“Meeting on the Drafting of Ministerial Regulation No. 8” part of Issue 9
"There have been several amendments made during the Meeting on proposals to the Ministerial Regulation No. 8 B.E. 2518 issued under the virtue of Building Control Act B.E. 2479 , i।e।
- Article 2, the first meeting prescribed “The road along the edge of the sea” means the road that one side connected to the sea does not exceed 50 meters from building construction restriction line.”
The meeting held later on further amended “setting of 100 meters from the construction control line referred to the map annexed.”
- Article 4, “Within the distance of 50 meters from the road along the edge of the sea, the following types of buildings are not permitted to be constructed.”
(8) Building of 14 meters above the road surface.
This was later amended to read “The area of 100 meters measured from the construction control line according to the map annexed, from the sea towards the shore shall not be permitted to construct the following types of buildings”
(8) Building of 14 meters above the road surface.
Further amendment was to delete the wording “towards the shore” since the wording was clearly understood, then the following wording was used instead “to fix the 100 meters measured from the construction control line according to the annexed map at the sea shore that building of the following types are not permitted for construction”
During the meeting, the Chairperson questioned the person who proposed this amendment that if the amendment shall take advantage on villagers who have only small piece of land on the sea shore for not being to optimize the use of land plots. The person who made this proposal answered that “minority must be sacrificed for the majority ”
The amendments were consented by the meeting because the meeting wanted to protect the beach by controlling the construction which may impact the natural look of sea beach area “
Issue 8 “to fix the 100 meters measured from the construction control line according to the annexed map at the sea shore that building of the following types are not permitted for construction”
Issue 9 “to fix the 200 meters measured from the construction control line according to the annexed map at the sea shore that building of the following types are not permitted for construction”
Issue 9 has a reason attached: “Note: The reason issuing this Ministerial Regulation due to the updating of the construction control areas in Tambol Bang Lamung, Tambol Na Khua and Tambol
Nhong Prue, by extending the construction restriction areas as appeared in the map annexed to the Royal Decree Promulgating the Building Construction Control Act B.E. 2479 controlling over the regions of Tambol Bang Lamung, Tambol Nhong Plalai, Tambol Na Klua and Tambol Nhong Prue of Amphur Bang Lamung of Chonburi Province B.E. 2521. It is, therefore, appropriate to amend the Ministerial Regulation No. 8 (B.E. 2519) issued under the Building Construction Control Act B.E. 2479 governing restriction of the construction of some kinds of building within the controlling areas under the aforesaid Royal Decree.
15th of February 2008 we appeal to The Administrative Supreme Court in
42 comments:
Thanks for the update. But I'm finding this all very confusing - keep looking at the map & reading the fractured Thai legalese & can't make sense of it all. Can one of the plaintiffs please lay it out in un-biassed, plain english?
Again: I suggest even more strongly a letter-writing campaign to the Pattaya news media to provide adequate coverage and clarify the issues. The media is the only way to really disseminate the information so that the people may form a balanced view.
Doesn't issue 9 automatically supercede issue 8?
Have you got some recent photos?
How is the building progressing?
Is it possible to update weekly?
Thanks.
Ask View Talay 7. I'm sure they'd be delighted to keep you updated. Courtesy is their middle name!
Yes but you get a much better view/picture from JCC.
The TV forum relating to this topic has become a joke run by a bunch of tossers. Time to switch off that site.
Judging by the childish wind up going on here the same tossers read this blog spot.
are you all fat, white, balding with fungal rashes... lads?
We take exception to the last comment on this blog, we are investors in both VT5 and VT7,but are very confused by all this reteric and while we see merit from both sides in view of the constant indecision regarding the legal issues surrounding this development we are moving to cancel our contracts in VT7 and trust this dispute will soon be resolved to allow us all to get back to the quiet life style we came to Pattaya to enjoy.
Has there been a date set down for the appeal, or will it be after VT7 has been finished?
"...we are moving to cancel our contracts in VT7 and trust this dispute will soon be resolved to allow us all to get back to the quiet life style we came to Pattaya to enjoy." You cancel your contract you lose your money. Better think twice.
Who wants to be holding an expensive piece of real estate that you will never be able to sell.
The building is illegal.
Who will want to buy into that in the future,would you?
Who will insure you in an illegal building?
"Who wants to be holding an expensive piece of real estate that you will never be able to sell.
The building is illegal.
Who will want to buy into that in the future,would you?
Who will insure you in an illegal building?"....Maybe you were on Mars at the time but Jan 15the the Court ruling changed everything.
Yep. Just a bunch of fat, balding, disease-ridden nutcases who have nothing else to do but show concern for the rule of law, the environment and protection of their homes and yours. Pitiful, ain't it?
I don't consider the issue at hand to be whether or not JCC keeps its view. Not even whether VT continues to build its various ("beauty is in the eye of the beholder")projects. The issue is NOT about whether highrise buildings have a right to exist.
High rise buildings, incidentally, allow ordinary people access to relatively affordable homes in areas which would otherwise become the elite enclaves of the wealthy.
The ONLY issue here is the importance of consistent, responsible planning and control.Such control takes into consideration the environment, infrastructure and other impacts on the area.
The only way to assure this is by clarification of and adherence to the laws - and enforcement of same. If these matters are left to the developers and "highest bidders" we all know that in 10 years we'll be living in concrete ghettos.
What a load of arrogant,elitist,self-serving tosh!
No wonder some people say if you dont like it here go back to where you came from.
This is THAIland not FARANGland. They will do it their way not yours.
If you cant stand the heat......
Why did you decide to live here? So you can show the poor, unsophisticated locals how things are done in the West?
Funny how they managed without you for the last few thousand years.
Got any new pictures StopVT7 Is it coming on fast or what What floor are they up to now How long before your appeal date We want to help but you tell little information.
So - you are saying that to respect, support and follow the laws that Thailand has created to protect its own resources and environment is "arrogant...tosh"? That respect for the rule of law is strictly a "farang" concept?
Not only arrogant but disrespectful to Thailand and Thais.
I said that!
Court ruling is nonsense everybody know,even the martians.
Dont disrespect them,they will probably be your only buyer.
Is there any news on the appeal process, will there be an injuction to stop work while this appeal is heard, or will we have to wait until the project is completed before anyone lets us know what has happened?
Any news would be appreciated.
Oh my god !!!
Can't believe that this kind of trick works in Thailand. My 6 years old daughter can is more logical and give better reason than that "expert???".
Anyway, Thailand is 2nd after Philippines. So pround.
This case should be added in the LA101 course in law school. Very basic.
thailand is 2nd, after the philippines, following the un-report. that seems to be a fact and everbody who nows how thailand 'works' will agree.
i think there is no foreigner, who will tell the thai-people, how they have to set up their laws, simply because thailand is their country and foreigners are guests - and they are all free to invest in thailand - or let it be.
but a law make only sens, if the politicans, the judges and courts, the police and the majority of the people follow it.
the vt7-case will show everybody, if his investments in thailand are safe and he have a chance, the get right, is he is right - and not only, if he spend more money to bring the 'law, order and right' to his side.
last entry on stopvt7 was a hearing scheduled in Bangkok on "Feb. 15 - 12:45". Assumed a mistake & blogger meant Mar. 15, which was yesterday (a Saturday). So - was there a hearing? If so, what happened? If not, what is the actual date? Please respond.
"last entry on stopvt7 was a hearing scheduled in Bangkok on "Feb. 15 - 12:45". Assumed a mistake & blogger meant Mar. 15, which was yesterday (a Saturday). So - was there a hearing? If so, what happened? If not, what is the actual date? Please respond."...why do you assume the Feb 15 date was a mistake? Because you haven't heard anything since? Does not really surprise me since it took months for the court to have hearings after the original injunction. Not clear to me if the Rayong Court needs to issue a final order since all they did was remove the original order to temporarily stop construction.
"assumption" of misprint was made as the notice of Feb.15 hearing was posted on Feb.24!
So - was there a hearing in Bgk? Am thinking "no news is bad news" & hope am wrong.
"So - was there a hearing in Bgk? Am thinking "no news is bad news" & hope am wrong."... I suspect this appeal will not be public or have a hearing. I believe the judges do their review privately.
Does anyone have any news on the appeal?
Why is there no injuction to stop building while this appeal proceeds?
Does it appear that building will just keep going until finished and then pulled down if the appeal is successful?
Please someone give us some updated news.
Pull down the building if there is an succesfull appeal? Dream on. They are building because the outcome is pre-determined in there favor. Get used to the sight if you live in Tower A.
Do you mean VT7 knows the verdict in advance so they continue the construction? How ???
The only verdict that counts is one of record by the Rayong Court; so the construction continues. Appeals have about a one in nine chance of success and I suspect this appeal even less since their case is so weak.
Yes, I agree with you that messuring 100m into the sea and 100m into the land is a very weak and non-sense reason. Not so many people on earth will believe it.
"Yes, I agree with you that messuring 100m into the sea and 100m into the land is a very weak and non-sense reason. Not so many people on earth will believe it."...Yes we foreigners think restricting construction into the sea is non-sense but I recall when I had bayshore property and the electric company decided to erect high steel towers in the tidal waters. Also a radio station built a huge antenna. I wish we add a rugation like Issue 9. The 200 meter restricted construction zone established by Issue 9 is not just about high-rise condos but other types of construction too.
Knock..knock...
Anybody can update us...where we are now.
This case is in fact stink !
I do not know whether we can raise the case to consideration of majesty the king.
One thing that should be aware by the VT7 investor is that VT7 may drag the case long until they finish the project. All the units sold, then they leave.
The fighting will change to be VT7 tenants and JCC. The value of VT7 will drop as noboby want to take risk of the building torn down. You may not able to sleep well in that building. Think hard about that. Up to you guys.
It's starting to turn into rambling on this site, without any facts or solid information from the StopVT7 group. Is there any update of solid reliabe facts of this case?
Or should we wait to see VT7 and JCC residents in the parking lot with there gang tatoos and knives.
"Knock..knock...
Anybody can update us...where we are now.
This case is in fact stink !
I do not know whether we can raise the case to consideration of majesty the king.
One thing that should be aware by the VT7 investor is that VT7 may drag the case long until they finish the project. All the units sold, then they leave.
The fighting will change to be VT7 tenants and JCC. The value of VT7 will drop as noboby want to take risk of the building torn down. You may not able to sleep well in that building. Think hard about that. Up to you guys."...Dream on....I think this poster must be doing drugs because the his brain is obviously fried.
Stop VT7 claim to have gone to appeal On what grounds?
Obviously they still want to pursue their original aim of preserving their sea views but that is hardly grounds for appeal.
Its faintly ludicrous of Knock Knock above to imagine that the Head Of State would care one way or the other about the selfish, ignorant, arrogant, ill informed,bullying,self-centred legal shenanigans of a group of expats led by someone who only arrived here two years ago.
Stop pissing American/farang water and get with the local culture.
There will always be a market for JCC units. The Russian and Indian Cheap Charlie purchasers will love it and more and more are arriving every month.
I agree with the comment about rambling w/ no concrete information forthcoming. I also think the dire warnings to VT& buyers are a bit off the wall. However, I'm getting pretty frigging sick & tired of the plaintiffs being described as ignorant,selfish, arrogant farangs who want to dictate to Thais on how to run their country. I'm equally sick of hearing about how adherence to and respect for laws is a farang concept, not a Thai value.
Every step of the way consultations have been taken with Thai lawyers on Thai laws. Plaintiffs seek to work within those laws to a result which, of course, they hope will benefit themselves. However incidentally, a result which clarifies and enforces existing laws will benefit many others.
As I see it , this ruling has given everyone a big problem (developers,investors,homebuyers,)in that everybody is confused as to what you can build , where you can build it,is it legal,etc.
Therefore somebody sooner or later will have to test it in the courts to confirm things.
Regardless of if you think there is no new evidence or whatever for appeal,this needs clearing so everybody knows they legally stand.
Now is as good a time as any.
I don't think you guys get it.
Rayong court has not made a ruling. I repeat Rayong has not issued a decision on this case.
Rayong court has only lifted the injunction stopping VT from continuing to build. This decision means VT is allowed (by the Rayong court) to spend more money on this project. If in the future Rayong make a final decision that the project is being constructed illegally then the only thing is VT will just lose even more money.
An appeal has been lodged with the Supreme Admin court in Bangkok to re-instate the no-build injunction NOT to appeal the case
This saga has only just begun
The previous post about the appeal has been erased. What's happended?
Post a Comment