I would like to change the link for the calculator to the specific one for jet-14 as it makes a substantial difference and the new members need to base themself on that…
@els : can you confirm the link to use is “JET simulation file” in the team finance file (Login – Nextcloud) ?
Could you also add a page for studios?
And for info, I changed the default numbers to 6m2 for a terrace but left 0 for parking space and cellar
@Lee : could you edit your post on small units, and indicate these net sizes
for a studio:
35m2 net casco as the standard size recommended by the architects
33m2 as an absolute minimum
Thanks!
Also, we said we need to consent to the prices of the options, so I would make a comment that this still needs confirmation.
And also maybe we need to organise that consent Maybe something to discuss in our next meeting?
I will add the page for studios + will still update the figures to be aligned with the figures of the architects (4370 euro/m2 instead of 4307 , terrace and cellar price) => will do that on wednesday…
Discussing the price of the options: this is for Team Finance, let’s bring it to their attention at the next Coordination Group meeting
Simulation file: preferably only one file, and preferably one where we can adjust the price of the finishings (to avoid unpleasant surprises)
Where to save it: how about we save it in the “JET-14 final documents” folder? This would be the folder to which we’ll send all the newlings.
One question / suggestion: can it be an option to simplify the simulation file, by splitting the size calculator and the price calculator? By this I mean putting the details of how big each room would be in another file or tab.
The advantage would be that the file becomes easier to navigate for people who are not very Excel-savy, and also that you keep access to the size calculator at all times. By this I mean if you change the value in B38 (to the size that you have in mind), you lose the formula “= SUM(F15:F31)”. So if you would have it in two separate tabs, this formula won’t get lost.
Ah yes, good point, it might be interesting to keep that feature.
I had adapted it in the original file as well, although my solution is not the most elegant one!
I get a slightly different result from yours (4432 instead of 4435 for finitions at 850euros/m2), not sure why…?
For the moment I’ve left it like that, and I’ve changed the average price to 4307euros per m2, to reflect the situation of jet-14 better.
Let me know when your file is ready to go and I’ll change the initial post.
It’s a good idea, as it also means that we don’t have to update the page for the studio as well as the page for the appartments every time we change something in the price estimate. It will minimise the risk of error…
Tried to do this: keeping one file, and seperating the two things in a seperate tab. This meant to keep ‘appartment and studio’ size calculation in one tab. I think this could work. The second tab (calculating the price) can work with the output of the first tab or you can fill in whatever amount you want… Don’t know if this will clear for sb who is not very Excel-savy
I assume it has to do with the fees and taxes , they are calculated on the finishing as well.
didn’t really get what you meant by this => have a look and adapt if you want
Let me know if this file is clear, if so, I will make a little post and tag Lucia/Alin
For me the idea is simplicity, so I would take this as far as splitting it into two documents (because not everybody is familiar with tabs). This would mean people calculate the size of their unit using one document, and then insert the number that you find there in the other file to calculate the price.
In case you or the the exploring/associate member you are buddying would like to have some more info about JET-14: here is what you’re looking for: Login – Nextcloud
This folder contains:
some pictures coming from the architects
sketches of how the cohousing will/might look like (fyi: if you hear somebody talking about obelix, asterix, idefix, they refer to the big building on the street-side (=obelix), the middle-building (=asterix) and the back building (=idefix)
JET-14 EF cout opération & ventes … => last FS received from the architects where they calculated the price/m2
JET 14 simulation file** => simulation file where you can
– calculate the apartment you want (the number of rooms, the m2 of kitchen,…)=> first tab of the file
– calculate the price for a certain m2, which can be the output of the first tab (or you can freely introduce this) => second tab
=> this takes into account the price/m2 the architects calculated in the last FS (feasability), the safety margin they recommend,…
the fiche of JET-14: JET-14 - chaussee_…: where it started!! For those who never scouted: when we went scouting and we saw an interesting site, we made a fiche. So this is the one made for JET-14
utf-8 Etudes faisabilités et préfais… : plans going with the last FS
note explicative the reef 10 avril: presentation given by the architects to the commune, région and bxl environnement
**remark: you might have come accross another simulation file, using somewhat different figures. This file now is completely alligned with the figures of the architects. The difference is towards the price per m2 that is now a bit higher, but the prices of the options a bit lower. It all balances out, so the final result should be more or less the same. (if you want to read some more about this difference - but i would not recommend it - Updated financial estimate - #19 by els)
remark: i am adding a ‘content file’ to this folder, explaining what the different documents mean…
@lee: should the document you made with the ‘history of JET-14 up until the vote’ not be included in this folder as well?
and maybe add @Caro 's simulations of the sun/light impact? (
Just for completeness… Don’t know if it’s all that urgent:
the back part of the garden (behind the Idefix building), was suggested to be private to the ground floor apartments of that building => define a price for those gardens as well?
studying the ‘how money bikes need to be stored in our bikeshed’, i wonder how this will work. I assume we will define a number of bike places per type of unit, with the possibility that some people will be able to ‘buy or sell’ some extra bike places to meet their needs => price to be defined or to be negotiated between the reeflings having too much or too little bike places?
Composing a set of documents for the newlings to get an overview is on my list, but I need to prioritise other things first. The summary document now sits in the “proposals” folder (which makes sense), so even now it should be easy to retrieve (there’s also a link in the plenary meetings agenda).
Including Caro’s light simulations would be a great win, but as long as they are not adjusted as per François’s comments (11 am the sunlight is perpendicular + the buildings on the left are 1.5 too high) my view is that this does not help the newlings to make an adequate assessment of the light. I left a placeholder in the summary document, so we can also add it there.
These are interesting points, so it would be great if you could bring them to the attention of the future helping circle that will be looking into this. For now however we don’t have the resources for it, and I think it’s also important to be aware that it is not possible or meaningful at this stage to increase the granularity of the price estimate.
Could we maybe move the sum up post above into a new post to make it easier to retrieve?
And I will modify the initial post of this thread to include the Jet-14 simulation file for calculation of size and price, it’s the only information that is relevant to this specific thread I think.
Question: I’m making the simulation file public and not sharing it by internal link, right?
Included a note on this in the folder so that people take the simulation with caution if they end up finding it
@Sarah I clicked on the calculator, and it looks like it’s not the latest version?
Also: in the version that is shared currently (publicly) we are giving access to the entire JET-14 budget. This is something I’d only do with the consent of the architects, so I would rather remove it for now. Would that work?
@els, in the latest version that I downloaded I saw that the safety margin is now set at 15%. Can you tell me why?
@ both, I put a copy of the calculator in the Onboarding Package, which is of course sub-optimal because this way it doesn’t take on board any corrections. Can it be an option for you to move the calculator to the Onboarding Package? My reasoning would be that from now it will only be newlings who need it, and in any case the Onboarding Package is the source for all Reeflings for important documents like the Onboarding Manual, the IT manuals etc. If that would work for you, can you please delete the copy and move the original?
@Lee , can you tell me which document you’re referring to?
For me the latest version is this one :Login – Nextcloud
and the safety margin is set at 10%
the impact of the finishing is based on the calculation of the architect. Removing it would mean that you couldn’t calculate it any more.
i would move the whole folder then, but that is with the plans of the architects (and other things), so don’t know if that would be ok (but they are allready shown on the presentation so i guess it would be ok)
@Lee@sarah
what i’ve did (and feel free to change it again):
i made a copy of the jet-14 simulation file (internal link) which is for me the latest version of the file i created. (there is a big part that was copied from sarah’s file: the part to calculate the size of your apartment)
I know Sarah also has one, but i thought it didn’t have the finishing cost included, or the impact of that finishing on the final price/m2 and that’s why we decided to continue with mine. (but maybe i am wrong about that). I would still continue with ‘my’ version, because soon we will have the extra 2 and 4 procent on top of the casco price , which will even make it more complicated.
in that copy - for the part of the architects calculations- i added the amounts as much as possible, and deleted all titles so now it’s very hard to deduct something from those figures. So for me that garantuees the protection of the architects work (you still see the entire JET-14 budget though, but you don’t know what it represents), and it allows to calculate the impact of the finishing on the final price/m2.
i would keep both the copies, as it’s now very hard to make any changes in the one in the onboarding package, as you don’t see the details of the calculation any more. We’ll just have to make changes in two documents, which is sth i can live with
Oh, I thought it was…
But I’ve removed it for now, let me know what file you want to be added. Or shall I ask the architects?
I’m not sure that it is the case that only exploring members will be looking for it as the Programme will probably have to be redone for some. So personnally, I would leave it where it is for now, with a document with a link to it in the onboarding package…
One more reason for not moving it I would say
That wasn’t the reason but that is the conclusion!
Agreed!
So if that’s a good solution for you Lie, I will then include that link into the first post.
Maybe something to discuss in our next meeting?