Weekend Edition

stluciatimes, caribbean, caribbeannews, stlucia, saintlucia, stlucianews, saintlucianews, stluciatimesnews, saintluciatimes, stlucianewsonline, saintlucianewsonline, st lucia news online, stlucia news online, loop news, loopnewsbarbados

Roadworks around power poles spark safety concerns

Work to expand the Norbert Road has been carried out around electricity poles, moving the project into what should have been its final phase.

Owner of the firm contracted to oversee the scope of works under the Norbert Road rehabilitation project, Rayneau Gajadhar, said his team moved forward with construction after four formal requests for an official cost breakdown – following a quoted estimate of $554,878.86 from the Saint Lucia Electricity Services Limited (LUCELEC) – were denied. 

“It’s impossible for us to be paying all those monies out and not know what you’re going to do and what we’re paying for,” Gajadhar said in a video posted to his Facebook page.

Gajadhar’s team has since placed reflectors on the poles to make them visible at night.

LUCELEC’s Managing Director, Gilroy Pultie.

In a statement shared by LUCELEC on Wednesday, Managing Director Gilroy Pultie confirmed receipt of Gajadhar’s request for a cost breakdown. According to Pultie, LUCELEC has been in discussions with the contractor and the overseeing ministry over the past two weeks.

“We have subsequently provided further breakdown of the cost. It is under discussion. We expect that the ministry will accept what we have provided, and provide feedback in the next day or two following which we will move on the project,” Pultie said.

LUCELEC says its approach to costing uses standard unit rates for materials and labour. 

“The company has a responsibility to manage its cost very prudently otherwise it could translate to the tariff, and one can always argue that LUCELEC can absorb the cost, and we can, but if we were to absorb the cost it would be a cost that we have to pass on to the consumers. Costs like the relocation of lines associated with the roadworks should be treated and passed on to the government, or the agency or the contractor as part of the project.”

He called for more responsible and inclusive planning of projects of that scale.

“Projects like this need to be managed going forward more responsibly, and what I mean by that is there needs to be more planning and coordination amongst all the stakeholders, including LUCELEC, to avoid situations like this where our infrastructure becomes hazards to the public,” said Pultie. “That should never happen again and LUCELEC will do all in its power to ensure that this is avoided going forward.”

Meanwhile, northern residents and daily commuters to the country’s north who have made ample use of the road to avoid gridlock traffic on the Sir Julian R Hunte Highway are voicing concerns about whether safety is being prioritised.

One resident of Bonneterre Gardens, Gros Islet, told St Lucia Times he has regularly relied on Norbert Road to commute between the island’s north and south for years, and before the road was eventually blocked to facilitate reconstruction, he noticed that work was being carried out around the poles.

“I noticed they were literally working around the poles and kept wondering why LUCELEC hadn’t shifted them, because that’s just an accident waiting to happen,” he said. “Now, hearing the back and forth between them and Rayneau Construction & Industrial Products Ltd, it honestly feels like both sides care more about cost than commuters’ safety. It’s disgusting and unfortunate that motorists are being put at risk over a cost dispute. This tells me that money matters more than the safety of motorists. It is really bad optics for both companies.”

The government has been vocal about the intention of by-pass road expansions as a means to help alleviate traffic congestion in the north. However, further delays now appear imminent.

According to LUCELEC, an estimated 21 to 25 electrical poles and parts of the existing distribution network will need to be relocated.

Any third-party or user posts, comments, replies, and third-party entries published on the St. Lucia Times website (https://stluciatimes.com) in no way convey the thoughts, sentiments or intents of St. Lucia Times, the author of any said article or post, the website, or the business. St. Lucia Times is not responsible or liable for, and does not endorse, any comments or replies posted by users and third parties, and especially the content therein and whether it is accurate. St. Lucia Times reserves the right to remove, screen, edit, or reinstate content posted by third parties on this website or any other online platform owned by St. Lucia Times (this includes the said user posts, comments, replies, and third-party entries) at our sole discretion for any reason or no reason, and without notice to you, or any user. For example, we may remove a comment or reply if we believe it violates any part of the St. Lucia Criminal Code, particularly section 313 which pertains to the offence of Libel. Except as required by law, we have no obligation to retain or provide you with copies of any content you as a user may post, or any other post or reply made by any third-party on this website or any other online platform owned by St. Lucia Times. All third-parties and users agree that this is a public forum, and we do not guarantee any confidentiality with respect to any content you as a user may post, or any other post or reply made by any third-party on this website. Any posts made and information disclosed by you is at your own risk.

2 COMMENTS

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

TRENDING

194
Independence

Do you think Saint Lucia has made progress since Independence?

Subscribe to our St. Lucia Times Newsletter

Get our headlines emailed to you every day.