Project was approved, says JAJ’s lawyer; error in calculation acknowledged
Meanwhile, in a response to Sunday Gleaner queries, JAJ’s lawyer, Rose Bennett-Cooper, said, “To the best of JAJ’s knowledge, the development is approved by the relevant authorities in accordance with their governing policies and procedures.”
She said that JAJ was not aware of the residents’ letter.
Bennett-Cooper also revealed that JAJ filed a claim in the Supreme Court on August 7, asking for an order compelling Ashley to turn over the title for her section of Lot 21A in accordance with the 2012 sales agreement.
In her affidavit, Juliet Holness said that under the sales agreement with Ashley, she was entitled to a copy of the title, free from any obligations such as mortgages, after paying the $7 million deposit.
However, this has not been handed over even though the request was made on October 30, 2012.
The developer said the situation was causing her “severe hardship” and created an environment for “errors” in the application process.
“For example, the requirement is that some application diagrams must show ‘as is’ buildings situated on each relevant title, and the defendant’s home is situated on the single/unsplintered title, which now still contains lots 1 and 2,” she added.
However, Ashley, who headed communications for the Andrew Holness-led education ministry more than a decade ago, has hit back, arguing that the title could not be provided because she was not “privy” to the approved plans for the development and only recently found out her property was enclosed in the development.
“It was when she made great efforts under great resistance that she finally got copies of the approved plans [from KSAMC],” said Knight, Junor & Samuels, the firm representing the resident, adding that “it is clear that this baseless lawsuit is a faint attempt at damage control.”
The Sunday Gleaner has obtained a copy of a letter in which Juliet’s lawyer appears to make a concession, informing that new drawings were to be submitted on August 7 to the KSAMC for approval.
“Upon review of the drawings for the development, it is noted that there is an error in calculation, which affects the density,” read a section of the redacted July 30 letter addressed to Ashley’s attorneys.
The nature of the error was not clear because of the redaction, but the developer explained that it was making amendments to the drawings and that the “error is not reflected in any of the works on the ground and requires no physical change”.
JAJ’s attorney also said Ashley is to be “cautioned that the development plans submitted to the authorities are not matters of public record in a manner such that she is entitled to unlimited access and copies … [that] the developer has private and proprietary and other rights to these drawings and documents”.
“It is expected that the relevant authorities will maintain and respect confidentiality of these drawings and documents in the usual manner,” the letter concluded.
The KSAMC is yet to respond to a list of questions submitted by The Sunday Gleaner last Tuesday, but its chief executive officer, Robert Hill, has provided a brief statement, noting that the issue is being reviewed by the corporation’s technical officers.
He said a report will be provided “shortly”.
Hill, meanwhile, is expected to meet with the residents later this month to respond to concerns they outlined in a July letter to him.
“We have a right, as citizens living in the area, to know what development is taking place, and how this is going to impact our lives,” said a representative of the three citizens’ associations, who did not want to be identified.
A visit to Lots 21A and 21B showed six hatched structures, including Ashley’s house, along with an unroofed structure.
jovan.johnson@gleanerjm.com