Jump to content


Advanced Members
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

331 Excellent


  • Rank
    Senior Member

Recent Profile Visitors

8,620 profile views
  1. Ignore people with big mouths and small brains. Great girl.
  2. New TM 6 forms

    Has anyone used the old TM 6 at Swampy recently? Any problem?
  3. Prawit will be looking for a job soon.
  4. Thanks. I didn't the prime minister said so much. As regards S44, as I said I can't see it happening. To use it to end the project would send the wrong message to foreign investors. To use it to finish the project would upset some sections of Thai society. As to why it was not done right from the start, this is the big question. Why Bali Hai/Park Plaza didn't apply to vary the permit at the outset beggars belief. I can only believe they were given wrong advise. I used to know someone who worked for Tulip Group and they were under the impression that they could regularize changes when the project was completed. City Hall might not have a legal duty help the developer, but in a civilized country they, under natural justice, would have a responsibility to cooperate and facilitate. How that plays out in Thailand I do not know. If you believe Bali Hai, City Hall have not been helpful. City Hall say nothing. The lack of transparency on the part of City Hall is disgraceful. It was December 2017 that Bali Hai said they were considering legal action. They should have done this a long time ago if they think their position is correct. This is an unusual if not unique situation. The building was constructed and topped off under an old law, but now they have to apply for a new permit under a new law. How a court will view that only time will tell. In the meantime the shell will remain, perhaps for 20 years.
  5. Thanks again Champa for detailed posts. Bali Hai will obviously only complete if the project remains viable. The only obvious solution would be to demolish the low block. Not sure what that would do for viability. Bali Hai is already talking about taking legal action. That could take a few years in a complex case like this. If they loose there will be bankruptcy; a few more years. Then there will be demolition. Heaven knows how long that will take to get done and at what cost and by whom. Unless City Hall want to see the status quo maintained for many many years they need to work with the developer. Bali Hai claim that City Hall is refusing to meet with them. If true this is not good enough. Of course cooperation and flexibility is required from Bali Hai. The only other answer is Section 44. Can't see that happening though.
  6. You make some good points. I have always been skeptical that the overbuild is as much as 5000 square meters. 13% for heaven sake. The removal of 5 floors that allegedly City Hall accepted would not account for that much floor space. I have speculated before about usable/non-usable floor space leading to a technical overbuild. You will recall all the false allegations that have been made before. Too high - it is not; too close to the sea - it is not; too close to the road - it is not; land titles not in order - they are; encroachment - yes a small one by the sales office that will eventually be demolished. One allegation not made is that the footprint is bigger than permitted. Without this I cannot see how a 5000 square meter overbuild is possible. It is a big shame that City Hall refuse to give their version. Do they have something to hide??
  7. I can't provide precise details, but originally the building was only a condo. The hotel only came into the equation when Park Plaza bought the project in, I think, 2011. The low block was originally about 40 units, mostly one bedroom units. Park plaza changed this into 100 rooms of "hotel room" size. There was also some changes in the high block, but I am not sure what. Somewhere in these changes came the overbuild. Whether the overbuild is as much as 5000 square meter I am not sure. As I said in an earlier post I have never seen an authoritative source for this. I do know that there are some issues over usable and unusable floor space, but the details I do not know. It is just possible that some of the overbuild is technical. I am not 100% sure of everthing I have said, but I am not far out.
  8. Thank you Champa for the comprehensive reply. I appreciate it. The mess that Waterfront is now in clearly shows that Thailand needs to look at its construction laws and procedures. It is sad for the buyers and sad for the people of Pattaya who face the prospect of looking at this shell for the next 10 to 20 years.
  9. Thank you Champa for a helpful and logical explanation. You seem to know more than any one else on this thread about such things, including me. Do you happen to know at what stages City Hall should have checked the construction. In my country once a building has reached certain points the builder/developer cannot proceed further until the building inspector has signed off that construction is being done in accordance with plans and regulations. Does this apply in Thailand. The reason I ask is that, no matter that the developer has done wrong (and he has) it took City Hall two years, when the building was topped off, to find that construction had been done contrary to the permit. In this time buyers put a lot of money into the project. It would seem that City Hall has done little to help people who bring money into Thailand to invest in Pattaya. Not to mention Thai citizens who invested in the project. In short, has City Hall failed in its responsibilities?
  10. Even with a "zip line" or restaurant the effect on the view would be the same. It is only an eyesore because it is not finished. It is not imagination that is required, but a will to get the construction completed. "As long as it wasn't used as a residence..." - it seems your real beef is that you do not want any one to enjoy living in a quality building with good sea views. Are you jealous?
  11. I have been talking to a couple of buyers that I know and I have seen most of the blurb that Bali Hai have put out. I wont accuse Bali Hai of lying, but I think they have been economical with the truth. Apart from the ex-mayor's press conference (which highlighted lifts and staircases/fire escapes) and the ex-deputy mayor's radio broad cast (which mostly dealt with the width of the road) City Hall have said nothing. As I understand it Waterfront was approved for 38,000 plus square meters of saleable floor area, but this was exceeded. Rumor has it that the overbuild was as much as 5,000 square meters, but there is no authoritative source for this. Bali Hai agreed to demolish 5 floors to deal with the overbuild issue and allegedly this was acceptable to City Hall. The demolition of 5 floors had nothing to do with the height or view as the height was legal. The number of units was increase from just over 300 to 400, mostly, it seems to facilitate the hotel. I am not sure if this issue has been resolved. As a result of re-designing the building the number of car parking spaces was reduced from the required 144 to about 90. Bali Hai's idea was to use an automated hydraulic car parking system to provide about 150 parking spaces. City Hall did not like this because such a system was not included in the sales contracts. As far as I know this issue has not been resolved. The encroachment is only in respect of the sales office and since this will be demolished as and if Waterfront is finished this is not a big issue. There are one or two other issues, but I do not know details. I believe they are solvable.
  12. No need to apologize; an easy mistake. The important point is that the only entity amenable to the courts and authorities of Thailand is Bali Hai. That is why the big international companies put so many layers in the cake. And that is why there will be no one to pay for demolition.
  13. I think you will find Bali Hai was ordered to do the demolition. In any event, Park Plaza do not own Bali Hai any more. They sold it to Red Sea Hotels.
  14. Demolishing Waterfront in the next 10 to 20 years is not a viable option. Who is going to do it? Who is going to pay? You don,t have to go to Bangkok for examples; where there are many. In Pattaya you only have to look at Batman Nightclub/Disco. City Hall cannot demolish a small hotel in Soi VC. In Bangkok the BMA estimated that it would cost 200 million baht to demolish a smaller building (forget the name). If Bali Hai goes bankrupt this will crawl through the courts for 10 years plus another 10 years to get the shell demolished. If Bali Hai is bankrupt they will not have the money to pay. If the bank ends up owning the land they will not do it; they never do. Whether you like Waterfront or not we are where we are. There are only two ways forward:- Finish the building. It will at least look better than it does now Leave in its present state for the next 10 to 20 years.
  15. I have been there. It has been widened and is now a dual carriageway. Has been since the Navy Review.