Jump to content
BANGKOK
rooster59

Pattaya: Ban Sukhawadee structurally sound after fire - but repairs will be extensive

Recommended Posts

Pattaya: Ban Sukhawadee structurally sound after fire - but repairs will be extensive

 

2020-07-09_17-20-46.png

Image: 77kaoded

 

Engineers, council employees and insurance assessors visited the tourist attraction of Ban Sukhawadee in Pattaya where fire devastated a Buddhist building earlier this month.

 

Fire broke out in the Phuttha Boramee building on July 1st and investigators have been waiting to determine if the building was safe to enter. 

 

Structural engineer Siriwat Chaichana determined that it was structurally sound though damage to an internal roof, floor and fittings was extensive. 

 

It would need to be completely gutted and repaired. 

 

The sprawling tourist attraction that features ornate and elaborate gardens, the temple and restaurants was built by a Thai tycoon who owns the country's largest chicken farm in Saraburi.

 

Source: 77kaoded

 

thai+visa_news.jpg

-- © Copyright Thai Visa News 2020-07-11
 

2020-07-09_17-20-19.png

2020-07-09_17-21-03.png

2020-07-09_17-21-17.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Kerryd said:

Meanwhile the city had cited the owner of this building back in December, claiming he doesn't own the land it's built on !

The city already demolished 2 other, smaller buildings last April that it said were encroaching on public land. Surprised this one wasn't found to be unsafe and condemned to demolition.
I'm sure the owner will have a hard time getting the necessary permits from city hall to rebuild the place as well.

Not all of "his" land was encroached land, only part of it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, rooster59 said:

repairs will be extensive

and expensive but then that's what insurance is for!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Due to the ongoing issues of the land ownership im sure the the owner will settle for a cash settlement after the fire!!!!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Kerryd said:

Meanwhile the city had cited the owner of this building back in December, claiming he doesn't own the land it's built on !

Yes, but the Sky Wizard was not involved in the others. He/she/it is involved in this one. 🙂

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Almer said:

Due to the ongoing issues of the land ownership im sure the the owner will settle for a cash settlement after the fire!!!!

Yes, nicely put, without leaving yourself open to slander-defamation/get sued. 🙂

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, thequietman said:

Yes, nicely put, without leaving yourself open to slander-defamation/get sued. 🙂

Took me several versions to be safe

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/11/2020 at 10:34 AM, Kerryd said:

Meanwhile the city had cited the owner of this building back in December, claiming he doesn't own the land it's built on !

I thought the issue was with the building which had been done on the beach area not these main buildings which are well inland. It is often the case here when land ownership is investigated closely some discrepancy is uncovered, like the mansions built in National Park lands by some local Hi-So. I wonder if he really does want to rebuild, since he seems to have been under a lot of scrutiny and a recoup of his spending on philanthropic spending may be preferable. One has to wonder about the fire.....

Shame, so many years ago a really interesting place to visit and all for free.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, jacko45k said:

I thought the issue was with the building which had been done on the beach area not these main buildings which are well inland. It is often the case here when land ownership is investigated closely some discrepancy is uncovered, like the mansions built in National Park lands by some local Hi-So. I wonder if he really does want to rebuild, since he seems to have been under a lot of scrutiny and a recoup of his spending on philanthropic spending may be preferable. One has to wonder about the fire.....


From the news article in the previous thread:
"In 2018, Pattaya said more than 13 percent of the property was built on public land and must be demolished. While Panya originally promised to cooperate, the goodwill quickly was replaced by foot-dragging and legal appeals.

 

In April, after Sukhawadee had closed, Pattaya brought in bulldozers to demolish a Building B, a one-story, 1,400-sq.-meter, reinforced-concrete building encroaching on public land, and Building C, a 75-sq.-meter concrete shed and other fixtures around both structures.
 

In December, Pattaya cited two five-story concrete buildings being constructed that lie on waterfront land that, city officials say, Panya doesn’t own."

https://www.pattayamail.com/featured/fire-destroys-pattaya-tourist-attraction-sukhawadee-house-306070

Perhaps those 5 story buildings mentioned are elsewhere in that area and the "museum" is legal ? Hard tell when they only identify them by a letter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/14/2020 at 8:58 AM, Kerryd said:


From the news article in the previous thread:
"In 2018, Pattaya said more than 13 percent of the property was built on public land and must be demolished. While Panya originally promised to cooperate, the goodwill quickly was replaced by foot-dragging and legal appeals.

 

In April, after Sukhawadee had closed, Pattaya brought in bulldozers to demolish a Building B, a one-story, 1,400-sq.-meter, reinforced-concrete building encroaching on public land, and Building C, a 75-sq.-meter concrete shed and other fixtures around both structures.
 

In December, Pattaya cited two five-story concrete buildings being constructed that lie on waterfront land that, city officials say, Panya doesn’t own."

https://www.pattayamail.com/featured/fire-destroys-pattaya-tourist-attraction-sukhawadee-house-306070

Perhaps those 5 story buildings mentioned are elsewhere in that area and the "museum" is legal ? Hard tell when they only identify them by a letter.

I used to go past there a bit. They reclaimed land from the sea and built on it. This was illegal because the King owns any reclaimed land. I think these are the buildings that were removed. There was also an access to the beach from the soi beside it which they closed off and built on. This had to be opened and the building demolished. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Always thought this should have been built on a prominent bit of land -somewhere else -  not next to a gas station and a stones throw from the main highway . !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...