Interior Ministry orders further checks on Waterfront Residence in South Pattaya

[TheCruncher]

these 2 item are 'fix it" items in construction.Seems like major issues(view block, distance from sea etc.) have been swept under the carpet and the whole thing apparently has been reduced to fixable items.5000 sqm overall(100sqm per floor) won't be a deal-breaker.Developer obviously has experience with crisis-management and handling it good for them.slow but sure steps fwd..

yeah well. number 2 is not exactly a fix it item?

if the feasibility study was carried out on the basis of the area they have already built losing 5000 m² could affect the profitability of the whole project?

I don't think many developers would want to finish off in a breakeven situation

I don't think the 5000 sqm is about the inside of the building.

It say a permit was issued for 3800 sqm, which is nothing if you add up 50 floors, and 5000 sqm was used. I understand a TOTAL of 5000 sqm meter was used, or 1200 sqm on top of what was permitted.

So in my opinion we are talking about the ground floor.

How big is the plot on which the building stands?

I received information from another source which said the building should have been 38,516 m² (not 3800 m²). Also if you notice the information in johng’s post says “Pattaya City inspected the developmnt area that permited them 3.8 thousand square meters “

3.8 thousand is 3800, while 38 thousand is 38.000.

But since you have the info that it should be 38.516 I think we can say that it was a mistake in the report, and it will indeed be 5000 sqm they have to cut somewhere, if not that they actually build 50.000 sqm

[dogeatdogworld]

the news report has conflicting information.it mentions 3,800 sqm(three thousand eight hundred) and 38,000sqm(thirty eight thousand) in the same paragraph.I believe the more accurate 38,516 is the total square meter/ total living space the developer applied and got the permit for..Apparently they exceeded it during the construction by building extra 5,090sqm in total, which is roughly 100sqm per floor in a 53 floor construction.

who knows!

Edited February 15, 2016 by dogeatdogworld

[TheCruncher]

What is the going price at Waterfront, wasn't it in the range of 150K sqm?

5000 sqm x 150.000 Baht = 750.000.000 Baht, not exactly small change.

[Asiantravel]

whenever I'm in the area and I gaze up at the structure I keep wondering about the enormous challenge of partial demolition. About the cost involved of doing so and the practical difficulties.

The other day I started wondering what if they offered pattaya city itself ownership of the extra 5000 m in return for being allowed to immediately recommence the building work?pattaya city could then achieve a rental return from this part of the building which they could apply to all the costs involved in running the city and the developers would avoid the cost and time involved of demolishing the part which they were not meant to have built in the first place?

Does it sound crazy?

[pattayadude]

I doubt they will go to the extent of demolition of floors. On the contrary, the developer could turn lowest floors into parking for extra spaces required. Crazier maybe but it's the best solution to kill two birds with one stone. This way, the 38,000 sqm limit will be met(issue #1), AND have enough parking space (issue #2)

Edited February 26, 2016 by pattayadude

[Asiantravel]

I doubt they will go to the extent of demolition of floors. On the contrary, the developer could turn lowest floors into parking for extra spaces required. Crazier maybe but it's the best solution to kill two birds with one stone. This way, the 38,000 sqm limit will be met(issue #1), AND have enough parking space (issue #2)

does that mean the developers will have to to buy back areas on the lower floors that were already sold as condominiums?

[pattayadude]

I don't think there's any other way.

[TheCruncher]

whenever I'm in the area and I gaze up at the structure I keep wondering about the enormous challenge of partial demolition. About the cost involved of doing so and the practical difficulties.

The other day I started wondering what if they offered pattaya city itself ownership of the extra 5000 m in return for being allowed to immediately recommence the building work?pattaya city could then achieve a rental return from this part of the building which they could apply to all the costs involved in running the city and the developers would avoid the cost and time involved of demolishing the part which they were not meant to have built in the first place?

Does it sound crazy?

You mean like offering an illegal building to city hall and thinking that would make it legal at once.

Yeah, sounds crazy.

[pattayadude]

And everything else is legal... Give me a break!

[Asiantravel]

whenever I'm in the area and I gaze up at the structure I keep wondering about the enormous challenge of partial demolition. About the cost involved of doing so and the practical difficulties.

The other day I started wondering what if they offered pattaya city itself ownership of the extra 5000 m in return for being allowed to immediately recommence the building work?pattaya city could then achieve a rental return from this part of the building which they could apply to all the costs involved in running the city and the developers would avoid the cost and time involved of demolishing the part which they were not meant to have built in the first place?

Does it sound crazy?

You mean like offering an illegal building to city hall and thinking that would make it legal at once.

Yeah, sounds crazy.

you don't think money talks louder than laws in this city?

[Asiantravel]

I doubt they will go to the extent of demolition of floors. On the contrary, the developer could turn lowest floors into parking for extra spaces required. Crazier maybe but it's the best solution to kill two birds with one stone. This way, the 38,000 sqm limit will be met(issue #1), AND have enough parking space (issue #2)

But do the lowest floors in the building have sufficient headroom for parking?

[pattayadude]

Doable

[JESSVANPELT]

I doubt they will go to the extent of demolition of floors. On the contrary, the developer could turn lowest floors into parking for extra spaces required. Crazier maybe but it's the best solution to kill two birds with one stone. This way, the 38,000 sqm limit will be met(issue #1), AND have enough parking space (issue #2)

does that mean the developers will have to to buy back areas on the lower floors that were already sold as condominiums?

the only way they can comply with the original building permit is to knock of 2 of the upper floors, but in doing so you eliminate your high priced penthouses

Secondly its almost impossible to double the vehicle parking spaces required, they now have 30 and need 60. There is really not much land outside thats suitable, so this mammon taking some ground floor apartments and flipping them into a car park/

[JESSVANPELT]

I doubt they will go to the extent of demolition of floors. On the contrary, the developer could turn lowest floors into parking for extra spaces required. Crazier maybe but it's the best solution to kill two birds with one stone. This way, the 38,000 sqm limit will be met(issue #1), AND have enough parking space (issue #2)

But do the lowest floors in the building have sufficient headroom for parking?

parking space is part of the space allocated so doing this does not satisfy both, only the parking problem

[pattayadude]

Let's face it. The developer isn't gonna give up the whole project just because the building is short of 30 parking spots. Its like burning the whole bed for one bed bug. There are solutions and sometimes even enemies have to meet in the middle to avoid catastrophe.

[LennyW]

I doubt they will go to the extent of demolition of floors. On the contrary, the developer could turn lowest floors into parking for extra spaces required. Crazier maybe but it's the best solution to kill two birds with one stone. This way, the 38,000 sqm limit will be met(issue #1), AND have enough parking space (issue #2)

does that mean the developers will have to to buy back areas on the lower floors that were already sold as condominiums?

the only way they can comply with the original building permit is to knock of 2 of the upper floors, but in doing so you eliminate your high priced penthouses

Secondly its almost impossible to double the vehicle parking spaces required, they now have 30 and need 60. There is really not much land outside thats suitable, so this mammon taking some ground floor apartments and flipping them into a car park/

Very simple solution is do it Japan style, virtually every apartment/condo block in Hiroshima has elevator parking like in the picture. You key in your code and the lift goes up or down to bring your car to ground level and the gate opens.

Edited February 28, 2016 by LennyW

[pattayadude]

Even with hydraulics, they need to build enough space for 30 more cars.

[pattayadude]

Build or buy a building nearby and convert it to parking for valet type is another solution

[LennyW]

Even with hydraulics, they need to build enough space for 30 more cars.

Yeah, but even with a simple one like i posted above, you can have parking for 40 cars, but only need a footprint for 10.

[pattayadude]

The question is. If the City is willing to work with the developer, I'm sure they can find a solution but I'm afraid the situation isn't that simple and I don't even know what the main reason is for this unwillingness.

[johng]

The ground floor looks high enough for most pickup trucks

and the third floor is very high !!!

Edited February 29, 2016 by johng

[pattayadude]

Hydraulic elevators can do the trick

[johng]

Important Waterfront Update

We are writing to address some recent false reporting in the press and social media, and provide you with a full update on the current situation.

13th February 2016 was the deadline date for Pattaya City Hall to issue the construction permit, or to provide any further final comments.

Being that this was a Saturday we received an official letter from Pattaya City Hall on Tuesday 16th February. In this letter they have requested clarification on just two points.

A calculation from us to show the usable space, non-useable and saleable area within the building.

A presentation on how the automatic car parking will work.

We have fully completed a detailed analysis and breakdown on the space of the building and a full presentation on the car parking set up, and this was submitted to Pattaya City Hall as of Friday 19th February 2016.

Both issues that Pattaya City Hall had raised were simple enough for us to answer and we believe they are legal under the Building Act.

Our understanding is that Pattaya City Hall, have just one final 30 day period to review our submission to these points and either issue the permit or refuse, we are not aware of any reason that they can or will ask for any other information from us.

We will update you again in 30 days.

Sincere thanks for your patience.

Bali Hai Company Limited

[striderman]

some of the marina piles have begun to topple, quite an achievement as it has never actually opened so it is not down to general wear and tear

i have not noticed any work on the waterfront site or seen the main crane move since oct 2nd 2014

[KittenKong]

Could a boat have struck any of the ones that have fallen over? Or is it just erosion at the base?

Some of the remaining piles dont appear to be fully vertical either, though it may be an effect of the camera lens. Or indeed they may never have been fully vertical.

[striderman]

kittenklong other than the odd boat sometimes tied up the marina has not been used.

shoddy work installing them is the favourite and the situation is likely to get worse as time passes

[Jiu-Jitsu]

guess the question now is who, if anyone, is going to pay for the demolition?

Generally such failed projects just sit there forever, to serve as a reminder. There are plenty of them around.

However this one is in a particularly prominent position and I suspect that local government and tourism officials will not want it to stay as it is.

Grease the correct wheels and train will roll along just nicely.

give it time.

Perhaps they don't want to or cannot afford another round.

The marina and parking project an abject failure and an eyesore. Existing customers will be clamouring for their money back and new buyers will be hard to find and convince.

The shills proclaiming 'iconic building' have all but disappeared.

Who will pay for the clean up? No one it seems. The whole mess just sits there....

[CRUNCHER]

From Pattayawatchdog facebook

https://www.facebook.com/PattayaWatchdog/posts/1089003807811206

apologies for my and google's translation effort.

As expected

Pattaya City has not renewed construction permits for Waterfront condominium.

According to a review due on February 13, 2559.

This news follows two main reasons.

1. Parking as described in the EIA report, was for 60 places

but developers only provided 30 places subsequently told Pataya city that

parking would be resolved by using a 2 storey hydraulic system floor height of 3.2 meters, but the city checked and found it inadequate for large vehicles.

2. Pattaya City inspected the developmnt area that permited them 3.8 thousand square meters,

and found more than five thousand square meters used without permission.

City building permit can not be renewed.

I am not sure how much credence can be placed on a report like this.

I cannot comment on the car park because I have no knowledge on this, but the discrepancy on the floor area is just too great to be believable - it is over 30%. The building has a foot print of so many square meters multiplied by the number of floors (and I believe the developer built fewer floors than he was entitled to). Any civil servant with a calculator could have worked this out years ago. How come this has just surfaced after the building has been inspected, measured and investigated every which way for the last 18 months.

When you look at this in conjunction with all the lies that have been told about this project over the past 18 months - too high, too close to the sea, land was stolen to included in the project etc. etc ad nausium- all of which have been debunked, this project has been the victim of some very bad people.

Yes, the developer has said that some questions have been asked, questions that should have been asked months ago, but that does not mean that the above is accurate.

To me it looks like more lies spread by people conducting a vendetta against the developer or City Hall or the Government or maybe all three.

Even by Thailand standards this has dragged on for far too long. It is a disgrace. If this building was illegal it would have been stopped long ago. The authorities are delaying the inevitable to try and find some way to save face for stopping the project in the first place.

[dogeatdogworld]

From Pattayawatchdog facebook

https://www.facebook.com/PattayaWatchdog/posts/1089003807811206

apologies for my and google's translation effort.

As expected

Pattaya City has not renewed construction permits for Waterfront condominium.

According to a review due on February 13, 2559.

This news follows two main reasons.

1. Parking as described in the EIA report, was for 60 places

but developers only provided 30 places subsequently told Pataya city that

parking would be resolved by using a 2 storey hydraulic system floor height of 3.2 meters, but the city checked and found it inadequate for large vehicles.

2. Pattaya City inspected the developmnt area that permited them 3.8 thousand square meters,

and found more than five thousand square meters used without permission.

City building permit can not be renewed.

I am not sure how much credence can be placed on a report like this.

I cannot comment on the car park because I have no knowledge on this, but the discrepancy on the floor area is just too great to be believable - it is over 30%. The building has a foot print of so many square meters multiplied by the number of floors (and I believe the developer built fewer floors than he was entitled to). Any civil servant with a calculator could have worked this out years ago. How come this has just surfaced after the building has been inspected, measured and investigated every which way for the last 18 months.

When you look at this in conjunction with all the lies that have been told about this project over the past 18 months - too high, too close to the sea, land was stolen to included in the project etc. etc ad nausium- all of which have been debunked, this project has been the victim of some very bad people.

Yes, the developer has said that some questions have been asked, questions that should have been asked months ago, but that does not mean that the above is accurate.

To me it looks like more lies spread by people conducting a vendetta against the developer or City Hall or the Government or maybe all three.

Even by Thailand standards this has dragged on for far too long. It is a disgrace. If this building was illegal it would have been stopped long ago. The authorities are delaying the inevitable to try and find some way to save face for stopping the project in the first place.

it probably wasn't stopped because the left hand knew what the right hand was doing and authorities turned the other way in the beginning and during the construction. However when an investigation became inevitable, they all started playing the three monkeys. It's almost impossible that the developers found out about the extra floor area on the eleventh hour. And equally ridiculous what a civil servant could have figured out with a cheap tape measure and a calculator, took the inspectors 18 months to catch!...Whom can you believe at this point??? Why did the marina stopped almost the same time the construction was stopped? What's the relation? Is there one!?

I can come up with at least 20 questions more on this line.

[Rimmer]

A troll post with an attached picture claiming to have been taken the other evening showing a completed and occupied building has been removed.