Powder Point Bridge Replacement Project Negotiations Make Some Progress, Encounter Some Obstacles

Key issues: Wood driving surface, rust prevention on pilings, making sure there are no unwanted design changes during the construction phase

The committee is pursuing Design Concept 1, one of two design concepts proposed by MassDOT in February

New design for the bridge deck. Notice at the bottom of the barrier separating the road from the sidewalk is wood. Previously, it had been cement. MassDOT is insisting on keeping the steel railings, however.

Old design from February 1 of the deck of the bridge. Notice the cement barriers, which are now gone and the yellow crosswalk sign, which has not been removed.

May 18, 2026 (Duxbury) — At a Selectboard meeting on Monday, Powder Point Bridge Advisory Committee Chair Ed Mayo highlighted the enormous progress the town has made in negotiations with MassDOT over the design of a potential replacement for the Powder Point Bridge.

They have convinced MassDOT to preserve the current bridge alignment and the low speed of the bridge. They have added wood sidewalks on each side of the bridge. There is more wood on the railing system than in previous iterations. “Highway-oriented visual impacts” have been reduced.

Mayo also listed a series of impasses.

MassDOT is adamantly opposed to putting a wood driving surface on the bridge. The pilings they propose are designed to rust — perfectly functional but ugly. They won’t provide the town with long-term maintenance costs. We still don’t know about construction scheduling. They want to have a metal crosswalk sign in the middle of the bridge that could blow away and kill someone in a storm. Duxbury will not have any control over the design once the 25% design phase is over.

The committee has settled on negotiation for the first design concept from MassDOT’s February 2026 presentation, shown above. Mayo said that they have not included the proposed bump outs because they disturb the sight line of the bridge. They have advocated for sidewalks on both sides of the bridge.

The committee nixed the bump outs

“We thought having the two walkways would be important, and I think it adds some symmetry to the bridge actually,” said Mayo. “We haven't had anybody really resist that idea too much.”

Mayo did not say whether he had made any progress in improving the look of the bents on the bridge — the horizontal cement beams that sit above the set of four pilings in the picture below.

No Wood Driving Surface, Yet

MassDOT refuses to provide a wood driving surface to the bridge even though one was provided to the Mitchell River Bridge in Chatham.