Interior Ministry orders further checks on Waterfront Residence in South Pattaya

[NanLaew]

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.

They use the same 'technology' as the light company does when they plant their power poles along the roadside.

[champa]

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.

Referred to the original source on manager online (http://manager.co.th/Local/ViewNews.aspx?NewsID=9590000015582).

In the news said that Pattaya City did not issue the construction permit based on 2 important issues.

First is parking lodges is less than the permitted plan. It should be 60 lodges but the current building has only 30 lodges. The developer has a solution they will use the hydraulic parking system with 2 stories, 3.2 m. height per floor that will provide 60 parking lodges. By the way Pattaya City found that the parking lodges are very narrow, only small car can park there.Then Pattaya City suggest the developer to add more space for the parking lodge.

(You can see the parking area at Centara grand pratamnak which owned by tulip group for example)

note: This information was confuse. As the information in the eia report shown that the building should be 149 parking lodges. Problem is the 149 parking lodges was calculated by 315 rooms. At the present this building will has more rooms (about 100 more rooms for hotel) and more restaurant. The regulation spec that the building should has more parking for hotel room and for restaurant area. Actually the building should be more parking than 149 lodges to be legal building.

Second, Pattaya City found that the building has 5,090 sqm. using area more that the permitted plan. This is BIG issue.

Back to the EIA and construction plan which was approved and premetted on 2008. The Pattaya City planing act on that time (the old version) had control the size of the building on this area by Floor area ratio (FAR) at 1:10. This means the building size should not be more than 10 times of land size.

This project, land size is 3,853.6 sqm. then the building should not be more than 38,536 sqm. If the using area on the building be more than 38,536 sqm. The building will be illegal. In this case Pattaya City found that the building has 5,090 sqm. more than the regulation so the building now is illegal.

To fix this issue they should reduce the using area. source said on the news confirmed that the building are not match the permitted plan in all 53 floors (every floor) I guess that it should be wider than the plan side by side in every floor. average is about 100 sqm per floor. so it should be 10 m side by side.

Note: the current version of city planing act which was issued on April 15. The FAR now reduce to 1:7.

[pattayadude]

It's the City's responsibility to inspect day ONE that the floor area matches the plans.This goes for every city and every country,let alone Thailand, even for a Banana Republic!.

And same for every aspect of life. You warn a kid not to steal early age if you don't wanna end up with a bank robber in his adult life.

They could have measured the freaking floor area with a cheap tape measure during the first stage of the construction to avoid such disastrous ending!

So the City of Pattaya or whoever is responsible with the issuance of the permits and inspections are equally or even more GUILTY.

Edited March 9, 2016 by pattayadude

[champa]

The cover page of local media, march issue.

It is hard for me to direct translate the head line.

This is negative wording for Waterfront like in the very hard time.

The Mayor confirmed many thing wrong with the building the sentence ending with the word "demolish".

[johng]

My wife translates the front page headline something like this.

Waterfront under heavy fire from many sides,

Pattaya Mayor ( nick name Dtik) agitated says not built to specifications but they (presumably the developer) refuse to demolish.

[EyesWideOpen]

I am very much looking forward to this investigation. I hope the story will be well covered.

Nope. Thai style, it will do the gentle fadeaway.

Construction will wait a bit, then proceed full

steam....

[Jiu-Jitsu]

I am very much looking forward to this investigation. I hope the story will be well covered.

Nope. Thai style, it will do the gentle fadeaway.

Construction will wait a bit, then proceed full

steam....

No...it won't.

[EyesWideOpen]

I am very much looking forward to this investigation. I hope the story will be well covered.

Nope. Thai style, it will do the gentle fadeaway.

Construction will wait a bit, then proceed full

steam....

No...it won't.

We shall see. The only parallel I can think of is when

that giant tower of a building was built in Patong, Phuket.

It sat unfinished for years. Then when the furor died away,

construction was started back up, and the units were

finally finished and sold. There is no was on god's green

earth that this project will be demolished. Anyone who

thinks that has not been here very long..... There will

be some noise made to save face at city hall for allowing

this monstrosity to be built, the right money will change

hands, and this building will indeed be finished.....

[champa]

The guilty is not on the city hall for allowing this construction permit.

By now,City hall announced some illegal issues which were developer's guilts.

First the developer encroach hill foot, public area for 173 sq.wa.

Second the developer did not follow the permitted plan. The city hall said that 5,090 excess area on the building. It is worth 700 million baht.

This shows that the developer is greedy with out good governance.

For your information some thai said, his friend paid deposit for 3 million baht. Now he get back 30%.

This is case by case. I think it was depend on the negotiation.

Other thai said they did not get any of deposit back.

Edited March 11, 2016 by champa

[pattayadude]

You are misleading people

[dogeatdogworld]

"The guilty is not on the city hall for allowing this construction permit. "

Allowing to build on 100sqm more area is more guilty than adding 100sqm more than on the plans.

Allowing to build on "sacred land"(as many of you call it) is even more guilty.

Allowing a 53 storey building which would have eventually and clearly block that view is the guiltiest.

All the City could and should have said 10 years ago was: " we are sorry but your plans WILL block the view so we can NOT allow this construction "

That's it!

Everybody would go home and no harm done and life would go on!

I can intellectually argue on this with you until the end of times.

Your posts were supposed to be "informational" but they now turned out to be biased. So that makes all your arguments biased.

[KittenKong]

The guilty is not on the city hall for allowing this construction permit.

By now,City hall announced some illegal issues which were developer's guilts.

In Western countries the government department that issues the building permit would check on a regular basis that the job description is being followed and would stop building immediately if any irregularities are found. This involves representatives of the building permit department actually getting off their backsides and going to the site and doing something.

In Thailand this doesnt happen, but it doesnt make it any less City Hall's fault.

Here you cant just assume that everyone will obey the rules. In fact here you can generally assume the opposite. If you want the rules to be followed here you have to check every single thing daily, and carry a big stick to beat people with if they dont do as they are supposed to. And your stick will get a lot of use.

[champa]

The guilty is not on the city hall for allowing this construction permit.

By now,City hall announced some illegal issues which were developer's guilts.

In Western countries the government department that issues the building permit would check on a regular basis that the job description is being followed and would stop building immediately if any irregularities are found. This involves representatives of the building permit department actually getting off their backsides and going to the site and doing something.

In Thailand this doesnt happen, but it doesnt make it any less City Hall's fault.

Here you cant just assume that everyone will obey the rules. In fact here you can generally assume the opposite. If you want the rules to be followed here you have to check every single thing daily, and carry a big stick to beat people with if they dont do as they are supposed to. And your stick will get a lot of use.

I am not on Pattaya City hall side. Many of people in Pattaya blamed Pattaya City for issurance the construction permit. There were some illegal issues on the construction plan. For example the seaside street is very narrow and not be allowed to build high rise tower.

I just updated the Pattaya City hall action by now.

I am Totally agree with you that it is Pattaya City hall's fault that they did not check the construction process.

Please tell me, what happen in the Western country when the government department found some thing wrong in the construction process?

Do they safe face by let the developer continue construction?

By now Pattaya City announced that they found something wrong on the under construction building.

Pattaya City hall asked the developer to adjust the paper plan to match the building.

But If the real building is illegal what do they do in the western country?

[CRUNCHER]

"The guilty is not on the city hall for allowing this construction permit. "

Allowing to build on 100sqm more area is more guilty than adding 100sqm more than on the plans.

Allowing to build on "sacred land"(as many of you call it) is even more guilty.

Allowing a 53 storey building which would have eventually and clearly block that view is the guiltiest.

All the City could and should have said 10 years ago was: " we are sorry but your plans WILL block the view so we can NOT allow this construction "

That's it!

Everybody would go home and no harm done and life would go on!

I can intellectually argue on this with you until the end of times.

Your posts were supposed to be "informational" but they now turned out to be biased. So that makes all your arguments biased.

I appreciate your sentiments, but as I understand post #14 the extra area is not 100 sqm, but about 1,200 sqm. or more than 30% more than permitted (or allegedly so).

After 18 months of this building being examined us-side-down, inside-out and back-to-front, I am amazed that this issue only comes to light now.

Perhaps, reading between the lines of the developer's letter at post # 53 there is some misunderstanding between usable, non-usable and salable area. It seems as if people are clutching at straws to delay the restarting of construction.

[pattayadude]

In western,eastern, northern or southern countries there are inspections throughout the process. The City makes sure that the builders stick to the plan throughout the construction. If a violation is found at any stage, they stop it before it gets any further. This protects everyone so it doesn't become a giant mess in the future. With the waterfront, the city made its inspection after the building was topped off. And if it wasn't for the public protests, they would never find out the 5090 sqm overage!. And the source of the violation was at the ground level!.This is crazy!

[champa]

Please be informed that Pattaya City never make light of Pattaya people those complained the project.

The mayor said that people miss understand in all issues and all the permitting processes were legal.

BUT Pattaya city officer found something illegal that made by the developer.

Such as encroached foot hill for 173 sqw. and not built to the specifications.

Back to the beginning state,

Pattaya City had no authority to halt the project. if the developer follow the specification and permitted plan.

Pattaya City can not halt the building by counting number of people against the project.

By now, 18 moths pass by, Pattaya City always give the developer a chance to summit the new construction plan with out EIA.

This is not chicken and egg problem, which come first.

People complain or the developer fault?

Do you really think that people complaining enough to halt the project?

The fact that should be consider is the building legal or illegal.

I agree that there are both of Pattaya city, the regulator and the developer's faults.

Let wait and see what it will be.

Edited March 13, 2016 by champa

[phycokiller]

in a western country a mayor that wasted public money on an unusable marina and an unneeded carpark distroying one of the last of Pattayas public parks and allowed a building to go ahead knowing full well there could be problems down the line would probably be in jail, or at least voted out, but short of a revolution nothing will happen here and the destruction can continue unhindered

Edited March 13, 2016 by phycokiller

[TheCruncher]

Please be informed that Pattaya City never make light of Pattaya people those complained the project.

The mayor said that people miss understand in all issues and all the permitting processes were legal.

BUT Pattaya city officer found something illegal that made by the developer.

Such as encroached foot hill for 173 sqw. and not built to the specifications.

Back to the beginning state,

Pattaya City had no authority to halt the project. if the developer follow the specification and permitted plan.

Pattaya City can not halt the building by counting number of people against the project.

By now, 18 moths pass by, Pattaya City always give the developer a chance to summit the new construction plan with out EIA.

This is not chicken and egg problem, which come first.

People complain or the developer fault?

Do you really think that people complaining enough to halt the project?

The fact that should be consider is the building legal or illegal.

I agree that there are both of Pattaya city, the regulator and the developer's faults.

Let wait and see what it will be.

Back to the beginning state,

Pattaya City had no authority to halt the project. if the developer follow the specification and permitted plan.

But the developer DIDN'T follow specification and permitted plan, and Pattaya City failed to discover that.

[champa]

Please be informed that Pattaya City never make light of Pattaya people those complained the project.

The mayor said that people miss understand in all issues and all the permitting processes were legal.

BUT Pattaya city officer found something illegal that made by the developer.

Such as encroached foot hill for 173 sqw. and not built to the specifications.

Back to the beginning state,

Pattaya City had no authority to halt the project. if the developer follow the specification and permitted plan.

Pattaya City can not halt the building by counting number of people against the project.

By now, 18 moths pass by, Pattaya City always give the developer a chance to summit the new construction plan with out EIA.

This is not chicken and egg problem, which come first.

People complain or the developer fault?

Do you really think that people complaining enough to halt the project?

The fact that should be consider is the building legal or illegal.

I agree that there are both of Pattaya city, the regulator and the developer's faults.

Let wait and see what it will be.

Back to the beginning state,

Pattaya City had no authority to halt the project. if the developer follow the specification and permitted plan.

But the developer DIDN'T follow specification and permitted plan, and Pattaya City failed to discover that.

Agree with you.

It is both Pattaya City and the developer guilt.

So what is the next step?

Should Pattaya City re issue the construction permit?

Does Pattaya City has authority to re issue the construction permit?

Pattaya City sent the letter to "the office of natural resources and environmental policy and planing" who works on EIA approve and the department of public works and town and country planing which works for construction permit to discuss that Pattaya City has the authority to do so or not?

Both government offices had the same advise. Pattaya City can re issue the construction permit with 2 conditions.

1. The building area should be the same as the permitted plan, which is 38 k sqm. (by now Pattaya city said that it is 5,090 sqm. extra)

the building area was controlled by the city planing act.

2. The number of room in the building should not be more than the permitted plan which are 315 rooms. (by now we all know that this building has 300 condominium units and about 100 hotel rooms).

[dogeatdogworld]

Next step as both parties have probably been preparing for is resubmitting "fixes" to get around the code violations for extra space and inadequate parking slots.

Here's my 2 cents on that and I will make it as simple as possible.

For the car parking: Developer has to "create" more space either by expanding the existing car parking area on the first a few floors or somehow buy back some of the residential lower floors above parking from investors and redesign the space to accommodate for the extra parking requirement.

A building can be built or purchased nearby and turned into a "valet parking " for the extra 30 car space required.

For the 5090sqm: On this one the City and the developer has to " meet half way".

Developer can buy back top several floors and turn it into recreational areas.

This way the City can save its face for "turning a blind eye" for that issue and the developer gets punished for "ignoring" rules and illegally built space(if that's the case)

Edited March 13, 2016 by dogeatdogworld

[Jiu-Jitsu]

"The guilty is not on the city hall for allowing this construction permit. "

Allowing to build on 100sqm more area is more guilty than adding 100sqm more than on the plans.

Allowing to build on "sacred land"(as many of you call it) is even more guilty.

Allowing a 53 storey building which would have eventually and clearly block that view is the guiltiest.

All the City could and should have said 10 years ago was: " we are sorry but your plans WILL block the view so we can NOT allow this construction "

That's it!

Everybody would go home and no harm done and life would go on!

I can intellectually argue on this with you until the end of times.

Your posts were supposed to be "informational" but they now turned out to be biased. So that makes all your arguments biased.

I appreciate your sentiments, but as I understand post #14 the extra area is not 100 sqm, but about 1,200 sqm. or more than 30% more than permitted (or allegedly so).

After 18 months of this building being examined us-side-down, inside-out and back-to-front, I am amazed that this issue only comes to light now.

Perhaps, reading between the lines of the developer's letter at post # 53 there is some misunderstanding between usable, non-usable and salable area. It seems as if people are clutching at straws to delay the restarting of construction.

There is no misunderstanding. The project is a dead duck. No one is going to cough more up to get the wheels olied and rolling again. The port and marina were supposed to take the area upmarket. That has clearly failed. Mistral/Atlas/Elran threw money at it and now Tulip/Red Sea Group...again at the wrong time.

So who will they sell to now? The Chinese hordes?

If the market was buoyant, funds might be found to re-grease the wheels. But in the current state, it's just a white elephant.

[champa]

Today updated on manager online.

Pattaya City still not approved the construction plan. The issues of parking area and extra building area were not clarification.

Pattaya City requested the developer for the revised plan again.

In the same way Pattaya City asked the office of natural resources and environmental policy and planning for the initial advice and the guide line of this case.

http://manager.co.th/Local/ViewNews.aspx?NewsID=9590000035356

[dogeatdogworld]

Sorry but I am not too clear with some of your sentences.

"Pattaya City still not approved the construction plan"

Do you mean...Pattaya city STILL has not approved the "revised" plans that Developer submitted? or they just REJECTED what was submitted almost 2 months ago?

"The issues of parking area and extra building area were not clarification"

Do you mean...The City was not satisfied with the "fixes" that the developer proposed in the revised plans regarding "issues of parking area and extra building area" , therefore The City requested the developer to revise their plans again?

[Jiu-Jitsu]

Sorry but I am not too clear with some of your sentences.

"Pattaya City still not approved the construction plan"

Do you mean...Pattaya city STILL has not approved the "revised" plans that Developer submitted? or they just REJECTED what was submitted almost 2 months ago?

"The issues of parking area and extra building area were not clarification"

Do you mean...The City was not satisfied with the "fixes" that the developer proposed in the revised plans regarding "issues of parking area and extra building area" , therefore The City requested the developer to revise their plans again?

What 'fixes' and 'revised plans'? Do you have knowledge of any fixes or revised plans being submitted? The project is a dead duck.

[dogeatdogworld]

That may be your opinion and I respect it, however I believe you need a lot of catching up to do with the latest developments.no duck no shootings

[Jiu-Jitsu]

That may be your opinion and I respect it, however I believe you need a lot of catching up to do with the latest developments.no duck no shootings

Latest developments....don't make me laugh. I have my sources and you have yours.

So, do you have any knowledge of any "fixes" and revisions being submitted. My sources state "no chance".

[TheCruncher]

That may be your opinion and I respect it, however I believe you need a lot of catching up to do with the latest developments.no duck no shootings

I hope with "developments" you don't mean the crap and bs they write in their letters to investors.

[dogeatdogworld]

Cruncher if there was a letter, you and I would know about it by now.No one can claim here in this forum that their sources are better than the rest and that's for you Jiu.

[Jiu-Jitsu]

Cruncher if there was a letter, you and I would know about it by now.No one can claim here in this forum that their sources are better than the rest and that's for you Jiu.

Do you even have a source?

[TheCruncher]

Cruncher if there was a letter, you and I would know about it by now.No one can claim here in this forum that their sources are better than the rest and that's for you Jiu.

They send letters to their customers every month. A friend of mine has bought into another unfinished project from them, Tulip, and get letters every month where they also talk about waterfront.

They still keep saying that everything is above water and will be cleared in the very near future.

In the letter he received in February the claimed that new plans had been submitted and everyone was satisfied now.