Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Bridges topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Select Board weighs small-bridge repair versus full TIP replacement for Laughingbrook Bridge
Summary
Board members raised safety concerns about corroded rails and eroded sides on Laughingbrook Bridge and discussed applying for small-bridge engineering funds or pursuing a larger TIP-funded replacement. Staff said the bridge currently qualifies as a "small bridge" and suggested engineering work would be needed upfront.
Chair Bob told the board he was concerned the bridge’s railing and sides are deteriorating and asked whether a targeted repair might be possible rather than pursuing a full $4 million replacement. Staff said Laughingbrook Bridge is currently classified as a small bridge and therefore could qualify for the state small-bridge program, but that engineering costs and a Chapter 85 review would be required upfront.
Members compared the costs and goals of the small-bridge program (lower-cost repairs and streamlined procurement) with a large TIP-funded replacement. One member noted that temporary repairs—welding plates and welding beams to shore up the rail—had worked on other local bridges and could cost hundreds of thousands, not millions. Staff cautioned that the town would still need to front engineering and perform required reviews to make an application competitive.
The board asked staff to investigate quotes and to consult with the town’s engineering consultant (the same firm that helped with South Road) to determine whether to seek small-bridge funding or pursue a TIP application. Members noted using remaining Chapter 90 balances to cover engineering could be a possible funding path if the town is selected.
