The abandoned condo building at bali hai pier on google

[NanLaew]

42 minutes ago, toenail said:

- You mean the empty car lot next to the "H" building? -- a helicopter has to land instead of driving the big boys to the area? mmmm- I wonder what the  navy is planning?

 

Maybe a helicopter shuttle to replace the dead-in-the-water Hua Hin ferry service?

[ftpjtm]

For what it's worth, the verbiage below was posted on another forum today (I believe I am not allowed to link to it)

 

"Waterfront Development finally gets the Green Light - Pattaya, Thailand

The Waterfront Suites and Residences Condominium building at Bali Hai Pier in Pattaya has finally been given the green light.

Building of the fifty-three storey tower block was halted in August 2014 after complaints which led to questions about the  legitimacy of its planning consents.

Now Mr. Lyon Weindenfeld, director of the Bali Hai company, said that after Pattaya City Council ordered construction to cease they have managed to resolve all issues relating to the building and its environmental impact.

Concessions have been made and the construction company has agreed to remove the eight top floors and provide greater underground parking facilities.

Mr Weindenfeld has said the company are now keen to get on with the construction of what they believe will become a ‘great Pattaya landmark building."

[Henryford]

I don't see how cutting only 8 floors will help, it will still block the view.

[tropo]

Yes, about 50 floors.
Uneasy to count at the bottom (big ones) and at the top (in terraces)
 

Lol I did a recount the other day and got to 50 plus.


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

[pattayadude]

it's gonna take more than just 5 floors but who am I to know!

A realistic deal can be cut at 10 floors IMO to satisfy the overbuilt area and parking issue.

We'll see next a few months  if Waterfront will end up 45 or 40 or 0!

Edited January 6, 2017 by pattayadude

[pattayadude]

On 11/3/2016 at 2:49 AM, tropo said:

I watch that building from the park most days and there's nothing going on. It's not 20 floors - I could count over 40, with a skywalk over to another building about half way up. It was incredible that they had put a building up blocking the view from the park. This park is one of the few tourist attractions in Pattaya. Hopefully they will demolish it. That would be a great gimmick for New Years Eve.

that building will never be demolished.

it's "too big to fail"!

[pattayadude]

On 11/2/2016 at 11:16 AM, Henryford said:

 

They should either finish it or knock it down, it looks terrible as it is. Why does it take 2 years to make a decision?

Here is my unbiased opinion:

that building will never be knocked down.

because it's "too big to fail"! too much tax revenue to be lost.too expensive to demolish. Also the act would be too embarrassing for a government.

And not in Thailand anyway! And not in this economic climate...

 

Obviously the halt was a result of planning regulation violations.

Series of investigations including a criminal one were concluded last year and only 2 serious building violations and several less serious ones were discovered and the City Hall and developer are persistently trying to negotiate a deal that will not "break the camel's back".

Violations are part of every major construction project along with lack of inspections and irresponsible and greedy developers but they almost never amount to or justify a complete demolition!

 

These are some very tough negotiations.Excessive bureaucracy or adherence to rules and formalities move things in a snail-pace in Thailand but a resolution obviously won't take forever.

 

In a nutshell, they will not kill the goose...

Edited January 6, 2017 by pattayadude

[pattayadude]

On 12/12/2016 at 5:04 PM, tropo said:

Lol I did a recount the other day and got to 50 plus.


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

Correct!

[monspencer]

Just my 2 pennies' worth....It is a total eyesore and should be pulled down.

 

I used to go up to the top of that hill to show visiting friends the beautiful vista over Pattaya, but not now. 

 

It's such a pity that anybody should have been given the green light to build such a monstrosity there.

 

Just goes to show how those brown envelopes can make the authorities turn a blind eye.

 

[johng]

well the legal battle goes on and on (like the energizer bunny)
latest court has ruled the building permit is not legally issued....what happens next more appeals and more wait and see ?

[TaaSaparot]

5 minutes ago, johng said:

well the legal battle goes on and on (like the energizer bunny)
latest court has ruled the building permit is not legally issued....what happens next more appeals and more wait and see ?
 

 

 

Correct ...... why has there been so little in the media about that decision ?

[CRUNCHER]

14 hours ago, johng said:

well the legal battle goes on and on (like the energizer bunny)
latest court has ruled the building permit is not legally issued....what happens next more appeals and more wait and see ?
 

 

First I have heard of this.  When was the case, which court and who was the plaintiff(s)

[NanLaew]

9 hours ago, CRUNCHER said:

First I have heard of this.  When was the case, which court and who was the plaintiff(s)

The 'usual suspects'.

[johng]

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=1372211689490415&id=800812306630359&__tn__=%2As

[johng]

Champa has pointed out that the building control bureau,not a court has ruled the permit was issued illegally ,apologies for my mistake.

[BruceMangosteen]

1 hour ago, johng said:

Champa has pointed out that the building control bureau,not a court has ruled the permit was issued illegally ,apologies for my mistake.

In your opinion, what does "permit was issued illegally" really mean? Either it was issued or it wasn't? Forgive me for not grasping the distinction you or whomever is making. God Bless You.

[JSixpack]

13 minutes ago, BruceMangosteen said:

In your opinion, what does "permit was issued illegally" really mean? Either it was issued or it wasn't? Forgive me for not grasping the distinction you or whomever is making. God Bless You.

 

1. It was issued

2. It was not legal to have issued it

[johng]

My opinion means nothing, im just passing on information.

 

From member  @champa

"The final audit paper from the building control bureau, the unit under the department of public works and Town & Country Planning, Ministry of Interior. 

 

The result of the investigations found that the building permit was illegal (since 2008)."

[Basil B]

4 hours ago, johng said:

My opinion means nothing, im just passing on information.

 

From member  @champa

"The final audit paper from the building control bureau, the unit under the department of public works and Town & Country Planning, Ministry of Interior. 

 

The result of the investigations found that the building permit was illegal (since 2008)."

 

They made VT7 legal...

[champa]

The permit was issued since 2008 by Pattaya City mayor. 

 

December 2016, the building control bureau board had concluded that the permit was illegal. 

 

According to the MR  55, the building on the corner of 2 roads, the building line on the narrow road must be limited to 60 M. While the building line is 93 M.

 

This issue,  Pattaya City tried to explain that the narrow road by the building was not public road.

 

By the way, on December 2016 the building control bureau board concluded that the narrow road is public road and the building is on the corner of 2 roads. 

 

I am not sure that what will going on the next step.

 

To meet the regulation and make the building plan legally. I think they should cut down about 1/3 of the building line on the narrow road to be 60M. 

 

 

Edited January 22, 2017 by champa

[pattayadude]

15 hours ago, Basil B said:

 

They made VT7 legal...

true that!

lol..if there is a "will" there is a "way"

off-topic but related.powerful nations can start immoral and unjust wars while the rest can only watch.that's how the world rolls.Money rules etc etc

Edited January 23, 2017 by pattayadude

[pattayadude]

Can someone define  "illegal" here?

how can a permit  be "illegal"?

 

Edited January 23, 2017 by pattayadude

[SaintLouisBlues]

12 minutes ago, pattayadude said:

Can someone define  "illegal" here?

how can a permit  be "illegal"?

Because it was granted without meeting all of the preconditions for the grant OR it was granted by someone lacking the authority to grant that type of permit. That's only two. There must be plenty of other examples of how a permit can be illegal

[pegman]

4 hours ago, SaintLouisBlues said:

Because it was granted without meeting all of the preconditions for the grant OR it was granted by someone lacking the authority to grant that type of permit. That's only two. There must be plenty of other examples of how a permit can be illegal

New big boss!

[SaintLouisBlues]

11 minutes ago, pegman said:

New big boss!

Aw shucks. Thanks 

[pattayadude]

4 hours ago, SaintLouisBlues said:

Because it was granted without meeting all of the preconditions for the grant OR it was granted by someone lacking the authority to grant that type of permit. That's only two. There must be plenty of other examples of how a permit can be illegal

So once a legally issued permit can be proven to be  gotten illegally if investigated thoroughly.

If people had not complained (because their view got blocked), an investigation wouldn't have been conducted.

Based on this, can we assume the same for  most of the projects in this City during that period?

 

[SaintLouisBlues]

9 minutes ago, pattayadude said:

So once a legally issued permit can be proven to be  gotten illegally if investigated thoroughly.

If people had not complained (because their view got blocked), an investigation wouldn't have been conducted.

Based on this, can we assume the same for  most of the projects in this City during that period?

Just wait until I get out my crystal balls (both of them) and check

[pattayadude]

1 minute ago, SaintLouisBlues said:

Just wait until I get out my crystal balls (both of them) and check

actually it wasn't a question :)

take it as a statement.

[SaintLouisBlues]

10 minutes ago, pattayadude said:

actually it wasn't a question :)

take it as a statement.

You're in Thailand. Assume nothing works the way you think it should

[champa]

 

In Thailand there were some illegal building permit issuance  cases. 

 

You have to understand first that, the local government organizations such as Pattaya City, Bangkok and  municipalities are regulators for building permit.

 

By the way, some time the local government organizations issue the illegal building permit.

 

For examples,  

 

The Aetas Bangkok at soi Romrudee, supreme court  adjudicated in 2014 to revoke the building permit and ordered the building to be demolished.  Duensing Kippen has a detail of the Aetas case explain in English.  

 

Refer to the VT7, I saw that supreme court had ordered to revoke the building permit in 2015 with the condition. Supreme court found that the building permit illegal issuance with the land title deed of the surrounding road. Supreme court found that the land tile deed of the land of surrounding road was not belong to VT7 but it was belong to the owner of the developer company.  Supreme court  order to revoked the building permit of VT7 unless the developer separate the land title deed to belong to the developer company.  I think the separation had been done, so the building permit of VT7 was not been revoked.

 

I found the supreme court adjudicate the VT7 case in Thai here. The order to revoke the building permit with the condition of separation of land title deed is on the  last paragraph. 

 

In general, supreme court  orders the building permit to meet the regulations. They ordered The Aetas Bangkok to be demolished to be 8 floors not to be demolished the whole building.  In the same way, They ordered VT7 to separate the title deed of the surrounding road to belong to the developer. 

 

In case of Waterfront, according to the MR  55, the building on the corner of 2 roads, the building line on the narrow road must be limited to 60 M. While the building line is 93 M.  Once the building control bureau board had concluded that the building permit was illegal issuance. Pattaya city should order the developer to cut down 1/3 of the building line on the narrow road, from 93M to be 60 M.