Last night the local news reported local residents "felt forced" to let a gas drilling company put a pipeline in their front yard. How would you feel if someone comes to your door and states they are going to dig up your front yard and lay a 16 inch (think tire size) natural gas pipeline just steps from your house...where your kids play, where you go at the end of your day, where you lay your head each night... your HOME? You might say, "Now wait a minute buddy, I own this place". To which they say, "So you give it to us, or we take it". Then you contact your city (and if they take your calls), they say we can't help you.
If they can't, who can???
Here's an interesting letter we received that sheds some light on why an "alternative route" was needed. (Aug 08)
I would like to provide you an update you on where we stand on reviewing the options for the Thomas well site.
I met with Chesapeake more than a week ago to discuss the various pipeline routes. They owe me an exhibit of all of the routes they considered and an itemization of the impediments to each option. I expect to get that document this week. We discussed extensively the property north of I-30 that is controlled by the Tarrant Regional Water District. There is an existing pipeline in that area that is scheduled to be moved with the Trinity River Vision project. It appears that the remaining area will not be sufficient to accomodate an additional line. However, I am awaiting written confirmation about this from Woody Frossard at the Tarrant Regional Water District who is also the project liaison with the Corp of Engineers. We also discussed the option of the pipeline under Carter Avenue ; however, with the staging/boring of the pipeline, there is an entire house that would have to be condemned/removed to accomodate this path which is undesirable. This leaves the various perimeter routes on which I am awaiting the engineer's evaluations.
As far as the truck route goes, we have discussed the construction of a service road to allow access from the North. TxDOT is supportive of this. However, Chesapeake is unable to wait the 36 months or so that it would require to design and construct and still honor their leases in the area to produce minerals. We have provided information on the cost of complete reconstruction of Scott Avenue to City standards and continue to negotiate this point. I hope to have this discussion resolved late next week.
The suggestion was made that the City purchase the property and add it to Tandy Hills Park . I have been in contact with the property owner and the realtor. Regardless of the sales prices, their surface lease obligations would likely follow any sale transaction so it is unlikely to be a solution.
As far as the soil sampling that took place out there last week, Chesapeake 's contractor was in violation of the City's tree ordinance and is being cited accordingly.
Again, all of these items are still under discussion until we have definitive answers from the various parties involved. In the meantime, no permits will be issued. Please allow us to complete our discussions and we will update you as possible.
Planning and Development