The Greening Of Chiang Mai – The Sustainable Compromise

[tourismtiger]

Hi Cobra,

Please read my original post. It asks that those interested send me a PM with a request for a PDF copy of the proposal document. As a newbie to forums, I asked a forum user and was told that this was how it was done.

The proposal - a 32 page document, complete with executive summaries in Thai & English, Google mapping, detailed write ups, schematics etc., and much more provides you with most, if not all of the information you require.

After reading some of the responses, it appears that all comments to the forum were in direct response to the brief description

(no more than a subject outline) that I provided.

I did post a follow up asking those who had commented to revisit the proposal, but have had no requests for the PDF so far.

Hopefully this will clear up any misunderstanding. I look forward to your request for the PDF, (and hopefully the same from others who misread my initial posting) and then some (a) interesting debate on the pros and cons of the proposal, and ( input from the forum members to the Future Trends study.

Tourismtiger

[tourismtiger]

No sarcasm intended - I went for a B in brackets and got an emoticon - my apologies.

Tourism tiger

[CobraSnakeNecktie]

Tourismtiger.

Why don't you just post the link to your website and/or direct link to download the PDF proposal? Would seem like you would want to get the proposal out there for people to see.

Look in the button bar for "insert link" and put your website and proposal for anyone to download.

Thx

[daoyai]

Why not post a one page summary for those interested but not wishing to peruse an entire 32 page proposal.

[tourismtiger]

My programmer is rushing to meet deadlines for other work.

Regarding the river market project, he has completed half of the online the online programming (CGI Form based) needed for the Future Trends survey, and will finish the other half next week, but I had to get other work done first.

Rather than wait for him, I decided to invite those who were interested in reading the proposal to request the PDF.

Anyone who does not want to read the full 32 pages can read the executive summary - that is what it is there for.

Anyone asking for 'detail' - and some of you have - would most probably find the answers by reading the proposal.

As it was written for a local audience, most of the text in in bullet point format, and there are lots of images, schematics etc.

If you are too busy to read it, that's fine, but please do not knock it without having read it.

Tourism tiger.

[lannarebirth]

Briefly - I think this to a certain extent misses the point as do a lot of things that arise as projects etc.

Chiang Mai was/is to a certain extent popular as an entity in itself. It has a lot of shopping/attractions, but for many people the attraction is in the city itself.

This boils down as being the responsibility of existing residents and the city authorities.

I agree with cmsally. It's the city itself and its proximity to northern destinations that is the attraction. I think there may be enough markets.

I checked your website Mr. Tiger, but couldn't see the PDF. Could you link it there?

http://www.track-of-the-tiger.com/ I assume?

[tourismtiger]

Hi Iannarebirth,

I will put it on the website - you have the URL correct- but as I said I had other urgent priorities for my programmer.

Either ask for it via a PM (as some have now done) or wait a while for the upload complete with CGI forum designed to gather responses and suggestions under the Future Trends study.

Thanks

Tourism Tiger

[drtreelove]

Hi Iannarebirth,

I will put it on the website - you have the URL correct- but as I said I had other urgent priorities for my programmer.

Either ask for it via a PM (as some have now done) or wait a while for the upload complete with CGI forum designed to gather responses and suggestions under the Future Trends study.

Thanks

Tourism Tiger

Here's the PDF that I received in an email notification from ourchiangmai.com

No programmer required, just use the attachment manager, on the right side below the text box.

TPRM_August_30th_0809091.pdf

[cmsally]

A quick glance shows one problem. As the electrical gumph from Tapae Rd (only) is planned to disappear, all the aforementioned gumph to power the area will now come from Loi Khroh. Therefore you would have to make all that go underground as well as the in between areas. The only way you can greenify the sois is to put wires under the ground as that severely limits number of big trees that can be planted. That in itself very large budget. You would have to cut through all the contractors and subcontractors, that would be a major hurdle in itself, even then a lot of money though.

[tourismtiger]

Hi CMSally,

I am still learning to use the forum, (I'm a litle like a pig looking at a piano) so thanks for the response and your advice on the PDF.

Please take another look at the 'after' schematics for Loy Kroh Road.

The pavement width becomes more than doubled. The trench/storm drain and conduits (water, electic, sewage etc.,) would run under the new pavement area (old road surface.) leaving plenty of room for trees, although tree type should be carefully considered vis a vis roots, height, branch spread etc.

In my years here I have met numerous highly qualified foreign engineers, financial experts and specialists in various fields who have chosen to retire in Chiang Mai. It is my hope that they will look at my fairly basic proposal and offer their qualified advice and constructive suggestions, on how it can be improved or changed if need be.

The Thai's are not averse to listening to well framed, politely presented suggestions and ideas. They just dont want to be lectured to by pompous and arrogant fools - who does?

Corruption, contractors, sub contarctors - always a problem - but if the community (civic group alliance) has better oversight of these projects (and the will if they help subsidise part of the works from their share of river market derived revenues) then transparency is increased.

Corruption - The UK's BAE, The USA's Halliburton can teach those in Thailand some lessons in corruption. The only real solutions are global and they rely on a combination of education and greater public involvement.

Tourism Tiger

[drtreelove]

Please take another look at the 'after' schematics for Loy Kroh Road.

The pavement width becomes more than doubled. The trench/storm drain and conduits (water, electic, sewage etc.,) would run under the new pavement area (old road surface.) leaving plenty of room for trees, although tree type should be carefully considered vis a vis roots, height, branch spread etc.

I'm happy to see that you are talking about tree species selection appropriate for the site, underground utilities, etc. This is one of the biggest mistakes in tree planting is tall growing trees under utility cables; then we have to look at the results of the line clearance tree mutilation.

The only thing I saw in the proposal about landscape planning was for rooftop gardens, which is a very limited way to go and very expensive for installation and maintenance.

Planting_large_trees.pdf

SARAPEE_YANG_TREES__9_09.pdf

[noise]

I looked at your proposal and feel that my comments are constructive even though not positive. I have dealt with many govt/private and private/private contracts, SOWs, and system requirements documents, and offer these comments up the same way I did when I looked at those.

I thought the entire proposal read like a summary; I found no details, just PR words.

You said in the last posting I read: The Thai's are not averse to listening to well framed, politely presented suggestions and ideas. .....if the community (civic group alliance) has better oversight of these projects (and the will if they help subsidise part of the works from their share of river market derived revenues) then transparency is increased.

I do not think you have achieved that in the document I read. And, your words say, they will fund and undertake this absolutely massive, earth shaking, disruption city rebuild today based on some nebulous earning sometime in the future? All this has to be funded and the work completed before you can have any accurate assessment of income. Get half way through and stop for what ever reason (and there will be many disruptions to the plans and delays), and you run the risk of effectively killing the tourist industry.

Sure, many cities build convention centers and facilities based on future income. But your proposal is in effect a complete city rebuild all at one time.

What little substance I found in your proposal said your company would provide the barges and collect revenues. First, once again, let me say I do not think you would ever get the volume of traffic paying to walk there such that you could recoup your investment, let alone make a reasonable profit. If everything else you propose came to pass, you would have every merchant in the city recreating on streets on which Thai and foreign tourists could walk to at no cost.

Your proposal reads like the proposals most companies like to send their customers: We promise you the sky, but you won't know for sure what you get until you sign the contract. Every change you recomended, other than adding barges on two sides of the river, would have to be 100% CNX city/province funded and implemented. That doesn't seem to be addressed.

Burying electrical, telephone, cable utilities can not be done by just going to the start of a street, grabbing all the wires off the poles, and dropping them in ditches. No reference to greater effort required was made.

How would you propose to deal with the merchants whose businesses would be forced into bankrupcy when their street is effectively closed for burying utilities and widening/narrowing/repaving? You know most of them have very, very narrow profit margins; they are having trouble with the current economic downturn. They would not last through what could effectively be a complete stop in foot and car traffic for even just a few months.

You did not address how to deal with the massive mechant dissatisfaction, if they withstand the street full/partial closure for a year or more, when you eliminate private vehicle access to their stores and do away with their parking, what little there is.

You suggest changing the Mae Kha Canal into a walking street. Some of your words say it is a 100 year old cesspool, no water movement. It hasn't dried up so there must be some source of inflow. You did mention the run off area. Even if it is only storm drain in put, you have to deal with that water. No details; I am not sure if you propose enclosing it in a pipe or just filling it in. Methane gas build up would have to be addressed. Either way, massive task and, again, major disruption/displacement of homes and businesses that line the banks.

Water is release periodically into the moat and the moat is not far away. Did you look at the easier task of just increasing the flow in the canal and then dealing with output at the end? Given a clean, flowing canal, the merchants might decide on their own or with minimum city contributions to create walking paths along the banks (similar to what is seen in Wash D.C.)

And, by the way, I believe you mentioned water treatment facilities? I know of no such facility for anything other than the greater CNX drinking water system.

I can't even conceive the number of years it would take to achieve this dream, let alone the cos,t which would be astronomical. Again, let me ask how would CNX fund this?

BOTTOM LINE

You are a for profit tourist organization from what I can see on your web site. So is this supposed to be your brain storming vision for the future for your company's growth or is it supposed to be an informed (i.e., from a company that knows what the tourist want) vision for CNX sometime in the future?

If the former, eliminate the city modifications as being beyond your perview.

If the later, drop your barges down to a foot note as a possible use of the river banks. That particular bit would (should) be opened to competitive bids, anyway, and any revenue from that would be so small in comparison to the cost of the over all proposal that it should be completely ignored..

Either way, there is no effective, reasonable implementation plan presented (costs, time tables, increments, funding source, etc.).

ENDING COMMENT: I may have completely missed the point of your posting. If so, I appologize. But I interpreted it as asking for inputs on the content; I have done so.

Edited October 4, 2009 by noise

[daoyai]

I also read the "proposal". I have to agree with "noise" as there is very little substance there but it does contain all the relevant buzz-words and a attempts at greenwashing. Claims are made with no supporting data as well as many statements that contradict claims made earlies in the proposal.

[cmsally]

In agreement with the above, as to how you would recuperate investment. Although creating a different location, it would essentially be selling the same items that can already be found elsewhere.

Night Bazaar vendors wouldn't exactly be happy would they.

As for basically pedestrianising Loi Khroh Rd. How would hotels along there transport their customers with no bus/car access?

[tourismtiger]

Hi All,

I am happy to respond to the comments made and provide clarifications where needed, but would be more comfortable doing so over a coffee.

Having looked at my website, you know where to find me.

I'll even buy the coffee..............

Regards

Tourism Tiger

[noise]

I am happy to respond to the comments made and provide clarifications where needed, but would be more comfortable doing so over a coffee. Having looked at my website, you know where to find me. I'll even buy the coffee..............

For some twisted reason, I enjoy working RFPs, RFIs, SOWs, contracts and would probably enjoy discussing your proposal, if that is what it is. But since I live in Mae Jo, driving into town and finding a place to park is not one of my favorite past times. And I would really need to know what you are trying to accomplish and why to see if I could add anything of value to your efforts. Is this your vision for what CNX could be in 20 years (I say 20 because I do not see it all of it being achievable even in 10 years given the current enonomic and political conditions and the progress of other city beautification projects). Is it an unsolicited proposal you have submitted or will submit to the city/province? Is it something you are preparing/prepared in response to a RFI or RFP? I am still confused.

[WinnieTheKhwai]

> as to how you would recuperate investment

Wasn't that obvious? By selling barges at a couple million baht each! It's in the proposal.

Almost laughed out loud at the hint that as they're not fixed propery, Farangs can own them (hint hint).. However, all they'd own would be those pieces of wood that make up the barge, not the actual spot on the planet where it is. Rather similar to how you can own a wooden house, but not the land it sits on.

Edited October 6, 2009 by WinnieTheKhwai

[tourismtiger]

As stated before I feel further discussion on the proposals would best be conducted around a coffee table. It would also help filter out the input from those who seem more comfortable belittling my efforts by sniping at them from behind the cover of their avatars.

As a first time forum user I now understand why many others are reluctant to raise matters for discussion on online forums. It’s rather sad really.

To those who have misread the proposal, or do not find it complete enough, I will offer the explanations below. Thereafter I will leave the forum and revert back to my offer of coffee to all who feel they can contribute something worthwhile to the discussion.

Purview – my purview as the head of a multi-faceted tourism operation is to develop and implement a long term strategy for sustainable development for my company. That includes my doing whatever I can to improve the appeal of the destinations in which we work in. (If the water rises all vessels float higher on it.)

Quite simply, if I do not make an attempt to address the serious problems that the local tourism industry faces (business and environmental) then I am not doing my job. If I wait around for someone else to propose solutions, they may not be made, or worse, the same old mistakes may be repeated again and again.

Apart from ensuring my own livelihood, do I not have a responsibility to those I employ? In choosing to live here should I not also try and contribute to the sustainable development of the city - as opposed to whining about its flaws?

An Overview – Chiang Mai tourism.

· Chiang Mai has the lowest return visitor percentage of all Thailand’s promoted tourist destinations. 13% in 2004 compared to an average of 40% for Bangkok, Pattaya & Phuket.

It enjoys only 15% of visitor volume, and if you discount the figures for the Rajaphreuk Festival, that percentage has been in sharp decline since 2002.

· Despite being the Kingdom’s acclaimed handicraft capital the average guest spend on ‘shopping’ in Chiang Mai is lower by Baht 400-500 per person/per day that it is in any of the other destinations mentioned.

o Prices of goods are in many cases are cheaper overseas than they are here, as the crafts have been mass produced for the export market.

o Tour operators skim off 40-50% in commissions on handicraft shopping is some areas which to the annoyance of unsuspecting visitors is invariably a mandatory component in the tour programme. Guides comply as they depend on commissions in order to bring their earnings up to the minimum legal level.

o R&D in the indigenous art industry is almost non -existent because of the lack of funding for it, despite the known creative skills of the Thai people and the rich history of the arts and crafts. With the focus on shopin comsis, our menu of tourism products has remained largely unchanged over the past 20 years.

· Guides only take other tours reluctantly, in order that they make rotate quickly back onto the shopping tours. The one industry is robing the other to the detriment of both.

· Tour prices are artificially low, subsidized by revenues from shopping commissions hence the low quality of the tour product despite the culturally rich environment.

· The hotels were underpriced and under occupied long before someone lured investors into a new wave of hotel development, triggered some say but the promise of a casino for Chiang Mai. Many properties have just made it through to the high season, which is I suspect going to fall far short of expectations and bring about a rash of foreclosures and unemployment.

· Chiang Mai is the cheapest destination city within a cheap destination country. Rather than listen to the calls from the tourism industry to upgrade the country’s product and services, the powers that be continually call for further discounts on prices. We delude ourselves if we think even lower prices will help. They will ensure we fall further down the value chain and will chase the more affluent guests away – a downward spiral. Witness the rise of Vietnam - with hotels rooms at far higher prices than our own.

· We have forsaken the development of our own USP’s in favour of others that have rather predictably failed miserably.

· We are down to our last remaining artificial attraction, a small borrowed Panda, and still the industry leaders wait for someone to bail them out, instead of taking the initiative themselves.

My proposals

Are not in direct response to any specific RFB’s. They are written out of (a) frustration, (b)after lengthy discussions with those in power in both the private and public sector, many of whom realize that solutions are needed. They know that public funding is not available for tourism development. They agree PPP’s (public, private partnerships) are probably the best way forward and are looking at the options.

As the legal framework for PPP’s is still under discussion solutions like my own are put forward and are generally well received. They make good case studies and encourage debate, in the hope that we can find a model or models under which they can be implemented. There are few examples out there that offer a fair 3BL based return on investment to the various stakeholders, and I for one am interested in seeing that model in place.

It is of course difficult to provide a detailed business plan without the PPP model being agreed. What can be done is to table an idea or set of ideas for discussion and evaluation, (as I have done) and use it to press all involved on the need for swift action.

I genuinely believe that the formal agreement of one or more viable PPP’s with a sustainable and green agenda, (of the type proposed) will increase property values, provide collateral for redevelopment, and improve the tourism product in Chiang Mai more rapidly than any of the alternative solutions I have heard of.

Some answers to a few of the comments made by the avatars:

1. My plan calls for a rebuild of the entire city.

Rubbish, a gross exaggeration. The river market project is not much more than a floating marina based on a modular design. It is remarkably simple. The other projects are more cosmetic in nature than they are major works.(see below)

2. The whole of Loy Kroh would be closed indefinitely and eventually become a walking street.

Again inaccurate. The plan to place the electrical wiring underground is already on the drawing board. If we make the road narrower as I suggest, the trench for pipe and cable work can be done on one side leaving room for traffic to pass. It can then be repeated on the other side.

A second pass, one side then the other, can be carried out to widen the pavements (covering the trenches.) It is certainly not rocket science.

Long term - Hotel buses would have passes, delivery vehicles would have to operate in a given 'ervice window. (Note* Road works just like it have been in progress in and around the city centre for decades, but often hampered or slowed by the lack of funding.)

3. I would make money from barge sales, want foreigners to buy them, and they would own nothing but some pieces of wood.

The proposal is clear in stating that barges will be modeled on the old wooden scorpion tailed boats, and will look just like them for aesthetic reasons. The hulls would actually be steel or GRP, and the decks of some other material with wooden décor where practical.

Would we sell them? Of course we would. Would they be value for money? Well if they are not, we won’t be able to sell or lease them will we?

A major revenue stream would be derived from running a full calendar of special events and festivals. Imagine the appeal of taking your family (or visitors) to enjoy the Loy Khratong or Songraan Festivals in an area that was (made safe) for families?

Pay to enter – Do you want such a venue clean, tidy, safe and with good facilities at a modest cost. Or free, but covered in litter, with more bangs per minute than Baghdad, and not a clean toilet in sight? The pay to use precedent is well established elsewhere.

4. Would we sell them to foreigners (hint, hint?).

Definitely. If as we assume the law permits foreigners to buy them.

One of the biggest problems foreigners face when leasing a retail space in Thailand is that the more they improve it, and the more successful they make their businesses, the more the landlord is likely to increase the rental at the end of each 3 year lease period. Why not offer them a better option and help upgrade the product?

5. The return on investment is not viable. I beg to differ. Does the mainstream tourism industry in Bangkok think such a project would increase visitor numbers and become a focal point– Yes. Are the overseas tour wholesalers for it - Yes. Do the airlines and tourism industry asociations see the potential of it - Yes.

6. The shopkeepers in the bazaar would be against it.

Perhaps, butwhat if the PP model subsidises their move to the river market - or the Mae Kha Canal - depending on their ability to met the investment required for either (they represent lower and higher cost options)?

The building owners have long cried out for improvements to the downtown area that would allow them to lease their properties to higher end retailers, which incidentally the hotels also want in order to draw the higher end guest? (they currently avoid Chiang Mai.)

7. The Mae Kha Canal should not be developed as a shopping precinct/walking street.

Why not? It offers a viable solution for getting the vendors off the pavements in front of the shops the building owners want to develop. It can be properly managed especially if the vendors have a stake in it. Again, it is down to the PPP model employed.

8. Water flow - Incidentally after recent discussions with an organisation evaluating development options in the city it was suggested the Mae Kha Canal project include a ‘replica’ canal/stream component as a centerpiece. A 2.5m wide, 30-50cm deep canal through which water drawn from the Ping is sent along the km length before being rerouted back to the Ping. I like the idea.

9. Foreign ownership of Thai wooden houses.

Someone touched on this topic. Why not consider this solution, why do foreigners NEED to own the land. What if they can have a home that is also an investment?

The standard of prefabricated eco-friendly modular housing on the world market is very high. Such units can be modified to conform with the traditional or contemporary Thai house design.

The unit could be made of recycled teak or other durable 'gren' materials, and put together in a way that facilitates easy dismantling and relocation (and therefore retains value.)

In Chiang Mai I would consider locating them on lots of land leased on many of the underperforming small resorts on the outskirts of the city. You could for example get ownership of the house, have access to landscaped gardens, security , other services and have the opportunity of renting your unit out when you are away.

Perhaps under these circumstances a new category resident visa (5 -10 year ) becomes a possibility.

Many Chiang Mai officials and business people are really keen to have the city develop as a retirement centre for foreigners. They are fully aware of the multiplier effect of the retiree’s money (Baht 40-70K pr person) coming in each month brings, as well as the free promotion it gives the city. They just want a solution that avoids foreign land ownership.

Well, enough of jousting with avatars, let’s see if there are any real people out there.

Again, I welcome input from anyone with a genuine interest in contributing to the development of Chiang Mai, as opposed to whining about it’s failings from the sidelines. Avatars are fine, but we need real people to bring about postive change.

Coffee anyone?

Tourism Tiger

[getgoin]

I have long thought that The Night Bazaar needs to reinvent itself.

If you take a look at tourism in the last 20-30 years, shopping has always been one of the biggest attractions for Chiang Mai. Before, it was San Kampang-Bosang and the Night Bazaar along with pockets of cottage industries like lacquer, silver and textiles.

Things got bigger and the Night Bazaar expanded, Hang Dong and Baantawai grew up and the over priced, commission filled multi-craft shops in San Kampang-Bosang closed their doors. Craft centers like the JJ Market and The Kad Farang opened and failed.

Now, it's the walking streets and swap meets. These seems to do well.

I am not sure how well the shops and restaurants along the Sunday Walking Street do on Sunday. I do know that whenever they have the walking street type swap meets in The Rimping Maechok and at The Kad Farang the business owners complain that they might as well close their doors. It would be interesting to know and if there are any business owners who have a shop, not a table set up or a cart, along the Sunday Walking Street, how does the business compare to other days?

Another question I have is, if there were a river market where you could get a 30 Baht bowl of noodles, would a restaurant in a house selling Northern Thai Style Curry Noodles near the river get much business?

It has always been the case of borrowing from Peter to pay Paul.

I have not read the proposal put forth here but from what I gather from the comments it sounds like a couple of new tourist related shopping projects. Loi Kroh, the river and the sewage canal. (Not The Ping, the other sewage canal.) While these might be good ideas and I am not saying that they are not, the owners of The Shangrila and Le Meridian and all of the new Boutique Hotels also thought that their new accommodations were good ideas and that they had something better and different to offer and something that would bring tourists to Chiang Mai.

Rather than building new shopping projects or new hotels, at this point, not that new markets and hotels are not a good idea, how about something

different? Planting trees? Not good enough. A casino? Maybe. Disneyland Chiang Mai or some huge waterparks? Perhaps. Creative Kingdom's Lannawood? Not likely but a good start if it happens. A zoo that is really a front for an exotic meat restaurant for Asian customers? Already taken and it didn't work either.

[Donnyboy]

heres an idea, just improve on what we have,id be happy with more trees, level paths without holes you could fall in, underground electrical grid, clean accessible toilets, rubbish bins that look better than the wheelie ones on the street overflowing like a dump.

but as far as a floating river market, i think it wouldnt take long to become another white elephant

[cmsally]

Banning the ubiquitous shophouse would be fantastic; but maybe too late for that!

[daoyai]

I like shophouses, capitalism in very pure form, sell whatever you think you can and live upstairs. There does seem to be too many ugly new ones being built when there are still plenty vacant.