City officials begin demolition of South Pattaya Hotel

[JSixpack]

I think you are being very unfair to KittenKong who is thinking outside the box .

These kind of problems have been overcome before, such as in earthquake damaged high-rise buildings down in New Zealand for example.

I'm sure if people tried they could come up with a system of props and bracing or some similar way to strengthen the structure.

http://www.ubscure.com/Art/90919/28/The-process-of-adding-a-reinforced-concrete-column.html

Well, it's just amazing what money and time can do. True.

But of course the owner must have considered such a solution to keep his extra floors. If he didn't discover that it's impossible in this case, he certainly concluded that it would be cost ineffective, assuming he could even find the extra money.

There is no way to either of us to know how the discussions between the authorities and the owner have gone on?

If there was any element of bloody mindedness on either side it would have been impossible to even explore any possible alternative solutions ?

And if the authorities imposed a requirement for him to complete reinforcement works as a condition for him to be able to legally use the remaining 50% of the building - as to whether it was cost-effective or not wouldn't have even entered into the equation?

It was explored; nobody's that stupid, though people do like to imagine that Thais are. A good deal of money's on the line.

Common sense, my man.

But you must consider that even if it was structurally "repaired," our countless experts here would predict the building would fall down anyway. NO repair would ever be satisfactory.

[NanLaew]

Adding four floors to an existing structure without permission is, by definition, unsafe.

No it isn't. It's only unsafe if the existing structure cant take the extra weight. Permission has nothing to do with it especially as the permission may be more to do with the environmental impact of increasing the building height anyway, or a means to collect tax revenue.

Without permission pretty much includes without planning or engineering IMHO.

There was a notable hotel collapse in Korat about 15 years ago when the owner illegally added a couple of floors to the existing structure. Managed to operate safely for a few years until he decided to solve the long-running water shortage problem caused by not planning for the simple fact that more rooms need more water. He had water tanks built onto the top floor and when they filled them up, the whole lot collapsed.

[Ulic]

It's all fine until the collapse then everyone points to the other guy. Engineers, building permits, inspectors. The owner

throws up his hands and says as far as he knows everything was in order. Especially if the current owner sells the

building. Best to shut the hotel down refund all the guests there money, give them a little extra for the inconvenience add

everything to the bill the owner will have to pay to take the top floors down, plus interest. Fix a date for the fine to be paid.

Sell the hotel to pay the bill if the owner does not pay. May take some time. But it would send a clear message

to other property owners/developers to make sure all bribes to get the correct permits and inspections done must be paid.

You can't have these people going ahead and doing work without the correct thick envelopes being dispersed appropriately.

[Pattaya28]

Quote "1 hour reprieve was given so the hotel guests could safely vacate the rooms to allow the demolition teams to continue"

Thank goodness for the reprieve !!

[PeterSmiles]

By the pictures in the article the demolishing has indeed already begun.

Previous threads on the subject have devoted pages to such barstool sneers from our resident cynics, know-it-alls, and blowhards.

And where are they now? A scant few showing up to backpedal.

But I expect more to show up like PeterSmiles and claim it's not really happening while it is--and after it's done, deny it was really done, claiming the photos are faked, blah, blah, blah.

I know you consider yourself an authority on this forum, unfortunately you're the only one who is considering that, but wasn't there only a few weeks ago an article where those same government officials went to that very same hotel with those very same intentions to start the demolishing, and had to return empty handed as they were denied access ?

Hey here it is

Failed attempt to begin demolition of popular South Pattaya Hotel

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/681218-failed-attempt-to-begin-demolition-of-popular-south-pattaya-hotel/

Now go back your favorite afternoon beer bar on Soi Bukhoaw, slurping some 40 Baht Changs during happy hour, as that is the only place where you can make yourself feel important.

Ah, but that was then; this is now. As LennyW pointed out, the pics show it has in fact begun.

But if you want to believe it ain't happenin', 'cause you wisely KNOW it ain't really, then be my guest. Cheers!

I didn't notice the picture Lenny mentions in the OP or anywhere else in this thread, and I recall that I'm reading Thaivisa not Pattaya One.

But fair enough there is a picture in the newspaper that the demolition has started, which doesn't mean it can't be stopped right now and there.

If you still think my comment was so far of the mark, maybe you should be reminded of that other demolition case of 101 illegal businesses on walking street which is going on for something like 20 years. Yet not a single demolition has taken place. Budget provided by the government has disappeared once already, but I think the second budget was approved more than 5 years ago.

How many times have they started the demolition of the Nang Nual, which is part of those 101 businesses, seating area above the sea? Has it been demolished yet ?

As far as I recall they have started and stopped at least 4 times.

How many new businesses have started on those very same illegal premises since the announcement 20 years ago , and granted a license?

So what makes you think that this case is different, after all we're talking about the same laws applied in the same country and even the same city.

[KittenKong]

No, completely wrong point. KittenKong seems to have a Bangladeshi understanding of structural engineering. From earlier photos the new floors add about 50% to the height, and therefore the weight of the building. Most tall buildings in Pattaya stand on concrete pile foundations. How exactly would you go about adding new concrete piles under the foundations to support the extra weight? It's not just a simple matter of sticking in a few extra props.

Actually this wasnt the point I was making at all.

Assuming no extra work is done then the addition of extra floors will be safe if and only if the building was originally designed to support those extra floors. It doesnt matter what permissions or rubber-stamps are provided.

I once owned a bungalow that had been built specifically to support an extra floor (ie as a house). I could have had that single-story building extended upwards at any time without any danger at all. The same may well apply to this hotel, but no piece of paper will change whether it does or not.

[Spalpeen]

It's true that some buildings are designed with the intention of adding more floors at a future date, but it's extremely rare. This is mainly down to extra cost.

Reinforced concrete structures are designed with a very large safety margin. This is because the design engineer doesn't know how well the construction will be carried out or what internal loads might be placed in the future - a huge water tank on the roof, for example. Typically, a concrete structure will take over twice it's design load before it gives way. That's why this hotel has not yet collapsed after the addition of four extra floors.

But I'd be absolutely certain that this structure wasn't designed for the extra floors, because if it was they would have had no problem getting approval for the work. And there's no engineer on earth who would put his name to approving changes that eat so far into a building's safety margin.

[Langsuan Man]

Why does every topic here at TV bring out the damn testosterone in the posters

Would someone who lives in the area, please walk outside and look up and tell us if there is any demolition work taking place at the subject hotel on Thursday 28 November 2013

[KittenKong]

But I'd be absolutely certain that this structure wasn't designed for the extra floors, because if it was they would have had no problem getting approval for the work.

Which is why I commented that for all we know they didn't request permission simply because it would have involved some large tax payment or fee, or other bureaucratic difficulty, not because the structure would not support it.

And we still don't know.

But even so I find it somewhat unlikely that the owner of a large and fairly expensive building situated in the middle of a popular downtown area would take chances with his building collapsing due to improperly constructed extensions. After all, this would invalidate his insurance and he would end up with nothing but the land and some rubble, some big lawsuits for damages and probably a large number of government agencies after his scalp.

Now if it was a cheap factory building on the outskirts of Nakorn Nowhere then I might think it much more likely.

[KittenKong]

Why does every topic here at TV bring out the dam_n testosterone in the posters

I see no testosterone.

Why do so many people on here assume that posters only post because they are totally obsessed with the subject about which they are writing, and that they are all foaming at the mouth with anger and concern, and hammering their keyboards to pieces in fury?

Personally I post on here about local situations and Thailand-related things that I find interesting because I am retired and have nothing better to do. It makes a change from playing Suduko and listening to Radio 4 and walking along the beach, and it's certainly cheaper (and much nicer) than sitting in a bar listening to former CIA/SAS personnel tell me their unlikely life stories. And when I get bored with the posted inanities on here I can just stop looking at my monitor and look out of my window at the sea and hills instead. It's all rather pleasant and relaxing really.

I certainly dont get at all worked up about anything being discussed in here. With the exception of the really important topics like where the best breakfast/curry/pizza is, of course.

[Langsuan Man]

So that means that you don't know whether or not they are continuing with the demolition of the hotel ! Thank you for posting your reasons for posting

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[KittenKong]

Thank you for posting your reasons for posting

You're welcome. And thank you for your interesting question about testosterone levels to which I replied, presumably as you wanted.

[JSixpack]

I didn't notice the picture Lenny mentions in the OP or anywhere else in this thread, and I recall that I'm reading Thaivisa not Pattaya One.

Excellent recollection. Maybe you could, like, bother yourself to notice it. The OP was just an excerpt from Pattaya One and referred to the article at Pattaya One. Therefore to know what you're talking about, you'd need to read that article and see the pics. But you didn't.

But fair enough there is a picture in the newspaper that the demolition has started, which doesn't mean it can't be stopped right now and there.

Yeah. And if it were demolished, it could just be rebuilt the same way, right? Anything can happen, man!

You know, I think you've gotten your panties in a wad simply because you misunderstood my purpose. Merely by grouping you with the cynics, know-it-alls, and blowhards, I didn't mean to suggest you curb your enjoyment of hittin' that ol' sour note. Hit it enough times and in enough places and you've just got to be right at some point, heh, heh. Go to it!

And who knows, though it seems quite unlikely, you could be ultimately right. But I wouldn't care one way or the other: I prefer just to wait and see rather than blow hot air. I do enjoy laughing at all the hot air, though.

How many times have they started the demolition of the Nang Nual, which is part of those 101 businesses, seating area above the sea? Has it been demolished yet ?

Yawn. You've confused apples and oranges again--one reason it's not worth wasting time replying to you, so this'll be my last.

TOTALLY different cases.

Was this demolished?

http://bangkok.coconuts.co/2013/06/19/bangkok-fishbowl-exotic-species-swim-free-abandoned-mall

How could you have ignored that?

In the meantime, demolition has in fact started. Cheer up: things could be much, much worse if your very wise, very shrewd prediction doesn't come true. Be thankful you'll avoid coming castration as in the sad cases of poor Gsxrnz and 2169 (who is "with him on this"):

I'll bet both my nuts that the buildings will still be standing in 7 years, never mind 7 days.

Living in PTY without nuts--can one possibly imagine a worse fate?

[PeterSmiles]

How many times have they started the demolition of the Nang Nual, which is part of those 101 businesses, seating area above the sea? Has it been demolished yet ?

Yawn. You've confused apples and oranges again--one reason it's not worth wasting time replying to you, so this'll be my last.

TOTALLY different cases.

Was this demolished?

http://bangkok.coconuts.co/2013/06/19/bangkok-fishbowl-exotic-species-swim-free-abandoned-mall

How could you have ignored that?

I

And you dare to say I get confused ?

In the Coconuts article that you link to is said that the company was in breach with building regulations and that the 7 illegal floors were indeed dismantled. So the law was enforced,

Why you feel the need to bring up a case in a different jurisdiction that is actually known for enforcing the law, while I am talking about a demolition of 101 businesses ordered by the court , in the same part of the city as the Boutique hotel, and which after 20 years still isn't enforced.

I think you should stay away from that cheap Chang, so you would be able to differentiate apples from oranges.

Edited November 28, 2013 by Rimmer
Libel

[JSixpack]

So that means that you don't know whether or not they are continuing with the demolition of the hotel ! Thank you for posting your reasons for posting

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Well, now, black fox can just go out onto his balcony and let us all know exactly what's happening.

i can see the building from my balcony and it still standing, i dont expect any changes soon if ever.

But maybe the concept of "face" holds good with farangs, too.

[phycokiller]

rather odd that they considered the building to be in danger of falling but let the owner continue to rent out rooms while he did or didnt fix it

[Spalpeen]

rather odd that they considered the building to be in danger of falling but let the owner continue to rent out rooms while he did or didnt fix it

.

'Rather odd' is putting it mildly. If the thing did, or does, collapse the City Council would have some very hard questions to answer.

[marinediscoking]

I did not think they were going to enforce the building code and have been watching this matter closely for some time. After driving by earlier this evening it looks like de-construction is under way, at least by looking at the entrance now compared to 2 days ago. Looking up there are no noticeable walls that have come down from the upper stories, but I guess that will take time.

.

Edited November 28, 2013 by marinediscoking

[lemoncake]

i am not a building expert, as a matter of fact have no clue at all about building game, but how on earth do you dismantle top floors without damaging all the floors below? and then who would be paying for all the damages?

i am however somewhat an expert on working with Thai builders and from what i saw and learned, i am almost certain they will break and damage anything and everything possible.

This indeed may turn out to be an interesting story to follow up

[MB1]

Aha. No permits. Not safety. Can't have no permits going around can we. Actually, I agree with the concept but they COULD have shown up in the AM with a few cops after 9 AM and starting knocking on doors informing the tenants they had 48 hours to check out and find a new room.

A few days wouldn't have changed the outcome and it would have shown some compassion for the people in the rooms. It is near high season and if they had a long term rental they may need time to find another one. And of course no one cares if they paid in advance. TIT.

I'd have thought that the right thing to do would be that the authoritys in charge of the demolition would have had a plan in place to look after the tourists/residents and arrange alternative accomodation for them, the deputy mayor and those others in charge of this need a good kick up the arse for allowing what happened to the residents of the hotel, giving them one hour to vacate rooms after discussions just aint good enough and is not the way to treat tourists to Pattaya or Thailand, but aah well it is Thailand after all and they were in a hotel that had broken rules, though through no fault of their own...

Just another day in Pattaya/Thailand and another example how tourists are treated by those who are supposed to look after them.

[KittenKong]

rather odd that they considered the building to be in danger of falling but let the owner continue to rent out rooms while he did or didnt fix it

I still haven't read any official comment or newspaper report that contains any mention of danger or the possibility of the building falling over.

All I have seen is this: "Officials confirmed that the extensions to the Hotel are in contravention of the Bureaucratic Administrative Procedures Act 1996 Section 58(1) and Section 59" which to me suggests that the only complaint is that the proper permits (and presumably the corresponding fees/taxes) were not taken care of prior to the building work.

So to me this still seems to be a financial/administrative matter rather than anything else.

[Spalpeen]

rather odd that they considered the building to be in danger of falling but let the owner continue to rent out rooms while he did or didnt fix it

I still haven't read any official comment or newspaper report that contains any mention of danger or the possibility of the building falling over.

All I have seen is this: "Officials confirmed that the extensions to the Hotel are in contravention of the Bureaucratic Administrative Procedures Act 1996 Section 58(1) and Section 59" which to me suggests that the only complaint is that the proper permits (and presumably the corresponding fees/taxes) were not taken care of prior to the building work.

So to me this still seems to be a financial/administrative matter rather than anything else.

So if you were living in this building...........

........ you wouldn't be the least bit concerned about the safety of the structure? You would just see it as a bit of an administrative problem?

[KittenKong]

So if you were living in this building...........

........ you wouldn't be the least bit concerned about the safety of the structure? You would just see it as a bit of an administrative problem?

I might be concerned but until there was some negative comment from an expert I would see no reason to be alarmed.

[LongTimeLurker]

I wonder WHY they want to demolish this building too. Unsafe? I didn't read that in the article.

Adding several more floors to a building designed for x floors, what do you think? There have been collapses in the past for this type of behavior.

I think from memory, in this case its because owner of the hotel did not obtain permit to build. I do not think safety was an issue, more the fact that owners by passed City Hall.

I hope you do not call me wrong again, too many time for this week already

I guess they may now be getting serioous and take action next against the 101 businesses on Walking Street that have been illegally built.

I've been holding my breathe on that one for the last 20 years.

[LongTimeLurker]

rather odd that they considered the building to be in danger of falling but let the owner continue to rent out rooms while he did or didnt fix it

I still haven't read any official comment or newspaper report that contains any mention of danger or the possibility of the building falling over.

All I have seen is this: "Officials confirmed that the extensions to the Hotel are in contravention of the Bureaucratic Administrative Procedures Act 1996 Section 58(1) and Section 59" which to me suggests that the only complaint is that the proper permits (and presumably the corresponding fees/taxes) were not taken care of prior to the building work.

So to me this still seems to be a financial/administrative matter rather than anything else.

So if you were living in this building...........

........ you wouldn't be the least bit concerned about the safety of the structure? You would just see it as a bit of an administrative problem?

I doubt any such permit exists to put a hill and forest on top of your building

[lemoncake]

rather odd that they considered the building to be in danger of falling but let the owner continue to rent out rooms while he did or didnt fix it

I still haven't read any official comment or newspaper report that contains any mention of danger or the possibility of the building falling over.

All I have seen is this: "Officials confirmed that the extensions to the Hotel are in contravention of the Bureaucratic Administrative Procedures Act 1996 Section 58(1) and Section 59" which to me suggests that the only complaint is that the proper permits (and presumably the corresponding fees/taxes) were not taken care of prior to the building work.

So to me this still seems to be a financial/administrative matter rather than anything else.

So if you were living in this building...........

........ you wouldn't be the least bit concerned about the safety of the structure? You would just see it as a bit of an administrative problem?

I doubt any such permit exists to put a hill and forest on top of your building

The latest green trend, its called vertical gardens. In Australia they finishing one up now.

[LongTimeLurker]

Around which time we expect the news flash " Government workers are denied access to the Boutique Hotel, so have to leave without doing any demolishing " ?

By the pictures in the article the demolishing has indeed already begun.

Previous threads on the subject have devoted pages to such barstool sneers from our resident cynics, know-it-alls, and blowhards.

And where are they now? A scant few showing up to backpedal.

But I expect more to show up like PeterSmiles and claim it's not really happening while it is--and after it's done, deny it was really done, claiming the photos are faked, blah, blah, blah.

Remember a few years ago our resident structural engineers and H&S types were all telling us Central was going to collapse?

Isn't that why they added all the extra steel bracings? To prevent a collapse?

[wooloomooloo]

There's no way I would stay. For all those stating nothing to be concerned about, quite frankly, you're all bonkers.

I'd move out immediately knowing the state of play with this establishment and claim on my travel insurance and continue my holiday, alive.

Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

[PeterSmiles]

Remember a few years ago our resident structural engineers and H&S types were all telling us Central was going to collapse?

Isn't that why they added all the extra steel bracings? To prevent a collapse?

I don't want to change the subject to Central, and also don't want say anything is wrong with that building, but I have a question regarding.

I seldom go to Central but about two weeks ago i happened to be there and exited the fourth floor of the department store to the parking lot. This is the door closest to 2nd road.

While I was standing right outside the exit/entrance door, a limousine drove by through the parking lot, read my words a single limousine not a loaded truck, and I felt the concrete under my feet moved considerably.

Is this normal behavior or not ?

[lemoncake]

Remember a few years ago our resident structural engineers and H&S types were all telling us Central was going to collapse?

Isn't that why they added all the extra steel bracings? To prevent a collapse?

I don't want to change the subject to Central, and also don't want say anything is wrong with that building, but I have a question regarding.

I seldom go to Central but about two weeks ago i happened to be there and exited the fourth floor of the department store to the parking lot. This is the door closest to 2nd road.

While I was standing right outside the exit/entrance door, a limousine drove by through the parking lot, read my words a single limousine not a loaded truck, and I felt the concrete under my feet moved considerably.

Is this normal behavior or not ?

Nah, nothing, it was a bullet proof limo, with heavy load