Fiche Factory: talking sites

The Reef
62

Hi Marcel,
I looked at all the fiches, a lot of them are out already…

I agree, jet is very attractive…

Lee mentioned your remark to the architects. Apparently it is more the building left and right that count to see how high we can go, so I think it will stay with the current proposal…

1 Like
63

I think we must be careful also with the heighs of the buildings, as building higher than 4 floors on the strer building will take away some light from the neighbors (and even our garden?) and increase the vis-à-vis with them >> this could bring back the neighbor issue

3 Likes
64

If you look at the buildings left and right: in the back of the terrain left and right neighbour seem to be rather 3+1 stages.

I understand it is delicate, but to keep everything within budget you have to stretch as much as you can.
Don’t forget that the first permit in 2016 was approved for 25 appartements, 1 commercial space and 35 parking places
(this also means that the owner is trying to sell this since 2015…

Another idea to discuss with the architects is to see if eventually later another floor can be added on top. Mostly this can nowadays and as the instructions are (by lack of terrains) to construct higher (you see this in every street) it is not excluded that later you can add a stage. Better be prepared for this. You never know.

m

3 Likes
65

This is right now not at all the strategy that Stekke+Fraas want to push forward, they said in the work session they don’t want to loose the trust of the municipality for the moment by pushing too much… I would also want that we stretch it to the max mut maybe the site has its own limits…

Right now, their proposal is already a 4 layers building at the street, with a zone the recul for the last layer. They can eventually take away the zone de recul to gain some m2 but to go higher/closer to the n°249 is bringing back the risk of the neighbor starting a recours in Conseil d’Etat >> the recours happens after a permit is given, and worked in the previous case in the legal case against Matexi.

The only option where to go higher, to me, is on the bloc at the backside (the “Idefix” volume)

2 Likes
66

Another idea/remark regarding the comparison of prices I made.
This is a comparison of “naked” grounds like Jette is.
To make the comparison with a renovation or deconstruction ground maybe you could ask the architects if they can make a simulation on Jette, imagining that there would be a building on it. VAT would be 6%, which gives a difference of about 1 to 2 millions savings. Which can make another terrain of 2 million as or more attractive.

67

hi @marcelh ,

the FS we will get on friday for AND-28, is exactly that. There are buildings on it, so 6% and the price of the terrain is double as expensive as JET-14

1 Like
68

Hello @reef-building,

Honouring our commitment to radical transparency and our motto “documentation or it didn’t happen” I have created a 3-page document in which I tried to sum up all the essential information about JET-14.

This is the link: https://c301.nl.tabdigital.eu/f/141822

The purpose is twofold:
1 - make sure that we all get the overview before we vote
2 - help future Reeflings to grasp the essence about the site without having to read our 200 exchanges and documents.

Questions:

  • Can someone please have a look at the comments that I left in the document, and make the necessary changes?

  • Can someone please have another go at all the documents (plans, sketches and budget), and gather all the final ones in one folder?

  • Can anybody who has the time please read the document and amend or complement it as you see fit?

  • @els can you please liaise with Team Facilitation and get the group more information about everybody’s wishes on the common spaces?

Ideally I would like to finalise and share the documents on Monday evening, Tuesday noon at the latest. Can someone please confirm that you can help?

2 Likes
69

I’ll review before monday eve and the info about the commons will be shared by monday eve as well. All full members shared there whishes about the common spaces :slight_smile:

3 Likes
70

@Lee , reviewed the documents, added some extra info (but not a lot since you did most of it) with track changes on. Also added some info to the final folder with sketches and plans.
If you see things are still missing, let me know…

1 Like
71

Thanks a million @els!

I have accepted all tracked changes, and made some minor edits.

One major change, on the common spaces, I did in tracked changes, to be sure that you have seen it.

I also added you as a co-author. Is that ok, or would you prefer to be a peer reviewer? (all is good to me)

Final note, as to your suggestion on moving the JET-14 folder to a less hidden dark hole on Nextcloud: yes, let’s do that by all means when we have reached our next moment of stability. Moving a folder doesn’t break a link, so all in all this should be easy.

2 Likes
72

Sorry, only saw your message now. I have internet problems at home so since yesterday, only on internet with my smartphone/4g… and spending my time trying to fix that…
No problem with co-author, though the honour is too big, as I barely did anything…

1 Like
73

internet issues fixed (oef)

thanks @Lee ,

  • i was wondering what you once mentioned in another chat as ‘ideas to increase the m2 of commons’, so your addition gives the answer.
    I added another one: the mezzanine idea? => but i am wondering if this will increase of ‘official m2’ and thus cause a problem for the commune/région/… Does anyone know this, otherwise i’ll ask the architects.
  • I had another reflection: the whole thing i brought up with the taxes and fees of the options included in the calculation of the architects. Now there is a difference in the price per m2 mentionned in this file, and the price/m2 used in the simulation file. So my idea is: or explain that somewhere (but i have the impression it confuses more than that it creates clarity), or update the simulation file and work with the figure of the architects => i guess most/all people will take a terrace and thus this will come down to the same (and that is giving the biggest difference) so this only leaves the private cellars , where the price difference is not so much bigger.
  • maybe not related to this document, but linked to have a more and more clear vision on the financial aspects: i would like to have a view on the price of the parking space.
    ** For one: for me personal.
    ** For future reeflings wanting a parking space
    ** For us, to know how much we will get from selling the parkings (to reeflings or external people)
    We started with an underground (indoor) parking with a surface of 35 m2 per parking (ramp needed) to an outside parking space with roof, on ground level (not needing 35 m2 as no ramp needed). I don’t know if the 30,000 euro is the market price, or if this was more the market price for a closed/indoor parking. I would think it’s not (but did not do any internet search), if it would be lower, that means our price per m2 will go up
74

Great idea. For now I’d wait a bit with launching further questions? We now know that there are several options, including moving the bike space, which would almost be break-even. Let’s now wait for a moment of stability, and then organise a working meeting with the architects?

I am personally in favour of working with the architects number, for the reasons that you mentionned, and also because this would be a level 5 decision that we haven’t really discussed.

We’ll try to get that as soon as possible, but for now I’d go with the architects’ numbers.

1 Like
75

@reef-building : should we be contacting the owners of and-28 to say we’re no longer interested in this site?

2 Likes
76

I will tomorrow, see u

3 Likes