Got asked to bid a very unusual project

[2manyrocks]

You need to start reading from the beginning. The who has been answered.the legal has been taken care of because of the who. In any case screw legal and have fun.

I did like the one that had somebody on the pile hooking them up and drag to shore. Sounds like something I’d attempt.

Hay dude. Are you also clearing the down stream ones as well?

If we were making guesses, why not guess the conservancy is weary of nothing being done and simply asked Hay Dude what it would take to clear up the jam without actually having looked into who has legal responsibility to clear up the log jam?

If the RR isn't using the tracks, why wouldn't SEPTA at least allow access to remove the debris that endangers their bridge support and protects the conservancy's property?

There's more than one log jam here and isn't all logs.

 

[Hay Dude]

Questions:

- is your customer seeking a fixed price bid or are they open to (open ended) time and materials?

Fixed price is probably what they expect. There’s no “materials” and I have a pretty good handle on the time needed to do it. Only other thing is excavator & crane rental.

- is the scope of work only logs visible or does it also include a submerged pile down to the river bottom?

Just visible as far as I know. Might as well get the submerged ones while there. I’m a good swimmer/diver lol

- is it possible to bid the job and receive a carve out that you are not responsible for anything that floats away?

I think I’m on the hook for damages, but I don’t see much chance if I take the route of cutting into small pieces.

- is it possible to interrupt or stop the water flow long enough to provide better access?

Oh heavens no. Its a river!

- would you be allowed to set anchors, either on shore or on the island/pier the logs are bunched up against?

Yes

Looks like a fun project. I presume in advance there might not be a lot of bidding competition!

I agree!

 

[Hay Dude]

If we were making guesses, why not guess the conservancy is weary of nothing being done and simply asked Hay Dude what it would take to clear up the jam without actually having looked into who has legal responsibility to clear up the log jam?

I am one of a few in the area who take on impossible tasks and they know it. I don’t think their staffer has any idea about liabilities, but if I do the “cut short pieces” method, I think there’s little chance of down-river damage. In fact, if you look down-river, there’s a shallow area and a huge sand bar. I would think it’ll float slowly, and probably harmlessly down the river.

If the RR isn't using the tracks, why wouldn't SEPTA at least allow access to remove the debris that endangers their bridge support and protects the conservancy's property?

Bigger question is if the bridge technically belongs to SEPTA, why won’t they clear the log jam? My guess is since the tracks are closed for last 40+ years, they are practicing “willful neglect or abandonment and simply allowing the structure to eventually collapse? I really don’t know what is on their minds.

There's more than one log jam here and isn't all logs.

It’s not really that bad. The part in the water is a bit tricky. The part on land looks like it could be straight forward.

 

[plowhog]

Maybe a first impression would be to excavate down and set a very strong, shore based concrete anchor in the ground. Then use that along with a gear reduction device or block and tackle etc. to enhance pull strength. As a log is winched to shore and runs aground, pick it up with your excavator and load it. After the job is finished you could cover up the concrete anchor with topsoil.

For access to set chains, etc. you need an employee out there who can safely navigate. Maybe a telehandler / excavator / whatever with enough reach to be able to set and hold in place a "work platform" above the mess (and above danger should it dislodge).

Finally, you mentioned a few thousand dollars? I wouldn't touch it unless the agreed price was exponentially higher. Too much that can go wrong, plenty of risk. But that's just me.

 

[Hay Dude]

View attachment 848421

It looks like - to start - A good bit of chainsaw work to cut the top stuff up into 4'-5' chunks and cable it over to shore. Then you'll have an idea of what's left in the water to winch to shore Jenga style.
View attachment 848423

Yes I am beginning to think a floating platform, anchored at the tip of the “sand bar” might be a decent point from which to cut/release pieces, but this brings about another issue:

If you stand on sandbar and cut pieces to create space, soon you’ll have logs in the water to cut. Can’t put chainsaw in the water.

 

[Snobdds]

The problem I see is that removing this log jam isn't going to prevent the next one.
A better solution is one that does more than just pushing today's problem towards tomorrow.

Also, when the problem is difficult, I favor solutions where the customer is required to have some involvement. In this case, the museum and the museum patrons are in a position to have political and financial influence that extends far beyond simply paying for a one time job.

Repairing the railway well enough to use a railway crane is where I would start, and I would ask the museum to use its influence to accomplish that chore. That would take care of both this and susequent jams at that location, and it would also serve as a general solution that could be used for the other area logjams.
rScotty

That might take 10 years before the funds are raised to fund the project.

 

[Snobdds]

A long reach dredging excavator is still your best option.

 

[2manyrocks]

Bigger question is if the bridge technically belongs to SEPTA, why won’t they clear the log jam? My guess is since the tracks are closed for last 40+ years, they are practicing “willful neglect or abandonment and simply allowing the structure to eventually collapse? I really don’t know what is on their minds.



It’s not really that bad. The part in the water is a bit tricky. The part on land looks like it could be straight forward.

Maybe part of the problem is a failure to communicate instead of directly asking SEPTA? They might say they don't have the money to take care of all of it. They might say you could have access to the bridge if they were provided with adequate proof of insurance? Maybe they'd abandon the whole thing to the conservancy? Maybe the conservancy doesn't want the responsibility of dealing with future log jams?

If they granted access, would the work be easier, less risky, and more cost effective?

The point is it's impossible to know without communicating effectively.

 

[Topzide]

You need a hydraulic chainsaw with environmentally friendly hydraulic fluid that runs and lubes the chain. That way you could use under the water.

 

[Snobdds]

Maybe part of the problem is a failure to communicate instead of directly asking SEPTA? They might say they don't have the money to take care of all of it. They might say you could have access to the bridge if they were provided with adequate proof of insurance? Maybe they'd abandon the whole thing to the conservancy? Maybe the conservancy doesn't want the responsibility of dealing with future log jams?

If they granted access, would the work be easier, less risky, and more cost effective?

The point is it's impossible to know without communicating effectively.

You have to be a government employee with this type of mentality.