Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Bridge Replacement topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Engineers lay out four Clark Drive bridge options; replacement-in-kind estimated at $3.6M

Town of Ludlow Board of Selectmen · July 6, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Hoyle/Tanner engineers presented four alternatives to replace Ludlow’s Clark Drive bridge lost in the 2023 flood, with replacement-in-kind estimated at $3.638 million and FEMA engineering funding time-sensitive. Board was urged to submit designs promptly to preserve grants; no final decision was made.

Hoyle/Tanner engineers presented four options to replace the Clark Drive bridge that washed out in the July 2023 flood and cautioned the town that delays could risk losing FEMA engineering funds. Kelly Lavigne said the temporary bridge that was installed after the flood "probably will not last through another storm" and that the town must show FEMA feasible alternatives to secure reimbursement and continued grant support.

The engineers’ cost estimates were: rebuild in place (replacement in kind) — total $3,638,000; rebuild 300 feet north — $2,044,000; rebuild 100 feet south — $2,885,000; and decommission Clark Drive and expand Plumley Avenue — $931,000. Lavigne said the in-place reconstruction requires a 56-foot hydraulic opening and would likely require closure or alternating one-way traffic on VT 100 during parts of construction. Thad Leugemors and Kimberly Canarecci explained FEMA reimbursement rules and timing: FEMA typically reimburses 75–90% of eligible repairs depending on program rules and obligation timing, and engineering designs must be submitted promptly to avoid losing the grant for engineering.

Select Board members stressed operational concerns. George Tucker, Jr. said closing VT 100 would disrupt transfer-station access and EMS response; Chief Ben Whalen agreed alternative local routes were not viable for emergency apparatus. Penny Wu committed to coordinating with VEM staff and the engineers to pursue designs that minimize closure time and protect grant eligibility. The board took no formal vote and directed staff to pursue timely engineering submittals and further discussion at a future Select Board meeting.