Mu Ban Wong Siri

The live resale market gives a more useful price reference than old launch information would. When checked on 16 September 2026, the lowest visible asking price was THB 5.19M for a three-bedroom, two-bathroom house with 180 sqm of stated indoor area. Another active listing was THB 5.79M for three bedrooms, two bathrooms and 150 sqm of indoor area, with a 186 sqm plot stated in the listing. A 150 sqm house previously advertised at THB 5.29M is now shown as sold by one platform. These examples show why price-per-square-metre comparisons need care: plot size, renovation, parking, furniture and the legal package can matter as much as internal floor area.

Common facilities appear limited. The project profiles consistently mention 24-hour security and CCTV, but we did not find reliable evidence of a shared swimming pool, gym, clubhouse or a developer-run rental programme. That can suit a buyer who wants a conventional residential house and does not need resort-style communal facilities. It is less compelling for someone whose priority is a modern managed compound with extensive shared amenities and a single operator responsible for the overall experience.

The location is practical rather than beachfront. FazWaz places a Tops daily outlet roughly 580 metres from the estate, Ban Na Bon School at about 500 metres, and Chalong Pier at around 5.6 kilometres. Phuket International Airport is shown at roughly 37.9 kilometres. The case for the location is therefore everyday access to Chalong, local schools, shopping and the southern/eastern road network rather than walkability to the sea.

For a foreign buyer, the land position is the critical legal point. One resale listing reports a Chanote land title for a specific house, but that evidence cannot be extended automatically to every property in the estate. Thai law generally restricts direct foreign ownership of land except in narrow statutory circumstances, while ownership of a building and rights over the underlying land can be structured separately. A buyer should therefore verify the title deed, registered owner, encumbrances and the proposed land-right arrangement for the exact property before paying a reservation deposit.

The main gap in the public record is the original developer. We found a stable project identity, map coordinates, completion year, unit count and current resale evidence, but no dependable source linking the estate to a specific developer brand or legal entity. Because this is a 2006 project, that absence is plausible; it is not a reason to guess. The developer field should remain unfilled until a project document, land-allocation record or other primary evidence establishes the original development entity.