresok]

......

The next time you come to Jomtien, Thai Bob, I suggest you hire a rowboat and some surveying equipment. You can have Jpm76 stand on the beach with a measuring stick while you use your trusty map to row out to the end of the arrow. Jpm76 will plant the rod firmly at the foot of VT7.

Then, standing in the boat, you can do a sighting. The boat may bob up and down a bit, but, no problem. It may drift in and out with the waves, but, hey, what's a few meters here and there. It may turn around so that you find yourself sighting Ko Larn -- but maybe View Talay will build a cereal box there one day.

Yes, indeed. Of course one would place a surveying line out in the middle of the water. Just the place to make an accurate measurement when you're deciding to issue a building permit.

Hey, I think your rowboat has sprung a leak!

Hey Prospero an excellent suggestion but we will need some help. So I am going to ask for your help. I will ask that you stand at the MSL (low tide of course) as our reference point. Of course the Thais on the beach will be asking what those dumb farangs are doing now. After we explain, they will ask "Why did ThaiBob spend a lot of baht to rent a boat? You farang "Think too much"; all you had to do to was measure from Prospero to JPM76 because Same-same". Of course, we'll look at each other red-faced, "Now why we didn't think of that"!!

Note: In reality Prospero I will have to take a rain-check since I will be back here in America actively involved in the election of Barack Obama as our next President.

Thanks very much for your enlightened suggestion, Thai Bob, but that leaves us with the questions: "What is that arrow doing on the map?" and, "Why not just say 100 meters from MSL. Why say 100 meters out and 100 meters in?" and "What are they doing banning gas stations from being built over the water?" Etcetera.

I am glad you are remaining in the United States to work for Barack, although you could come to Pattaya and join our local chapter of Democrats Abroad. As I'm sure you know, Americans overseas can vote if they are registered, and that is not difficult to do. Just go to votefromabroad.org.

One of the reasons I have been a life-long Democrat is because it is the party most likely to protect our environment from rapacious developers. At this very moment, Nancy Pelosi (you've heard of her) is leading the fight to block oil drilling off the east and west coasts. Democrats are far likelier to protect and preserve beachfront, wilderness, and even the urban environment from destruction, environmental damage, and uglification. I find it telling that you are actively involved in supporting the Democrats in the United States, while you are actively invloved in backing a developer here in Jomtien that only a Republican could love.

I agree Prospero, 100m from MSL would have been the obvious wording, for anybody.

CCL out to sea 100m from MSL is totally implausible and impractical.

[stopvt7]

To ThaiBob

The Court or survey report never call the borderline area100 meter from MSL into the sea the Construction Control Line “CCL”. They call it area for construction restriction or building control area.

So please change you picture explanation!

Thaibob are you working for Barack? If so you pick a another looser to believe!

[OhdLover]

Well well.... the repeating continues....

I will just state that everything ThaiBob states is so clear and evident, that it's almost hilarious how stopvt7 and others try to change blue into yellow. Facts are facts, no matter what side you approach them. You can post the same map 6 million times, flip, rotate, enlarge it, but unless you blurr it, it doesn't change the map.

I guess stopvt7 is in a state of mind that is not accessible to logic.

[ThaiBob]

To ThaiBob

The Court or survey report never call the borderline area100 meter from MSL into the sea the Construction Control Line “CCL”. They call it area for construction restriction or building control area.

So please change you picture explanation!

Thaibob are you working for Barack? If so you pick a another looser to believe!

Yes, stopVT7 I am working for Barack and I say that proudly. You are obviously on the other side also politically but for some reason I am not surprised. Your logic as shown on this thread makes about as much sense with the McBush logic to invade and occupy Iraq. I apologize to posters from other countries what McBush has done to the world and hopefully the ship will be righted this November. But to get back on track, the map is not propaganda for either side but a fair representation. As I suggested to Wiresok I would not get hung up on exact English translations of Thai technical language. But the Court did say,

"While measured from this point outward to sea at the distance of 100 meter, it shall be the construction control area as shown in the map annexed to aforesaid Royal Decree. And while measured from this point toward the land to reach the building by another 100 meter, it shall be the distance from construction control area of 200 meter referred in Article 3 under the Ministerial Regulation No. 8 (B.E. 2519) amended by the Ministerial Regulation No. 9 (B.E. 2521) which restricts the construction of building over 14 meter from road surface. Measurement showed that the building of the Second Prosecuted Person is over 200 meter construction control line."

[Wiresok]

Google Earth has apparently updated their maps. They now show the VT 7 construction. If you use the ruler, it is no more than 100 meters from the shore line. If there is any justice they will be tearing that building down.

You can starkly see how vt7 is built closer to the sea than previously issue 8 allowed.

These images from google really put things into perspective, and clearly illustrate why the Bangkok Supreme Administrative Court have indicated its decision will be based on what's best in the public interest.

Can anybody see any structures 100m out there in the sea ?

[ThaiBob]

[...

Thaibob, you can see that your position is diluting all the time, so now you want to be a victim.

You constantly subscribe to, support, promote, and defend, the view of vt7, city hall, and the vt7 lobby(as is your right) ,so yes you have personalised this view to you, but I don't take your comment personally.

You are insisting that the CCL is out there , so you go find it, and measure 200m from it .

While you are out there mark it all the way up the coast.

I know its not out there, so why would I want to go looking for it?

Watch out while you are out there ,stop vt's battleship is out on manouvres.

I don't struggle with translations, these descriptions are a quote of your own words above.

You have gone from the sublime to the ridiculous, but next time you visit Thailand I take it you will go from America to England, back to America, then on to Thailand, in keeping with your mixed up issue 9 theory.

I am not insisting on anything or have to find and measure anything. The Dept of Engineering did just that and reported to the Court which then wrote:

"While measured from this point outward to sea at the distance of 100 meter, it shall be the construction control area as shown in the map annexed to aforesaid Royal Decree. And while measured from this point toward the land to reach the building by another 100 meter, it shall be the distance from construction control area of 200 meter referred in Article 3 under the Ministerial Regulation No. 8 (B.E. 2519) amended by the Ministerial Regulation No. 9 (B.E. 2521) which restricts the construction of building over 14 meter from road surface. Measurement showed that the building of the Second Prosecuted Person is over 200 meter construction control line."

"I don't struggle with translations, these descriptions are a quote of your own words above." Yes, the quote is mine above but the source of all translations is stopVT7. So, these are his words; please resolve your description issues with him.

Edited August 14, 2008 by ThaiBob

[ThaiBob]

....

You can starkly see how vt7 is built closer to the sea than previously issue 8 allowed.

These images from google really put things into perspective, and clearly illustrate why the Bangkok Supreme Administrative Court have indicated its decision will be based on what's best in the public interest.

Can anybody see any structures 100m out there in the sea ?

Yes, images do put things into perspective. Note that if stopVT7 had his way Jom Tien Plaza (see image; highrise at bottom)would not be built today so as to protect stopVT7's view. (I am sure that would make JT Plaza owners happy to hear) There are more images available illustrating this and stopVT7's "good logic".

"Can anybody see any structures 100m out there in the sea ?" No I can't, can you? Thank God for Issue 9!!!!

[stopvt7]

ThaiBob The statement "200 meter construction control line" is on the land. Because the 200 meters is measure from the construction control area onto the land the CCL is on the Land. !

Read the January 16, 2008 Rayong Court Order: "The Department of Civil Engineer and City Planning followed the Court's order and submitted its report which can be summarized that: Measurement must be started from the point of MSL having 0.00 meter. While measured from this point (MSL) outward to sea at the distance of 100 meter, it shall be the construction control area ..................................... And while measured from this point (MSL) toward the land to reach the building by another 100 meter, it shall be the distance from construction control area of 200 meter referred in Article 3 under the Ministerial Regulation 8 (B.E. 2519) amended by the Ministerial Regulation No. 9 (B.E. 2521) which restricts the construction of building over 14 meter from road surface. Measurement showed that the building of the Second Prosecuted Person is over 200 meter construction control line"

This line (CCL) must be on the land?

Or we could say the Judges are confused? Like Americans who support either Obama or McCain!!

I'm a conservative and I do not vote for socialist or liberals!

Edited August 15, 2008 by stopvt7

[ThaiBob]

ThaiBob The statement "200 meter construction control line" is on the land. Because the 200 meters is measure from the construction control area onto the land the CCL is on the Land. !

Read the January 16, 2008 Rayong Court Order: "The Department of Civil Engineer and City Planning followed the Court's order and submitted its report which can be summarized that: Measurement must be started from the point of MSL having 0.00 meter. While measured from this point (MSL) outward to sea at the distance of 100 meter, it shall be the construction control area ..................................... And while measured from this point (MSL) toward the land to reach the building by another 100 meter, it shall be the distance from construction control area of 200 meter referred in Article 3 under the Ministerial Regulation 8 (B.E. 2519) amended by the Ministerial Regulation No. 9 (B.E. 2521) which restricts the construction of building over 14 meter from road surface. Measurement showed that the building of the Second Prosecuted Person is over 200 meter construction control line"

This line (CCL) must be on the land?

Or we could say the Judges are confused? Like Americans who support either Obama or McCain!!

I'm a conservative and I do not vote for socialist or liberals!

The City of Pattaya lawyers were confused, the surveyors were confused, the expert witness was confused, and now the judges are confused. Everybody is confused except you. Many here are just tired of your nonsense. Go find a qualified registered Thai engineer that will support your arguments that CCL = MSL and that you measure 200 meters from MSL. Get him or her to sign a sworn affidavit to be presented to the Court and be subjected to cross-examination. Feel free to post the results here and then we will take your arguments seriously. No more propaganda, no more out of context quotes, or your lawyer’s opinions. Your gun is firing blanks.

There is no confusion on my part in my support for Barack. A man who work to will unify our fragmented country (America) both at home and abroad, and bring us hope and prosperity in these difficult times. You on the other hand have a more difficult choice since McCain isn't conservative enough for you but I am sure you will succumb to the Republican Party line and smear tactics.