From Constable Michael Jackson, Transport and Technical Services Minister.

IN his letter (JEP, 16 December) your correspondent John Clennett raised some questions regarding the Victoria Avenue resurfacing projects, to which I am happy to respond.

Firstly, he questions the need for resurfacing at all and suggests that no noticeable benefit has been gained from the works completed to date. I can assure Mr Clennett and the public of Jersey that Victoria Avenue was in dire need of repair and in fact has not been resurfaced for 25 years.

Work of this magnitude is not entered into lightly. An in-depth condition survey of the entire road network was carried out in 2007 which confirmed the findings of an earlier evaluation in 2005. They clearly showed that significant reconstruction and resurfacing works were required along the full length of Victoria Avenue. Potholes had been appearing for some time now, which is a clear indication that the road surface has very little life left in it.

We at TTS have a limited budget for road resurfacing; we look after a road network of some 430 miles, of which last year we could only resurface 51/2 miles. We therefore have to be very selective about the roads that we resurface and we certainly would not be carrying out work that was not required and priority is given to the most important roads.

Given the necessity of the resurfacing works, TTS also took the opportunity to replace kerbing, duct work, drainage (45 years old), and street lighting (25 years old).

The need for this work may not be immediately apparent, but I can assure your readers that replacement of the drainage system was essential to ensure the long term integrity of the road surface. Integrating these elements of work into the resurfacing works also means that road-users will not be disrupted by separate projects.

We have also taken the opportunity to improve road safety by extending the right hand turn lane at Rue du Galet, thus preventing the overflow of vehicles from blocking the second lane, as they do currently during peak hours.

Secondly Mr Clennett questions the amount that has been spent on each phase of the works. I can inform your readers of the following actual or approximate predicted costs for the contract works, all of which are already in the public domain:

Phase 1 – Bel Royal to Rue du Galet: £1.2m.
Phase 2 – Rue du Galet to First Tower: £2m.
Phase 3 – First Tower to West Park: Out to tender.

Mr Clennett also refers to the ‘fiasco at Bel Royal’, on which I would like to comment. I presume he is referring to the realignment of a short length of kerbing to facilitate the movement of emergency vehicles. The cost for this element of the work was £5,000 of the total £1.2m spend on Phase 1.

I would suggest that the remainder of the Phase 1 project went very well and the works were carried out with the minimum of disruption to road users.

The question as to whether the States should be spending these sums of money in the current economic climate is a very valid point and may be better answered by a representative from Treasury and Resources rather than me.

However, spend on infrastructure is greatly needed and is a recognised method of economic stimulus being followed by the UK and other jurisdictions. I would therefore defend this level of expenditure, suggest that it is exactly the right time to be carrying out these works and would hope that the States’ commitment to provide this funding assists in the overall recovery of the Island’s economy, supporting local businesses and their employees.

Finally I would like to take this opportunity of thanking all the team who have worked on this project from the designers to the site team and I am sure your readers would join me in thanking them for their continued efforts in keeping the traffic moving and minimising delays to all road users while they complete this project.