VT7 - 100 meter from MSL compared to 200 meters from MSL ???

[travelerjim]

The VT7 project in Pattaya ...is now halted by court orders...or it seems,
maybe others have seen some activity at the construction site ???

I checked the StopVT7 website and they have posted this aerial map of the 100 and 200 meter lines...
interesting...

No doubt - the decision is still out on whose thinking (or money) will survive the crisis for View Talay 7.

http://stopvt7.blogspot.com/

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y64/travelerjim/StopVT7.jpg

"The court is going to order the Thai Port Authority and the Bangkok Department of Civil Engineering
and City Planning to take measurement and make a map for the court.
The map will show where VT7 building is located as to issue 9 alignment.

The stopvt7 group is going to hire an expert to watch over the taking of measurement and making of the map.

VT7 can keep working but not build over 14 meters high.

Their will be another court hearing.

The Bangkok letter form Department of Civil Engineering and City Planning explains the following?

1. The distance of 100 meters in Issue 8 and the distance of 200 meters Issue 9 are not the same alignment.
2. Issue 9 specified that the measurement of the alignment of the cost line be taken only at MSL (mean sea level).
This setting 200 meters measured from MSL for alignment of alignment before you can build over 14 meters.
3. City Hall and VT7 as made false claims in court by claim Issue 8 and Issue 9 as the same alignment before you can build over 14.

Quote from Mr. Surapol 19 of June 2007 Department of Civil Engineering and City Planning Bangkok letter:
тАЬThe distance of 100 m as per point 3 of the Ministerial Regulation Issue 8 (B.E. 2519) issued pursuant to the
Building Control Act B. E. 2479 and the distance of 200 m. as per point 3 of the Ministerial Regulation Issue 9 (B.E. 2521)
issued pursuant to the Building Control Act B. E. 2479 are not the same alignment.

In that the alignment of the coat line in accordance with the Ministerial Regulation Issue 8 (b. E. 2519) had not specified
the measurement be taken at MSL. But in accordance with the Ministerial Regulations Issue 9 (B. E. 2521) it specified
the measurement of the alignment of the coast line be taken only at MSL.тАЭ

Chief Engineer Acting on Behalf of the Director General
Department of Civil Engineering and City Planning"

--------------------------

and so goes the arguments for and against....

TravelerJim

[Dodger]

Another interesting variable, is the fact that the MSL (mean sea level) changes with the seasons which would have an effect on what they're supposedly trying to measure.

For some reason I find this whole issue humerus, as the Thais can't evan figure out how take a simple straight-line measurement using a tape measure and crayon. Point being, the fact that all the buildings which parallel Thrapraya Road now have to be removed because they are infringing on the new roadway expansion. Opps! I guess we built the last 450 buildings 15 yards closer to the street than they should be. Now they're trying to tackle a measurement which requires master surveyors with NASA type measurement gear...LOL...TIT.

Wouldn't it really be funny, if after they figure out how to take this measurement accurately at MSL, that they determine that VT7 is positioned correctly, although, all the other buildings over 14 meters high now have to be removed...55555+++++

Travelerjim,
You are to be congratulated for introducing this topic. The issue of the 14meter height limit within 200meters of the MSL is very important. It will affect every new development right along Dong Tan. And also developments on the southern side of the Police Box, including the locale of the proposed Ocean1.
It will be fascinating to see the manoeuvrings of the developers, their competitors, their opponents, the bureaucracies, the courts and the politicians pan out.
It should give the Dong Tan goers who sometimes lift their thoughts above the waistline entertainment for years to come.

[Sen Yai]

Another interesting variable, is the fact that the MSL (mean sea level) changes with the seasons which would have an effect on what they're supposedly trying to measure.

As Dodger is hinting, all this confusion may come from the wrong terminology being used. (Although Dodger is also wrong - MSL is a constant and doesn't change with the seasons, or even phases of the moon)

MSL= Mean Sea Level and is a Level from which Vertical measurements can be taken.

Horizontal measurements from the 'shore line' to any point in land should be measured from MHW= Mean High Water, which is a definition of the 'shore line'.

There is of course MHWS and MHWN, for Spring and Neap tides, depending of the phase of the moon and HAT and LAT = Highest/Lowest Astronomical Tides, being the highest and lowest possible tide marks.

All very simple really. But you can't define a position on land as a horizontal distance from Mean Sea Level !

WTF??? Measure out to sea 100 meters then back inland 200 meters? What kind of jackass surveying is that?

I suppose if that argument fails they can always keep going all the way 'round the world and claim they are actually 24,000 miles from mean sea level!

[Up2U]

WTF??? Measure out to sea 100 meters then back inland 200 meters? What kind of jackass surveying is that?.....

I suppose the logic is to prevent building in to the water. I few years back the City had an issue with Walking Street property owners building peers and extensions from their property in to the water. The City argues the restricted zone is 100 meters on either side of the MSL (and hence the 200 meters).