A $191 million Housing Development Corporation (HDC) housing project in a Laventille “hot zone” has come under scrutiny, with Minister in the Ministry of Housing Phillip Edward Alexander questioning why the contract was awarded to a company whose bid was $54 million higher than that of the lowest bidder.Alexander also questioned whether political considerations influenced the award.He raised the issues yesterday during a news conference at the HDC construction site at Citrus Close, off the Eastern Main Road, Laventille, formerly occupied by the Citrus Growers Association.Construction at the site has since stopped, and Alexander said he did not know what would happen to the development.He urged reporters to photograph the site, describing the area as a “hot zone” because of conflict between the Beetham and Laventille gangs. “We are actually on a piece of property that is contested between two violent gangs, Beetham gang and the Laventille gang, and this is a hot zone where this development is. To law enforcement, this is a hot zone,” he said.Alexander questioned the decision by the former PNM administration to develop housing in an area where he claimed residents could face serious safety concerns.“At some point under the last administration, somebody got an idea to bring citizens of Trinidad and Tobago and put them to live in a hot zone,” he said.According to Alexander, the HDC subsequently awarded a $191 million contract for the construction of ten buildings containing 191 apartments. He also questioned the economic viability of the project, arguing there was a limit to the amount that could reasonably be spent on housing in a particular location based on land values.Alexander suggested the units were too expensive to sell and would instead have to be rented, arguing it could take taxpayers more than 200 years to recover the cost of the development. He also questioned the procurement process surrounding the contract.Alexander said Wood Green Construction Services and Rainbow Construction had reached the final stage of the bidding process. He said Rainbow submitted the lowest bid of $137,244,000, while Wood Green’s bid was $191,275,000—a difference of approximately $54 million.According to Alexander, Rainbow was initially awarded the contract, but the HDC’s Procurement and Disposal Advisory Committee subsequently varied the award and gave the contract to Wood Green.He read from a letter dated May 20, 2024, sent by Rainbow to the Office of Procurement Regulation (OPR), which questioned the decision. The letter alleged the award to Wood Green, despite Rainbow’s substantially lower bid, amounted to waste and overspending. He added the letter to the OPR was submitted during the standstill period following the award, and claimed the regulator responded a year later, promising an investigation.Alexander questioned why, two years after that promise, there had been no apparent conclusion. “The same OPR that is very busy in HDC now wasn’t as busy then,” he argued.Alexander said the current status of both the contractor and the contract remained unclear.The Express contacted Wood Green via a number on its Facebook page but did not get a response to messages left.