Jomtien Condo Owners Sue For Sea View

[prospero]

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.

The VT7 developer did to Jomtien and to Jomtien Complex what Bush did to Iraq.

[stopvt7]

ThaiBob

What you call the CCL in the sea on your picture, on the Issue 9 map, is calls "Borderline of the Construction Control Area"! You are Wrong!!

The Supreme Administrative Court was right when they wrote: "Ministerial Regulation No. 9prescribed that the 200 meter line measured from the construction control line shown in the map .....................on the seaside (at MSL) ......................... shall be restricted from constructing of any building exceeding 14 meter high from road surface. Therefore, if the Construction Permit No. 162/2007 dated 28 November 2006 granted by the Defendant No. 1 to the Defendant No. 2 should appear to be unlawful against the Ministerial Regulation thereto as being claimed by the ten plaintiffs, the Court of First Instance should have sentenced this point of being unlawful, i.e. the judgment shall be focused on the permission of construction the building exceeding height limit by the Defendant No. 2. Whilst the Administrative Court of First Instance ordered the provisional measure to cease construction before judgment, the building's base rocks were built, the construction did not reach the height limit of 14 meter above the road surface. Where the Administrative Court of First Instance issued the order of provisional measure to effect temporary protection by ceasing the entire construction is, therefore, in excess of what reasonable under the circumstances.

The Supreme Court, therefore, gives an order to amend the order of the Administrative Court of First Instance. That the Defendant No. 2 shall cease the construction performed, under the Work Permit No. 162/2007 dated 28 November 2007, on the part exceeding 14 meter height. On a temporary basis until the Court has ordered otherwise.

Mr. Vorapoj Visarutpich

Judge of Supreme Administrative Court"

The Supreme Administrative Court will decide!

PS: foget the party talk!

Edited August 15, 2008 by stopvt7

[stopvt7]

You need to measure into the sea?

ThaiBob, further back a other 100 meters to CCL!

Edited August 15, 2008 by stopvt7

[Gary A]

I'm not confused. Make any lines you want and call them anything you want. Lawyers are very happy to confuse things as much as possible. The point is that mean sea level is a simple thing. For those of you who like to confuse things, mean sea level is the mid point of high tide and low tide. I have no dog in this fight but I would like to see developers follow the rules of law and it is obvious to me that VT 7 has been caught severely bending these rules.

[Wiresok]

....

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!!!!

Thaibob, are you going to superimpose the vt7 building on the map, in the position it would have to be in under issue 8.

ie 100m landward from hightide.

Your map would then be of some use.

[Wiresok]

Seeing as we are on the topic of distances and measurements, I would be interested to learn the technical aspects of the measurements required and undertaken here.

Issue talks of 200m distances , but measured in what context,

Perpendicular to the vt7 building in air?

Parrallel with sea level in air

Along the ground?

As you will appreciate depending upon which technique you employ, you will get a different measurement.

This leads to further questions,

Which technique does issue 9 state to employ?

Which technique did the Dept of Engineering surveyors employ

We all know that the Dept of Engineering did not comply with the court order to measure 200m from a point 100m further out to sea than MSL.

Any error embodied in a 100m measurement is doubled in a 200m measurement.

[SmartFarang]

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.

Yes, and if that is true then one can expect further outcomes, including land-fill along sea-shore resulting in a strip of new development in front of existing "beach-front" condos all along Chonburi beaches.

Thus, now that the Thais have derived billions of Baht from (mostly) foreigners for overpriced beach-front condos they are looking for more ways to milk the farang-cash-cow. Beach-front land has become prohibitively expensive, so that to purchase land, build, and make a billion or so profit is now impossible as the condos would be prohibitively priced, especially in a slowing world economy whilst cost of raw materials for construction are rising.

So we have Step 2 in their Master Plan. Fill and develop new land, much cheaper than buying existing land.

Am I paranoid? Fanciful? Maybe. Maybe not.

Edited August 15, 2008 by SmartFarang

[OhdLover]

Even when stopvt7 wants to fight the facts ThaiBob brings, he just confirms them.

Why isn't anybody capable of READING???

ThaiBob, I admire your continious replies to this obvious very confused or desperate man.

I would have given up longtime already.

To me it's clear that you and some others like jpm are presenting the right facts, and stopvt7 is trying to safe his face

by continuously mixing up facts with thoughts.

And if it's clear to me, it will be even clearer to a judge, who studied to separate facts from thoughts.

We will miss stopvt7 though, once he is forced to leave Thailand.

I cannot believe Thai authorities accept farangs, who accuse them of corruption and many other things, to stay as a guest in their country for another minute, once the final judgement is there.

Good thing for him he will still have that little guy that makes him laugh......

Edited August 15, 2008 by OhdLover

[Wiresok]

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.

Hi Thaibob, guess what, I'm a qualified, registered Engineer, will I do!!

Anyway, you don't need one for this, just go read issue 9 words, very straightforward.

Nor do you need one to see the nonsense you and your pro-vt7 lobby distribute about :-

prohibiting certain buildings, (but not all) , 100m out to sea;

or allowing buildings closer to the sea on issue 9 than issue 8,

or taking critical, legal measurements from a "ghost" position you cannot locate ,out in the sea,

or undertaking a measurement process of 300m when the issue 9 says 200m,

or measuring 100m from MSL was what the court ordered,when it ordered a 200m measurement from your "ghost" CCL position , that you insist is there to measure from, but when challenged to do so,could not comply with the stated issue 9 requirement.

As for the election I do feel you missed your chance with Hilary.

[surfer]

Attached is an image of Obama body surfing, he looks like he's done this before. To be where he is in this image he would have to be a man that appreciates the oceans natural beauty and therapy… leaves any $$$ spa treatment for dead by any who knows the experience of sliding down the face of a clean ocean…

Obama is loving the sea and in all its natural glory that is given to it by respectable coastal development. VT7 and everything it represents does not respect such an image in any manner at all, it's all about greed and me me me ….

Now again in Phuket…. The building setbacks from the high tide (or MSL) were only ever one way (200m, 20m for different structures) as per Stop vt7's idea of the Jomtien "setback" law. And it all makes sense to keep it that simple and give the water front some breathing space… a public and natural space!!!!

[ThaiBob]

ThaiBob

What you call the CCL in the sea on your picture, on the Issue 9 map, is calls "Borderline of the Construction Control Area"! You are Wrong!!

The Supreme Administrative Court was right when they wrote: "Ministerial Regulation No. 9prescribed that the 200 meter line measured from the construction control line shown in the map .....................on the seaside (at MSL) ......................... shall be restricted from constructing of any building exceeding 14 meter high from road surface. Therefore, if the Construction Permit No. 162/2007 dated 28 November 2006 granted by the Defendant No. 1 to the Defendant No. 2 should appear to be unlawful against the Ministerial Regulation thereto as being claimed by the ten plaintiffs, the Court of First Instance should have sentenced this point of being unlawful, i.e. the judgment shall be focused on the permission of construction the building exceeding height limit by the Defendant No. 2. Whilst the Administrative Court of First Instance ordered the provisional measure to cease construction before judgment, the building's base rocks were built, the construction did not reach the height limit of 14 meter above the road surface. Where the Administrative Court of First Instance issued the order of provisional measure to effect temporary protection by ceasing the entire construction is, therefore, in excess of what reasonable under the circumstances.

The Supreme Court, therefore, gives an order to amend the order of the Administrative Court of First Instance. That the Defendant No. 2 shall cease the construction performed, under the Work Permit No. 162/2007 dated 28 November 2007, on the part exceeding 14 meter height. On a temporary basis until the Court has ordered otherwise.

Mr. Vorapoj Visarutpich

Judge of Supreme Administrative Court"

The Supreme Administrative Court will decide!

PS: foget the party talk!

"What you call the CCL in the sea on your picture, on the Issue 9 map, is calls "Borderline of the Construction Control Area"! You are Wrong!!"

Calling are farangs, calling all farangs. I would like to introduce you to this week's definition / translation of Construction Control Line (CCL). Let's see, we have CCL, Construction Control Boundary, Borderline of restricted construction and now the latest definition and tomorrow? Note that all these translations are attributed to George Bush ..... I mean stopVT7. A real confidence builder. However, the Thais would recognize them for what they are, "Same-same".

"PS: foget the party talk!" Give me a break! You volunteered your comments and mocked my candidate, Barack (called him a Socialist), just like you mocked the "expert witness" and everybody else who happens to disagree with you. I hope you got to visit George in Bangkok before he left for China. Not even your conservative buddies Dick Cheney and Karl Rove will help you steal this next election.

"The Supreme Administrative Court will decide!" Now it all makes sense. Oh yes! the Supreme Court. However, this Supreme Court will hopefully not be stacked, manipulated, or bullied like other Supreme Courts (think election 2000). This SC knows MSL and CCL are not same which you will eventually learn.

[stopvt7]

Dear surfer

You on to something! Issue 9 was written for tourism. Tourist can appreciates the oceans natural beauty and therapy. That would of been a better reasons to sue city hall.

In your tourist picture posted, why is not Obama walking? He is called the Messiah?

Edited August 15, 2008 by stopvt7

[ThaiBob]

I'm not confused. Make any lines you want and call them anything you want. Lawyers are very happy to confuse things as much as possible. The point is that mean sea level is a simple thing. For those of you who like to confuse things, mean sea level is the mid point of high tide and low tide. I have no dog in this fight but I would like to see developers follow the rules of law and it is obvious to me that VT 7 has been caught severely bending these rules.

I have to admit I was confused by stopVT7's "facts" until I took a little time to do some independent thinking and ask myself questions. I looked at his "evidence" and it seemed reasonable so I asked why were others not convinced (especially the Court). Only when I did my own analysis did I realize there were major problems with his "facts" and these "facts" only serve his agenda. Maps and drawings work for some people but rational qualitative reasoning works easier for me.

Imagine in your mind two parallel lines called A and B. We are told these 2 lines represent a distance of 100 meters. We are also told that building or constructing within the area of these 2 lines is "restricted" or "controlled". What else can we say about these 2 lines? Well both A and B both bound or control or border the mentioned restricted or controlled area, so both lines could be boundary lines or control lines or border lines. Simple enough. Now in your mind picture the Issue 8 map with its Construction Control Line (and no MSL). Now simply superimpose your mind's image over the Issue 8 map with the CCL being line A. Presto, a restricted or controlled area, simple and clear to understand. Note that the CCL on the map (or line A in your mind) is called by stopVT7 as the CCL at "high tide" or "high water". Ok.

But now let's take it a step further. As Gary as astutely noted that MSL is not at high tide or low tide but somewhere in between. In our mind or on the map let's draw the MSL. Well although we don't have clearly defined reference points one thing we have certainly know is that by definition MSL and CCL are not the same line. I hope everyone understands this fundamental point including stopVT7. If you don't you will be confused.

How does all this apply to Issue 9? In short, Issue 9 added the concept of MSL and extended, expanded, made larger the restricted area or zone by 100 meters (from 100 to 200). We look at the new Issue 9 map and we compare it to Issue 8. We see the added MSL line and the CCL (Court’s definition) or what stopVT7 calls the Borderline of restricted constructions 100 meters seaward from the MSL.

Now let’s go back to the beginning and re-visit our image of the two lines A and B. What’s changed now is the separation represents 200 meters but we also must add another line for the MSL. Let’s call it line C and place it 100 meters from line A just like the map does. Other than adding line C (MSL) and increasing the width everything else about our image remains the same. The concept of a restricted or controlled construction area bounded by our 2 lines is all valid. Our labels or names for our lines are valid as well.

The last step simply superimposes again our mind’s image over the Issue 9 map. Guess what everything aligns perfectly. Line C = MSL; Line A = CCL or a boundary line or control line or border line or some other name you to choose to call it. Line B can be viewed as the other control line or border line or boundary all of which bounds our “restricted” or “controlled” construction zone. No surprises, no contradictions. And remember CCL and MSL are not same despite what stopVT7 tries to tell you. He (like his fellow conservative George) is so confused he does know right from left, up from down, Barrack from a Socialist, a Christian from a Muslim, Saddam Hussein from Al Qaeda, a liberal from a conservative and list could go on.

[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.

Hi Thaibob, guess what, I'm a qualified, registered Engineer, will I do!!

Anyway, you don't need one for this, just go read issue 9 words, very straightforward.

Nor do you need one to see the nonsense you and your pro-vt7 lobby distribute about :-

prohibiting certain buildings, (but not all) , 100m out to sea;

or allowing buildings closer to the sea on issue 9 than issue 8,

or taking critical, legal measurements from a "ghost" position you cannot locate ,out in the sea,

or undertaking a measurement process of 300m when the issue 9 says 200m,

or measuring 100m from MSL was what the court ordered,when it ordered a 200m measurement from your "ghost" CCL position , that you insist is there to measure from, but when challenged to do so,could not comply with the stated issue 9 requirement.

As for the election I do feel you missed your chance with Hilary.

"Hi Thaibob, guess what, I'm a qualified, registered Engineer, will I do!!" This is truly great news. With your background you can assist stopVT7 get the help he so desperately needs. Just remember your Thai qualified registered engineer (not a lawyer) must be willing to swear to tell the truth and be willing to give testimony and possibly be subject to cross-examination in Court (if called upon). A certified affidavit should do for now. I look forward to have someone explain stopVT7's argument coherently; understand the all subtleties and also your points (above) in a way that will be understood and accepted by the Court and others. I am confident stopVT7 will share his findings and post everything on his blog and share here with the forum readers. I look forward to this posting.

"As for the election I do feel you missed your chance with Hilary." That's what elections are all about, there are winners and losers. The people have spoken and I support Barack. Hillary is a Democrat and will be a valuable asset as the campaign progresses. Watch out McBush!

[ThaiBob]

Seeing as we are on the topic of distances and measurements, I would be interested to learn the technical aspects of the measurements required and undertaken here.

Issue talks of 200m distances , but measured in what context,

Perpendicular to the vt7 building in air?

Parrallel with sea level in air

Along the ground?

As you will appreciate depending upon which technique you employ, you will get a different measurement.

This leads to further questions,

Which technique does issue 9 state to employ?

Which technique did the Dept of Engineering surveyors employ

We all know that the Dept of Engineering did not comply with the court order to measure 200m from a point 100m further out to sea than MSL.

Any error embodied in a 100m measurement is doubled in a 200m measurement.

Wiresok, stopVT7 has some good information about the survey on his blog. You should check it out. He was also an observer and signed-off on the survey I believe.

"Any error embodied in a 100m measurement is doubled in a 200m measurement." ? Errors are not necessarily doubled. For example, if the measurement showed an error factor of (+) or (-) let's say 3 meters for a building distance at 103 meters (e.g., between 100 to 106 meters) then the 200 meter error range would be 200 to 206 meters (just adding the 100 meters). The error factor would not be 6 meters (doubled) for a range of 197 to 209 meters. Of course, the Thais saw no need to do a 200 meter measurement (100 meters is Same-same).

[stopvt7]

Dear ThaiBob.

Now I understand why you're a democrat! Facts are confusing to your "independent thinking" twit mind! Here is a fact you need to faculty in your consciousness thought!

The Supreme Administrative Court did read Issue 9 maps before they made this statement: "Ministerial Regulation No. 9 .........................prescribed that the 200 meter line measured from the construction control line shown in the map .....................on the seaside (at MSL) ................shall be restricted from constructing of any building exceeding 14 meter high from road surface. Therefore, if the Construction Permit No. 162/2007 dated 28 November 2006 granted by the Defendant No. 1 to the Defendant No. 2 should appear to be unlawful against the Ministerial Regulation thereto as being claimed by the ten plaintiffs, the Court of First Instance should have sentenced this point of being unlawful, i.e. the judgment shall be focused on the permission of construction the building exceeding height limit by the Defendant No. 2. ..........

http://stopvt7.blogspot.com/search?updated...p;max-results=7

Once the Rayong court knew where to measure from why did they appoint a so called expert witness?

Edited August 16, 2008 by stopvt7

[prospero]

I'm not confused. Make any lines you want and call them anything you want. Lawyers are very happy to confuse things as much as possible. The point is that mean sea level is a simple thing. For those of you who like to confuse things, mean sea level is the mid point of high tide and low tide. I have no dog in this fight but I would like to see developers follow the rules of law and it is obvious to me that VT 7 has been caught severely bending these rules.

I have to admit I was confused by stopVT7's "facts" until I took a little time to do some independent thinking and ask myself questions. I looked at his "evidence" and it seemed reasonable so I asked why were others not convinced (especially the Court). Only when I did my own analysis did I realize there were major problems with his "facts" and these "facts" only serve his agenda. Maps and drawings work for some people but rational qualitative reasoning works easier for me.

Imagine in your mind two parallel lines called A and B. We are told these 2 lines represent a distance of 100 meters. We are also told that building or constructing within the area of these 2 lines is "restricted" or "controlled". What else can we say about these 2 lines? Well both A and B both bound or control or border the mentioned restricted or controlled area, so both lines could be boundary lines or control lines or border lines. Simple enough. Now in your mind picture the Issue 8 map with its Construction Control Line (and no MSL). Now simply superimpose your mind's image over the Issue 8 map with the CCL being line A. Presto, a restricted or controlled area, simple and clear to understand. Note that the CCL on the map (or line A in your mind) is called by stopVT7 as the CCL at "high tide" or "high water". Ok.

But now let's take it a step further. As Gary as astutely noted that MSL is not at high tide or low tide but somewhere in between. In our mind or on the map let's draw the MSL. Well although we don't have clearly defined reference points one thing we have certainly know is that by definition MSL and CCL are not the same line. I hope everyone understands this fundamental point including stopVT7. If you don't you will be confused.

How does all this apply to Issue 9? In short, Issue 9 added the concept of MSL and extended, expanded, made larger the restricted area or zone by 100 meters (from 100 to 200). We look at the new Issue 9 map and we compare it to Issue 8. We see the added MSL line and the CCL (Court's definition) or what stopVT7 calls the Borderline of restricted constructions 100 meters seaward from the MSL.

Now let's go back to the beginning and re-visit our image of the two lines A and B. What's changed now is the separation represents 200 meters but we also must add another line for the MSL. Let's call it line C and place it 100 meters from line A just like the map does. Other than adding line C (MSL) and increasing the width everything else about our image remains the same. The concept of a restricted or controlled construction area bounded by our 2 lines is all valid. Our labels or names for our lines are valid as well.

The last step simply superimposes again our mind's image over the Issue 9 map. Guess what everything aligns perfectly. Line C = MSL; Line A = CCL or a boundary line or control line or border line or some other name you to choose to call it. Line B can be viewed as the other control line or border line or boundary all of which bounds our "restricted" or "controlled" construction zone. No surprises, no contradictions. And remember CCL and MSL are not same despite what stopVT7 tries to tell you. He (like his fellow conservative George) is so confused he does know right from left, up from down, Barrack from a Socialist, a Christian from a Muslim, Saddam Hussein from Al Qaeda, a liberal from a conservative and list could go on.

Thai Bob is the typical limousine liberal. He is for conserving the environment and preserving natural beauty when it is convenient. When it threatens his investment, to hel_l with the environment. So he's all for stopping offshore oil drilling in California, but is all for constructing a huge ugly building in Jomtien, so he can enjoy his views and protect his money.

I remember when the State of Massachussetts wanted to build wind turbines off the coast of Cape Cod. The first people to object were the Kennedys -- champions of wind power in other people's back yard.

I'm sure if oil were descovered in the Gulf of Thailand, TB would be leading the fight against the drilling. Why? To preserve the environment? No. "I don't want to look at those ugly oil rigs from my balcony." Of course, he'd SAY he was doing it for the environment.

The other side of it is that VT7 -- a so called "conservative" who believes in free markets unrestricted by government control, is petitioning the Thai government to stop a corporation from the pursuit of profit. In the United States, he's against government regulation, but here in Thailand, he's all for it.

Self interest trumps ideology every time.

Both these little guys make me laugh!

[stopvt7]

Dear prospero

Most conservative I know believe in zoning regulation and protecting the environment and Issue 9 is a zoning law to protect the Thailand's beach environment. VT7 knew the zoning requirements before they so-call purchase the land in front of JCC.

I wish NO harm to anyone. But, what make me work to protect the beaches and my rightful view is my dislike to see people think their above the law and better then other! All people are equal!!

Prospero enjoy your laugh!

Edited August 16, 2008 by stopvt7

[Sir Burr]

MSL and CCL cannot be at the same place.

Lets use a bit of logic.

If mean sea level is half way between the high water mark and the low water mark, this distance is going to differ all along the beach, as it depends on the slope of the beach. The shallower the slope, the greater the difference between high and low water, so, the MSL moves seawards.

MSL could be very different 50 metres along the beach. Why would anybody in their right mind use the MSL as CCL. The MSL will meander right along the length of the beach.

Edited August 16, 2008 by Sir Burr

[Gary A]

Dear prospero

Most conservative I know believe in zoning regulation and protecting the environment and Issue 9 is a zoning law to protect the Thailand's beach environment. VT7 knew the zoning requirements before they so-call purchase the land in front of JCC.

I wish NO harm to anyone. But, what make me work to protect the beaches and my rightful view is my dislike to see people think their above the law and better then other! All people are equal!!

Prospero enjoy your laugh!

Who did VT 7 buy that land from? What did they intend to do with the land? Don't you think this is interesting? Could JCC be in the middle of this? No one mentions that JCC reneged on their sales plan.

[stopvt7]

Dear prospero

Most conservative I know believe in zoning regulation and protecting the environment and Issue 9 is a zoning law to protect the Thailand's beach environment. VT7 knew the zoning requirements before they so-call purchase the land in front of JCC.

I wish NO harm to anyone. But, what make me work to protect the beaches and my rightful view is my dislike to see people think their above the law and better then other! All people are equal!!

Prospero enjoy your laugh!

Who did VT 7 buy that land from? What did they intend to do with the land? Don't you think this is interesting? Could JCC be in the middle of this? No one mentions that JCC reneged on their sales plan.

Do you remember "ripley" statement “Suddenly there were lots of "suits" prowling the building. Owners scampered about for information and were fed rumours and given red herrings to chase”. Do you think all the "suits" were need for a land sale? I don’t!

Have you ever been in a joint venture agreement negotiation? I have! I was around when all those suits spent day here in meetings. Then I was told by the JCC office all the "suits" move to a other location for more meeting. Then came a so-called sale statement. I was born but I was not born yesterday!

[OhdLover]

Attached is an image of Obama body surfing, he looks like he's done this before. To be where he is in this image he would have to be a man that appreciates the oceans natural beauty and therapy… leaves any $$ spa treatment for dead by any who knows the experience of sliding down the face of a clean ocean…

Obama is loving the sea and in all its natural glory that is given to it by respectable coastal development. VT7 and everything it represents does not respect such an image in any manner at all, it's all about greed and me me me ….

Now again in Phuket…. The building setbacks from the high tide (or MSL) were only ever one way (200m, 20m for different structures) as per Stop vt7's idea of the Jomtien "setback" law. And it all makes sense to keep it that simple and give the water front some breathing space… a public and natural space!!!!

Unfortunately this is not a political issue. It's a legal issue.

[Gary A]

I agree, talk about your socialist hero somewhere else.

[ripley]

Haines - suggest you stop allowing other/s to write messages under your stopvt7 name. Your own english and your logic are difficult enough to follow. The schizophrenic element is annoying & creepy.

[stopvt7]

Haines - suggest you stop allowing other/s to write messages under your stopvt7 name. Your own english and your logic are difficult enough to follow. The schizophrenic element is annoying & creepy.

Lana

Their a lady here who knows what I'm talking about! She the one who told me about the Thai bag lady which was at a Bangkok meeting.

How was it a few condo owner attack old JCC board then they had VT7 stopped? Then after their election they had a special EGM to raise money to stop the VT7 build. After a EGM special resolution to raise the funds they fired the lawyer within 30 days. Then did nothing. How a few fooled many! But I was the born yesterday!

[prospero]

Haines - suggest you stop allowing other/s to write messages under your stopvt7 name. Your own english and your logic are difficult enough to follow. The schizophrenic element is annoying & creepy.

It is against the rules of this website to "out" members by disclosing their identity. You should be ashamed, Ripley.

[ripley]

On 2007-04-08 stopvt7 introduced himself as Richard Haines on this site. (look it up) Therefore I didn't have reason to believe he meant to keep that private.

I did not "out" him and wouldn't do a thing like that.

Meanwhile, I am not "Lana".

Edited August 16, 2008 by ripley

[OhdLover]

But I was the born yesterday!

That explains it all. Thanks.

[stopvt7]

But I was the born yesterday!

That explains it all. Thanks.

Your welcome I enjoy given someone a good laugh!!

[surfer]

Haines - suggest you stop allowing other/s to write messages under your stopvt7 name. Your own english and your logic are difficult enough to follow. The schizophrenic element is annoying & creepy.

Calm down, what miserable dark clouded continents did you some of you self rightous elitists crawl out of?

Enough politics and here are some (possible) facts,

1. In Phuket (as elsewhere in Thailand) there are very similar building regulations to the issue 8/ 9 building regulations being debated on this forum topic. Coastal building heights in Phuket are also regulated by distances relating to the tide line/s and those specified distances from tide lines are a one way measurement. If the local Or-bor-tor says that you can not build higher then 14 metres at 200m distance from the high tide mark then you measure 200 metres from the high tide line, not out to sea 100m and back 200m. I believe the local Or-bor-tor is to an extent following regulations set by the central Thai government officials in Bangkok. Bangkok’s influence was more focused after the Tsunami.

There are always individuals/companies going against the local and central government building regulations in Phuket as there is a lot of money to win or lose. There is another building regulation in Phuket that does not allow the construction of any “permanent structures” from the ground contour line at 80m above sea level. On the last visit from the central Bangkok government land officials to Phuket the chief official took a look over the island by helicopter and then publicly noted to the local media a large number (more then 80 from memory) major construction infringements of the coastal and 80m contour regulations. I don’t think many have been stopped to date.

2. I am not stop vt7 and do not know him/ her personally.

3. I am really not interested in American politics other then to tackle insomnia.

4. They let me out of my cell last week

Some hearsay

I have heard from locals in Phuket that from the water line out to sea is 100% public so although a resort could in theory block beach access via land and roads by law you can swim right up to the beach front of that blockaded resort and nobody can make you go away (by law) ….. so I guess you can float within 100m of the MSL line in the ocean in front of any private development… don’t really know how this would work with the 100m each way bet on this topic but just felt like a wind up anyway.