Walking Street land owners again scuttle demolition plan

[Rimmer]

Walking Street land owners again scuttle demolition plan

PATTAYA:-- Walking Street property owners again have successfully thwarted – at least for now – any move to demolish up to half of the nightlife district due to public-land encroachment, a battle that has been raging for 20 years.

 

At the second public hearing on the 1.5-billion-baht proposal to redevelop the waterfront side of Walking Street into a public park, property owners presented rafts of documents they claim are legal property and land deeds and demanded their authenticity be investigated before any further action on the redevelopment plan occurs.

 

Those same demands and investigations have been made repeatedly over the past two decades with no resolution and, hence, no impact on Walking Street.

 

As early as 1988, 101 structures were deemed to be encroaching on public land and targeted for demolition. But the impact on tourism that demolishing so many of the bars and restaurants would have repeatedly has scuttled any action.

 

A royal decree on land expropriation issued April 17, 2014 confirmed the findings of the 1998 Japan International Cooperation Agency report. But owners of those properties, including some of Pattaya’s wealthiest and politically connected families, stalled any move to demolish the buildings even as Walking Street grew into Pattaya’s best-known and most-lucrative tourist attraction.

 

Read more: http://www.pattayamail.com/news/walking-street-land-owners-scuttle-demolition-plan-158361

 

PATTAYA MAIL 2016-12-16

[guzzi850m2]

Well be careful now, if the army's patience runs out the bulldozers might show out of the blue and level the whole waterside, which I sort of hope they do.

[tracker1]

One Government that seems set on creating unemployment one way or another

[NormanW]

Sooo much money involved here!!! A complex issue.

[impulse]

21 minutes ago, tracker1 said:

One Government that seems set on creating unemployment one way or another

 

Tame the walking street a little bit, along with the criminal vermin that are always drawn to ply their trade around sin, vice and the easy money they lure in.  (Think ladyboys braining guys with spiked heels for their bling)   Perhaps families and non sex-oriented tourists will fill the gap.  Notice I said Tame the walking street.  Not do away with it completely.

 

The question is the balance between the easy money from appealing to the vices, against a tougher job to actually compete for money from families with accommodations, goods and services worth paying for. 

 

One of those paths throws Thailand's daughters into prostitution and servitude to the depravity of sex tourists.  The other one may be less lucrative for the Elite who control it all.  I know which way I'd like to see it go.

[HLover]

I wonder what goodies were in the brown bags for all the big money owners of the Walking Street properties?

[fforest1]

'Walking Street property owners again have successfully thwarted '

 

What does this title imply? That the property owners are a greedy nasty lot that

are standing the way of some glorious new development?

 

Walking street put Pattaya on the map and is Pattayas #1 tourist attraction..

 

Every business in Pattaya profits directly or indirectly from Walking Street..from the noodle stand to the Hilton to dental offices to 7-11s...

Every one with a business or job in Pattaya should stand behind the Walking street property owners to stop any tear down...

 

Every one should take a good long look at how much land would be gained from a tear down..There would be one small narrow stretch of land and a bit more beach and that is it...There will be NO park,because there is

no land for a park,or any other glorious development...

 

Walking street is what it is...Its for sure different from where the tourist come from...Thats why the tourist travel, to see some thing different.

Thats why they have all flocked to see Walking street for almost

50 years....

 

Man....All people involved need think this thing through with a little critical thinking.... 

 

 

 

Edited December 16, 2016 by fforest1

[bokningar]

53 minutes ago, fforest1 said:

What does this title imply? That the property owners are a greedy nasty lot

Have no idea if greedy and nasty, but NOT rightful owners.

That is the point!

 

[KeeperRik]

Get that Monk from Wat dammar what ever it is, to sit in walking street then no one in authority will go anywhere near it ?

[impulse]

1 minute ago, pegman said:

Keep your twisted moral judgements to yourself. 

 

Show me where I have made a moral judgment.  Be specific.  Or go away.

[craigt3365]

The law needs to be enforced.  Otherwise, under the table payments continue and corruption is allowed to flourish.  Lots of money being handed around in this area. 

[whatproblem]

Isn't this surely a case where 44 could / should be used ?

[chicowoodduck]

Time for someone to grow some balls.....just level the whole place and be done with it.....??????

[craigt3365]

1 minute ago, whatproblem said:

Isn't this surely a case where 44 could / should be used ?

From the article.

 

Quote

But owners of those properties, including some of Pattaya’s wealthiest and politically connected families, stalled any move to demolish the buildings even as Walking Street grew into Pattaya’s best-known and most-lucrative tourist attraction.

 

[johng]

17 hours ago, Rimmer said:

including some of Pattaya’s wealthiest and politically connected families,

 

They may be of the correct color  and as such be regarded as "good" people so no action taken.

 

12 hours ago, fforest1 said:

There will be NO park,because there is

no land for a park,or any other glorious development...

 

one plan I saw for the area

[sandrew33]

14 minutes ago, whatproblem said:

Isn't this surely a case where 44 could / should be used ?

 

44 only survives as long as power is held. Power comes from support. Support can be redirected to those who better serve special interests. 

[Emster23]

Please replace term "owners" with "squatters" in future articles.

[whatproblem]

If it's public land isn't that the same as stealing land from the king because thailands is a kingdom

[NanLaew]

18 hours ago, Rimmer said:

...property owners presented rafts of documents they claim are legal property and land deeds...

 

I think they need to make a raft out of all these dodgy 'chanotes' and see just how unsinkable they are.

[Henricus]

Walking Street about 1974

[phantomfiddler]

9 minutes ago, Henricus said:

Walking Street about 1974

 

Right on, the beach was taken over loooong before 1988 and I hope it stays taken over :) Wouldn,t be the same without it, but it was much nicer back then !

[Dukeleto]

Like all the beach stalls, restaurants and beach chairs they removed from Patong beach. Now all I can smell walking down the walkway next to the beach is the very strong smell of urine. If you going to knock everything down you need to put people there to look after it in place of those who had a vested interest to look after it. Part of the allure of tourist and repeat tourists is the slap dash way things are put together here. If they wanted pristine sanitised "expensive" developments most of them need not leave home. In an effort to clean things up they are slowly but surely killing the very thing the tourist industry in this country is based on. If you leave business operators alone to get on with making money and concentrate on extracting the appropriate taxes it's a win win for both sides. Governments have no idea how to make money they only know how to spend it. That stems largely from the fact that anyone with half a business brain would not seek employment in such an institution so they are devoid of sufficiently business thinking individuals. Yet these are the folk making the decisions that affect business people who understand the business. When business wanes it's these folk who need to adapt or go under. People flock to Pattaya because of walking street....not a park! There must be a million other government owned land parcels they could turn into a park or anything they wish to turn it into. But no, lets flatten the no.1 tourist attraction for the city and replace it with a park. They really are experts in the art of foot shooting 101. One only has to look at the tourist numbers 3 years ago and compare them to now to know they are strangling the goose that lays the golden egg.

[LivinLOS]

38 minutes ago, whatproblem said:

If it's public land isn't that the same as stealing land from the king because thailands is a kingdom

 

A beach no less.. Kings land.. 

[Dipterocarp]

Tough tatties. Land encroachment can't be tolerated anymore and the bulldozers will come.

The land owners have plenty of money salted away to build a new string of whore-bars elsewhere. 

[Destiny1990]

To demolish walking street would be a wonderful plan.all these rotten  buildings are illegally build on state owned beach land even without any titledeeds.Amazing they are still there! replace it for a public park with marinas would really give Pattaya a great boost forward.There is more then enough bars and nightlife in Pattaya to reduce it seems a smart choice.ban all cars from soi Bukaw u can make your walking street there.i will be at the Park.

[Sydebolle]

........ including some of Pattaya’s wealthiest and politically connected families........

There you go; nobody wants walking street gone. Above for their income, the BiB for the lining of pockets, the customers for the titties and beers and the rest of Pattaya for having this "less than 10% of the tourism sector" sort of "zoned". 

[Destiny1990]

46 minutes ago, Dukeleto said:

Like all the beach stalls, restaurants and beach chairs they removed from Patong beach. Now all I can smell walking down the walkway next to the beach is the very strong smell of urine. If you going to knock everything down you need to put people there to look after it in place of those who had a vested interest to look after it. Part of the allure of tourist and repeat tourists is the slap dash way things are put together here. If they wanted pristine sanitised "expensive" developments most of them need not leave home. In an effort to clean things up they are slowly but surely killing the very thing the tourist industry in this country is based on. If you leave business operators alone to get on with making money and concentrate on extracting the appropriate taxes it's a win win for both sides. Governments have no idea how to make money they only know how to spend it. That stems largely from the fact that anyone with half a business brain would not seek employment in such an institution so they are devoid of sufficiently business thinking individuals. Yet these are the folk making the decisions that affect business people who understand the business. When business wanes it's these folk who need to adapt or go under. People flock to Pattaya because of walking street....not a park! There must be a million other government owned land parcels they could turn into a park or anything they wish to turn it into. But no, lets flatten the no.1 tourist attraction for the city and replace it with a park. They really are experts in the art of foot shooting 101. One only has to look at the tourist numbers 3 years ago and compare them to now to know they are strangling the goose that lays the golden egg.

Have u ever been in  that rotten street mate its embarrassing and its empty.marinas and parks and some decent hotels will generate much more revenue for Pattaya then how its now.i never have met people who like going to walking street more then once!

[NanLaew]

1 hour ago, Dukeleto said:

People flock to Pattaya because of walking street....not a park!

 

Bloody heck! I had that VERY SAME DREAM just the other night!!

[pegman]

16 minutes ago, Destiny1990 said:

Have u ever been in  that rotten street mate its embarrassing and its empty.marinas and parks and some decent hotels will generate much more revenue for Pattaya then how its now.i never have met people who like going to walking street more then once!

You admittedly have absolutely zero knowledge about  Walking Street but  condem it anyhow. There is 3km of beach just north of it where any "decent hotels" can be built.

[NanLaew]

1 hour ago, phantomfiddler said:

 

Right on, the beach was taken over loooong before 1988 and I hope it stays taken over :) Wouldn,t be the same without it, but it was much nicer back then !

 

You miss the point about 1988...

 

Quote

As early as 1988, 101 structures were deemed to be encroaching on public land and targeted for demolition. But the impact on tourism that demolishing so many of the bars and restaurants would have repeatedly has scuttled any action.

 

That was in 1988 when it was quite easily Patpong-By-The-Sea and very little else so livelihoods and the then burgeoning sexpat tourist income would have been significantly diminished. The whole city has changed in the past 18 years and the chanoted land east of Walking Street (NOT the stuff built over the beach) is worth hundreds times more than it was back in the 70's and 80's when various local government entities started handing out dodgy bits of paper that 'legitimized' stuff built over water. The original 'owners' of these structures have silted away millions, possibly billions of baht in the interim and it is the johnny come lately lessees and renters that are having a cow about their promised investment return being short-circuited so early.