Dock/pier project stalled after no bids; contractor asks to drive temporary pilings

Council members reviewed feedback that several contractors were unwilling to bid on a dock/pier job, citing logistical difficulties (barges, rock, ice-flow concerns) and calling the work "sketchy." S1 said he circulated Michael's drawings to multiple firms and that four contractors were preparing proposals; he suggested design-build as an option if formal bidding continued to fail.

Kramer North America — the contractor working with the railroad — formally requested permission to place temporary pilings and riprap between an existing dock and an older dock near the landing to allow a barge and large crane to offload. The transcript records the contractor's proposed approach: "put between the existing dock and the old dock... drive some sheep piling 40 feet above and roughly 10 feet over 15 feet over from shore, fill it all with, with riprap," and that the piling and riprap would be removed when the work was done. Council members repeatedly said a permit would be required and insisted Kramer or its representative come to a council meeting to present drawings and explain protections for the shoreline and timing.

S1 noted the city had already paid for design-level work and had shared hydraulics and other documents with contractors; he said if no bidders emerge the council could legally pursue a design-build contract in compliance with statutes but emphasized the need for clear time frames and contractual commitments. No formal approval for piling or riprap was given; council directed staff to require a presentation, permit documentation and a contract before any work proceeds.

Next steps: Kramer or its representative to be invited to the council to present the proposal; staff to verify permitting requirements and ensure any temporary works are documented with a contract specifying removal and restoration obligations.