Koh Som

[Gatorade]

I am going to re-open this thread as I think its important to discuss but I am setting some ground rules here and anyone who steps over the line will find their account suspended immediately. I really hope this is clear.

No baiting, no flaming, no aggressive posting. Such behavior will result in suspension.

No posting of personal details, of anyone. Period. Post personal details of a member of Thai Visa and your account will be banned immediately.

Keep it civil, keep it on topic and this thread can stay open. One transgression and the thread will be closed.

SBK, thank you for allowing "fair play" .

I think that the fate of this lovely little island should not rest with the developer alone. I have seen the proposed plans and I cannot see how so many very small and mostly 1 bed bungalows,(many of them semi-detached) will fit into the landscape without causing serious destruction to the environment. There are a lot of very small houses in a very small space.

Perhaps there is a Forum member out there who may be able to offer an insight as to how this development and its infrastructure will fit in.

Does this island fall under any of the local authorities such as Bhoput/Ban Rak?

thanks SBK for for allowing the debate.

why you assume that this is left only to the developer??

the plans have to be submitted to the planning authorities just like any other project.

why you assume that this is a "destruction" of the environment" as with any building there is bound to be some nature taken over..

from what i know, the developer is very environmental conscience and he wants to make this a "green project".

Have you looked at the plans? It is obvious that the whole orange grove and most of the Palms will have to be felled in the development area.

As you purport to have "inside knowledge" How exactly will this project be Green?

[Gatorade]

What are they building a resort or houses for sale?

I think they would be difficult to sell low budget houses on a island with nothing else.

We were told that they were for sale, starting at around 10 million Baht for the small one bedroom bungalows.

[OriginalPoster]

What are they building a resort or houses for sale?

I think they would be difficult to sell low budget houses on a island with nothing else.

We were told that they were for sale, starting at around 10 million Baht for the small one bedroom bungalows.

Are the bungalows nice enough that it's reasonable to expect them to sell for that price?

[Boater]

We were told that they were for sale, starting at around 10 million Baht for the small one bedroom bungalows.

That seems incredibly cheap !

[Marksamui]

What are they building a resort or houses for sale?

I think they would be difficult to sell low budget houses on a island with nothing else.

We were told that they were for sale, starting at around 10 million Baht for the small one bedroom bungalows.

Are the bungalows nice enough that it's reasonable to expect them to sell for that price?

10 million baht for a one bed bungalow on a island with nothing else, I can't see them being snapped up. Do they at least come with a pool?

For 10 million you can get something very resonable on Samui, I think this would be a hard sell.

No doubt most will be sold before they are finished proving me wrong, but then there are a lot of very silly people out there!

[OriginalPoster]

We were told that they were for sale, starting at around 10 million Baht for the small one bedroom bungalows.

That seems incredibly cheap !

Comapared to the Hamptons maybe. I realise that seafront property is at a premium almost everywhere but Thailand's supposed to be cheap.

Edited March 11, 2009 by OriginalPoster

[highdiver]

I am going to re-open this thread as I think its important to discuss but I am setting some ground rules here and anyone who steps over the line will find their account suspended immediately. I really hope this is clear.

No baiting, no flaming, no aggressive posting. Such behavior will result in suspension.

No posting of personal details, of anyone. Period. Post personal details of a member of Thai Visa and your account will be banned immediately.

Keep it civil, keep it on topic and this thread can stay open. One transgression and the thread will be closed.

SBK, thank you for allowing "fair play" .

I think that the fate of this lovely little island should not rest with the developer alone. I have seen the proposed plans and I cannot see how so many very small and mostly 1 bed bungalows,(many of them semi-detached) will fit into the landscape without causing serious destruction to the environment. There are a lot of very small houses in a very small space.

Perhaps there is a Forum member out there who may be able to offer an insight as to how this development and its infrastructure will fit in.

Does this island fall under any of the local authorities such as Bhoput/Ban Rak?

thanks SBK for for allowing the debate.

why you assume that this is left only to the developer??

the plans have to be submitted to the planning authorities just like any other project.

why you assume that this is a "destruction" of the environment" as with any building there is bound to be some nature taken over..

from what i know, the developer is very environmental conscience and he wants to make this a "green project".

Have you looked at the plans? It is obvious that the whole orange grove and most of the Palms will have to be felled in the development area.

As you purport to have "inside knowledge" How exactly will this project be Green?

have looked at the plan and went to see it with my own eyes.. they really did it beautifully and they marked the land plots and design with coconuts.

the orange grove is on the left side and at this point they have no desire to cut it down.

[angiud]

have looked at the plan and went to see it with my own eyes.. they really did it beautifully and they marked the land plots and design with coconuts.

the orange grove is on the left side and at this point they have no desire to cut it down.

GULP! Beautiful??

Good bye Koh Som.

[marcus]

When I read this topic I feel a bit sad. I can literally see Koh Som from my garden and the idea that this little spot will be completely ruined by another bunch of greedy falang makes my sick.

Curious to find out more about this project - who will find 40 people stupid enough to live on a 7 Rai island ? - Google told me that probably a regular poster on this forum is the brain behind this.

www.o11s.com/Past-Present-Projects.html

So if he can stop hiding himself and post here what will happen, it would be appreciated.

The guy you mention here is not the brain behind it, he is just consulting from time to time.

It is a Thai/farrang partnership and the developer lives on the island as well. If you wanna find out more, just PM him.

I was hoping he could post some information over here, now all we have are speculations ....

[PoorSucker]

Hmm, there's no room to park my fortuner.

[t.s]

have looked at the plan and went to see it with my own eyes.. they really did it beautifully and they marked the land plots and design with coconuts.

the orange grove is on the left side and at this point they have no desire to cut it down.

beauty certainly is in the eye of the landholder.

they will need to level the island to acheive that plan.

does the developer know you are speaking on his behalf? i would say you are not doing him any favours.

good lord what a disaster.

[highdiver]

have looked at the plan and went to see it with my own eyes.. they really did it beautifully and they marked the land plots and design with coconuts.

the orange grove is on the left side and at this point they have no desire to cut it down.

beauty certainly is in the eye of the landholder.

they will need to level the island to acheive that plan.

does the developer know you are speaking on his behalf? i would say you are not doing him any favours.

good lord what a disaster.

level the island..??? or you don't understand the plan or you have never been there. the plot is completely flat apart from some rocks on the kpg side.

[Gatorade]

have looked at the plan and went to see it with my own eyes.. they really did it beautifully and they marked the land plots and design with coconuts.

the orange grove is on the left side and at this point they have no desire to cut it down.

beauty certainly is in the eye of the landholder.

they will need to level the island to acheive that plan.

does the developer know you are speaking on his behalf? i would say you are not doing him any favours.

good lord what a disaster.

level the island..??? or you don't understand the plan or you have never been there. the plot is completely flat apart from some rocks on the kpg side.

I think levelling means levelling, that is chopping most of the trees down. And despite your spirited defence of the projectand your very carefully chosen words as in "no desire to cut down the orange grove at this stage" It will have to go to accomodate all those little boxes.

[highdiver]

Gator

i may have misunderstood the term leveling.. however from the plan and they way it is laid out the ornage trees are to the left. and are not part of the plan.

at any case i find this debate a bit confusing. this is private land and the owner can do what he feels like.

[HankChinasky]

Gator

i may have misunderstood the term leveling.. however from the plan and they way it is laid out the ornage trees are to the left. and are not part of the plan.

at any case i find this debate a bit confusing. this is private land and the owner can do what he feels like.

Wow another great argument from HD.

***no flaming--- do not do it again--sbk****

That's the big problem of Samui, it's because of attitude like these that the island is now a dump.

Everybody does whatever he wants, no restrictions, no control whatsoever.

Hopefully in a few years you and others of your sort will realize what a mistake it was. I hope that this island will serve as an example for other holiday destinations in Thailand of what to avoid...

I don't know why you are trying to defend Samui at all costs with your empty and nonsensical arguments...

Edited because don't want to be considered flaming or anything.

Edited March 12, 2009 by sbk
too late--sbk

[smartiemarty]

. this is private land and the owner can do what he feels like.

HD, Isn't this exactly the problem with all of the illegal building on samui.....?

So i can't wait till we see Phaze 2 of the project, - another 25 floor concrete monstrosity....... Or a row of shop houses!!!

And HD will say, " yes but it is private land and the owner can do as he pleases......"

Anyway, i am willing to bet that all of those "beautiful" villas will remain unsold for years to come....( like most of the cookie cutter developments i see around samui....), And the only green aspect will be the colour of the asbestos roof tiles.... Another "slum in paradise" ( ala Coco) in the making...

What materials are the villas to be constructed from? How about posting an "artists impression" of the proposed villas HD....

And finally what is the developers plan concerning fresh water? new pipeline, 20 liter water jugs, rainfall?

I know that this will all go ahead and nothing anyone says on T.V. will make one iota of difference, personally i think its a big shame this "beautiful" development will be built......

laterZZzzzZ

[Gatorade]

Gator

i may have misunderstood the term leveling.. however from the plan and they way it is laid out the ornage trees are to the left. and are not part of the plan.

at any case i find this debate a bit confusing. this is private land and the owner can do what he feels like.

You seem to have changed track. Private or public is not the issue. Why should I not care, simply because it is private?

I have watched the deterioration of Koh Samui over many years and I still find it incredible that there are people who can still defend the destruction of so many things we hold dear. Koh Som will be destroyed in the interests of profit, nothing more or less. I have no vested interest apart from the fact that I have enjoyed

stopping there for a long time and soon this will denied. As I said in my original post, "another brick in the wall".

[BusyBee123]

that plan looks horrendous there is no island left!

[marcus]

that plan looks horrendous there is no island left!

Just let's hope that due to global warming the sea level will not rise too much... These villa's might become an expensive artificial reef

[SamuiJens]

SAD,so sad, that things like this keep happening on Shamui!!!

[highdiver]

Gator

i may have misunderstood the term leveling.. however from the plan and they way it is laid out the ornage trees are to the left. and are not part of the plan.

at any case i find this debate a bit confusing. this is private land and the owner can do what he feels like.

Wow another great argument from HD.

***no flaming--- do not do it again--sbk****

That's the big problem of Samui, it's because of attitude like these that the island is now a dump.

Everybody does whatever he wants, no restrictions, no control whatsoever.

Hopefully in a few years you and others of your sort will realize what a mistake it was. I hope that this island will serve as an example for other holiday destinations in Thailand of what to avoid...

I don't know why you are trying to defend Samui at all costs with your empty and nonsensical arguments...

Edited because don't want to be considered flaming or anything.

Samui has building regulations and building control act. as long as the owner follows it he can do what he wants like on his private land.

in koh som case the limitations are actually very high as it is a green zone.

flaming remarks will not change the above facts.

[highdiver]

Gator

i may have misunderstood the term leveling.. however from the plan and they way it is laid out the ornage trees are to the left. and are not part of the plan.

at any case i find this debate a bit confusing. this is private land and the owner can do what he feels like.

You seem to have changed track. Private or public is not the issue. Why should I not care, simply because it is private?

I have watched the deterioration of Koh Samui over many years and I still find it incredible that there are people who can still defend the destruction of so many things we hold dear. Koh Som will be destroyed in the interests of profit, nothing more or less. I have no vested interest apart from the fact that I have enjoyed

stopping there for a long time and soon this will denied. As I said in my original post, "another brick in the wall".

Did not change track for one second.

Gator lets be honest here ...

did you "care" about the beautiful trees and nature that were cut down to make room for your own house?? or the road leading to it??

did any of the the posters who live here in houses that were built by cutting down trees and destroying nature "care" the same when it came to their property?

did any of the buyers in the Coco project (some are reading this froum) that was clearly a violation of building permits"care" when they invested ?

when tesco lotus was opened there were many cheers and applause here on this forum.. did any one "care" about all the trees that were cut down to make that monster of a shopping mall and parking lot ???

were the above not a"another brick in the wall"??

will the next "environmental conscience" farrang who buys land to build his dream house/ project care???

or is "caring" for the environment only limited to other peoples property ?

since the land we are debating is private land the solution as offered before is very simple.. buy it, and do what ever you "care" to do with it.

[Birdman]

Gator

i may have misunderstood the term leveling.. however from the plan and they way it is laid out the ornage trees are to the left. and are not part of the plan.

at any case i find this debate a bit confusing. this is private land and the owner can do what he feels like.

Wow another great argument from HD.

***no flaming--- do not do it again--sbk****

That's the big problem of Samui, it's because of attitude like these that the island is now a dump.

Everybody does whatever he wants, no restrictions, no control whatsoever.

Hopefully in a few years you and others of your sort will realize what a mistake it was. I hope that this island will serve as an example for other holiday destinations in Thailand of what to avoid...

I don't know why you are trying to defend Samui at all costs with your empty and nonsensical arguments...

Edited because don't want to be considered flaming or anything.

Samui has building regulations and building control act. as long as the owner follows it he can do what he wants like on his private land.

in koh som case the limitations are actually very high as it is a green zone.

flaming remarks will not change the above facts.

Facts are: There is a nice little island, which was more or less unspoiled, one of the places left alone. (Ok. some parties and fisherman, a few tourists sometimes.)

This shall not be so any more. There will be a lot of constructions for a year or so to make one of uncountable, faceless real estates we can see everywhere else already.

[sbk]

Yes, this is true. And unfortunately, highdiver is also correct. It is private land and the owners are entitled to sell it, develop it or let it sit. That is also a fact and one that is indisputable. You may not like it, you may disagree with their plans but the fact is, it is not your land, it is not national park, it is private.

Unfortunately for everyone else, the owners appear to be shortsighted. Why this is a surprise to anyone is beyond me. You are living on an island where corrupt officials altered land documents in order to sell off National Park and yet you seem more in an uproar over this, the legal development of private property than over that issue.

Sure, its sad, but I can't see why attacking highdiver for pragmatically stating facts will make a jot of difference.

[Gatorade]

Gator

i may have misunderstood the term leveling.. however from the plan and they way it is laid out the ornage trees are to the left. and are not part of the plan.

at any case i find this debate a bit confusing. this is private land and the owner can do what he feels like.

You seem to have changed track. Private or public is not the issue. Why should I not care, simply because it is private?

I have watched the deterioration of Koh Samui over many years and I still find it incredible that there are people who can still defend the destruction of so many things we hold dear. Koh Som will be destroyed in the interests of profit, nothing more or less. I have no vested interest apart from the fact that I have enjoyed

stopping there for a long time and soon this will denied. As I said in my original post, "another brick in the wall".

Did not change track for one second.

Gator lets be honest here ...

did you "care" about the beautiful trees and nature that were cut down to make room for your own house?? or the road leading to it??

did any of the the posters who live here in houses that were built by cutting down trees and destroying nature "care" the same when it came to their property?

did any of the buyers in the Coco project (some are reading this froum) that was clearly a violation of building permits"care" when they invested ?

when tesco lotus was opened there were many cheers and applause here on this forum.. did any one "care" about all the trees that were cut down to make that monster of a shopping mall and parking lot ???

were the above not a"another brick in the wall"??

will the next "environmental conscience" farrang who buys land to build his dream house/ project care???

or is "caring" for the environment only limited to other peoples property ?

since the land we are debating is private land the solution as offered before is very simple.. buy it, and do what ever you "care" to do with it.

Yes I did care.. However, how do you know how many beautiful trees were cut down to make way for my house? As far as I am aware they are all still standing.

Is there any point in discussing any of these issues on this forum if all you can offer as an apologist is to put your hands in the air and say "it belongs to someone therefore they can do what they like to it"

It is a sad indictment of our society.

You are now bringing into the argument many lost causes, Tesco etc which are not related to this debate and perhaps deliberately trying to muddy the water. All the wrongs committed here in Samui and KPH simply reflect that absolutely nothing has been learned.

Your solution to all of this is really most sad. It offers no hope to Fauna or Flora, protected or not which which happens to fall under "private ownership".

This is a shameful situation and if your reaction is typical, offers no hope for the future.

[sbk]

Yes I did care.. However, how do you know how many beautiful trees were cut down to make way for my house? As far as I am aware they are all still standing.

Is there any point in discussing any of these issues on this forum if all you can offer as an apologist is to put your hands in the air and say "it belongs to someone therefore they can do what they like to it"

It is a sad indictment of our society.

You are now bringing into the argument many lost causes, Tesco etc which are not related to this debate and perhaps deliberately trying to muddy the water. All the wrongs committed here in Samui and KPH simply reflect that absolutely nothing has been learned.

Your solution to all of this is really most sad. It offers no hope to Fauna or Flora, protected or not which which happens to fall under "private ownership".

This is a shameful situation and if your reaction is typical, offers no hope for the future.

OK, instead of attacking highdiver because you don't agree with his position and instead of bemoaning the fate of this little island, why don't you come up with some solutions instead? I'd be curious to hear what you think could possibly be done to change this outcome.

And lets please keep it within the bounds of reality, ok?

[marcus]

OK, instead of attacking highdiver because you don't agree with his position and instead of bemoaning the fate of this little island, why don't you come up with some solutions instead? I'd be curious to hear what you think could possibly be done to change this outcome.

And lets please keep it within the bounds of reality, ok?

A more realistic project maybe ? I don't dispute the legal right of the owner to build a house on his land, but is it necessary to build 42 on such a narrow area?

If there would be a couple of wooden Thai style houses or a small eco friendly resort, the picture would look completely different IMO.

[BusyBee123]

http://www.eco-tropicalresorts.com/TheButt...sortandSpa.html

the above link is a good idea of what an eco resort already is in Thailand, the resort planned on Koh Som would have great difficulty meeting the grade on many of the checklists due to the sheer number of huts and total lack of environment left around them. Though if they were using local people/materials etc this would be a good thing.... It's just difficult getting past the huge number of huts.

[highdiver]

Yes I did care.. However, how do you know how many beautiful trees were cut down to make way for my house? As far as I am aware they are all still standing.

Is there any point in discussing any of these issues on this forum if all you can offer as an apologist is to put your hands in the air and say "it belongs to someone therefore they can do what they like to it"

It is a sad indictment of our society.

You are now bringing into the argument many lost causes, Tesco etc which are not related to this debate and perhaps deliberately trying to muddy the water. All the wrongs committed here in Samui and KPH simply reflect that absolutely nothing has been learned.

Your solution to all of this is really most sad. It offers no hope to Fauna or Flora, protected or not which which happens to fall under "private ownership".

This is a shameful situation and if your reaction is typical, offers no hope for the future.

OK, instead of attacking highdiver because you don't agree with his position and instead of bemoaning the fate of this little island, why don't you come up with some solutions instead? I'd be curious to hear what you think could possibly be done to change this outcome.

And lets please keep it within the bounds of reality, ok?

SBk i don't think Gator is attacking me..and while we may disagree Gator has been a debating partner and at least he knows the facts and addressed the issue. at the end of the day i share his frustration that development can not be stopped specially when it is on private property.

15 years ago most of Samui was flora and fauna as Gator so gently expressed it.

Gators house as well as my own were built on properties that were sold and developed. the roads leading to our properties were constructed because we built houses and needed infrastructure. tesco and other venues were constructed to allow us a better living standards.

all this was done so we can live comfortably in our houses and there were plenty of trees cut down and flora and fauna were devastated because of that.

and here is were i differ from gator. i don't think its fair to ask another land owner to give up his right to develop or criticize him because if he does so we loose a nice natural spot.. as you said its not a public land or a natural it is private.

i don't think Marcus Eco friendly resort with a few wooden houses is viable to the owner..

A few years ago there was a great out cry by ecologist that were hurting to see the amazon rain forest detestation by development .

so they set up a fund that people from all over the world contributed money to and bought private lands and government lands and we are talking on thousands of hectors.

they ended up saving those precious jungles and rain forests not all of it but they did make an effort to save as much as possible.

the only pragmatical way to do it is to buy the land and then l have it unspoiled..

now comes the question.. how many nature lovers and Eco friendly members will be willing to actually put out personal money to promote this idea??

[BusyBee123]

'now comes the question.. how many nature lovers and Eco friendly members will be willing to actually put out personal money to promote this idea??'

we do anyway, the governments of our countries started many similar schemes in south america which is funded by our tax payers money, how much people choose to top that up with disposable income is up to them but all are contributing.