Watch for the response in the next post.
August 12, 2011
City of Fort Worth
I wish to file a complaint regarding M&C G-17346 which is the Chesapeake Rutherford 1H proposed well site. The street address is 6699 Boca Raton Boulevard per the City Council Agenda.
This item was on the City Council Agenda for which I filed an on-line speaker card against. I received a phone call advising me it had been withdrawn from consideration. Upon arriving to speak on another item, I spoke with Rick Trice who informed me the reason it was withdrawn was that Chesapeake had all of the necessary waivers.
I informed Mr. Trice there was an apartment in the Woodhaven Self Storage main building that is about 75 feet from the proposed pad site and less than the 300 feet required by Ordinance. I was then told they would have to move as Chesapeake had a waiver or something indicating no one lived there.
I have a copy of what I think he is talking about and it does say there is not a permanent resident. However, there is an on site manager as advertised on their web site who lives there. I unaware of any resident of an apartment who is a permanent resident, they however are a resident. The only permanent residents I am aware are in the Cemetery.
Perhaps Mr. Trice was being facetious about there needing to move, but it would appear to me the City has an obligation to review the matter more and if there is a resident, which there is, the occupied building should have the right to correct any issues. The Storage Company has been in business for a length of time and part of their service is having an on-site manager for their customer’s storage security. The Woodhaven Self Storage is located within the Woodhaven TIF 13 and most TIF areas are not noted for security and safety, this TIF is no exception.
There are numerous reasons why a well site should not be allowed at this location, but I will begin with basic procedure irregularities.
The drilling Ordinance 15-36 D clearly states no application for a gas well permit will be accepted without ALL of the waivers having been obtained.
The last waivers were not obtained until August of 2011 and yet the application was submitted and accepted by the City in early May of 2011, or three months earlier.
15-36D. Permitting Procedures for a Waiver from Protected Use Property Owners.
1. No application for a Gas Well permit within six hundred (600) feet of a Protected Use by Waiver of Protected Uses shall be accepted unless the written notarized waivers are obtained from all Protected Use Property Owners within six hundred (600) feet of the proposed well site. Written notarized waivers granted by the all the Protected Use Property Owners within a six hundred (600) foot radius around the proposed well or boundary of Multiple Well Site must be filed, at the expense of the Operator, in the applicable county records. All waivers must identify the property address, block and lot number subdivision name and plat volume and page number. Copies of filed Protected number. subdivision name and plat volume and page number. Copies of tiled Protected use Property Owner waivers must be submitted with the filing of a completed application for a gas well permit within 600 feet of a protected use.
The next irregularity is that it was recently cleared, graded and removal of large light poles along with installing a chain length fence around the property. This was done before the City issued any gas-drilling permit and at the direction of Chesapeake.
This violates Sec. 15-34(A) Gas Well Permit Required.
A person wanting to engage in and operate in gas production activities shall apply for and obtain a gas well permit under this article and shall indicate what type of gas well permit is requested. It shall be unlawful for any person acting either for himself or acting as agent, employee, independent contractor, or servant for any person to drill any well, assist in any way in the site preparation, re-working, fracturing or operation of any such well or to conduct any activity related to the production of gas without first obtaining a gas well permit issued by the city in accordance with this article. Such activities include, but are not limited to re-working, initial site preparation, drilling, operation, construction of rigs or tank batteries, fracturing and pressurizing. A permit shall not be required for seismic surveys unless the survey is conducted on city owned property or city rights-of-ways unless such requirement is waived by the city.
The City still appears to be ready to move forward with permitting this well site for Chesapeake despite there being a protected use (residence) approximately 75 feet from the pad site even though the Ordinance requires a minimum of 300 feet from the pad site.
This well is closer than 300 feet from a protected use.
The Woodhaven Storage facility is right next-door with an on-site manager and an apartment on the second floor. I talked to Scott Haskins the General Manager who assured me the apartment is used. That apartment is about 75 feet from the pad site.
The definition of a residence:
Residence means a house, duplex, apartment, townhouse, condominium, city-inspected mobile home or other building designed for dwelling purposes, including those for which a building permit has been issued on the date the application for a gas well permit is filed with the gas inspector. Residence shall include assisted living facilities, nursing homes (both intermediate care facilities and skilled nursing facilities), residential board and care facilities, group homes, twenty-four-hour shelters, half-way houses, hotels, motels and jails.
The Woodhaven Self Storage building was obviously designed to provide a living place. The up-stairs has a balcony, a ceiling fan and patio furniture along with an outdoors grill. The living area is required for this facility to provide security and oversight by the on-site manager as advertised. I have driven past this location many times late a night and observed automobiles present and activity on the balcony.
There are many practical reasons why a well should not be at this location.
The location is within the boundaries of the Woodhaven TIF 13.
When the TIF was authorized and approved, the citizens of Fort Worth and Tarrant County were assured there would be a plan put in place to ensure the TIF area would increase property values and create a better place to live.
When you look at where this gas well is proposed, it goes against everything we were promised.
I don’t understand why the Council Person for District 4 isn’t demanding this well site not be allowed. He is on the TIF Board and his duty is to protect the Woodhaven TIF 13.
It is located at one of the few gateways into the Woodhaven TIF. That would be John T. White and 820.
History has shown a gas well only brings down property values and it creates a nuisance along with being a safety hazard to the residents.
There are already more well sites than should be allowed in and around this TIF, but this well site is located literally in the middle of an existing community. On several sides there are hundreds of apartments and on the other side there are neighborhood friendly businesses.
There is a major grocery store, several restaurants and other business the residents frequent often. These are all extremely close to the site.
The well site is out of place.
How do you plan to notify 1000’s of apartment residents within that 600 feet or even 400 feet if there is a major blowout or explosion? You can’t.
There is no safety margin and no time to develop a plan.
If there is a blowout or fire, there is no acceptable safe access to the site for fire and safety crews if the winds are from the Northwest, and which it most likely would be during winter months.
The City also has other obligations.
The City signed an agreement with Tarrant County that states
4.1. Amendment to TIF Ordinance.
All amendments to the TIF Ordinance shall be
approved by the TIF Board prior to approval by the City Council.
Due to the site location, that would be contrary to what was agreed in the contract with the County and they can stop making payments.
Has the TIF board approved anything or even discussed this as the contract stipulates?
Chesapeake doesn’t need this well; they already have a well site less than 1000 feet away and could drill anyplace they could from this one. They can drill over 5000 feet if necessary.
They appear to be grabbing land and destroying surrounding property values.
The City has the authority to say no to this gas well. It is in a TIF and as such the State grants the authority
Sec. 311.008. POWERS OF MUNICIPALITY
OR COUNTY.
(b) A municipality or county may exercise any
power necessary and convenient to carry out this
chapter, including the power to
(3) enter into agreements, including agreements with bondholders, determined by the governing body of the municipality or county to be
necessary or convenient to implement project plans and achieve their purposes, which agreements may include conditions, restrictions, or covenants that run with the land or that by other means regulate or
restrict the use of land;
I have provided several images to review that support my request to looking deeper into the permitting of the Rutherford 1H well site.
They include a copy of the TIF area showing the well site is inside the TIF.
An aerial of surrounding apartments and residential friendly business that creates a community
The location of another well site less than 1000 feet.
There are photographs of the pad site before clearing, grading and site preparation and after. One aerial photo clearly shows light poles on the location.
Woodhaven Self Storage Web page – “on site manager”
There are eating establishments with Food prepared within feet of site.
The well site should not be allowed at this location, it is not needed by Chesapeake Energy and certainly does not belong in a location so close to residents and other business without an adequate ability to fight a fire if one occurred.
Chesapeake Energy cannot say there is not another location for a drill rig since there is already a well site within 1000 feet of the proposed site.
The location of this site is right in the heart of a residential neighborhood and neighborhood friendly businesses area.
Placing a well site in the heart of any residential community will destroy the surrounding area and is contrary to the goal of the Woodhaven TIF 13.
The City has partners in the TIF such as Tarrant County and the school District along with others who were never consulted about allowing a gas well and this violates the partnerships agreed purpose.
Chesapeake Energy and the City of Fort Worth have violated the trust of the Citizens of Fort Worth in misrepresenting the truth or the facts. Numerous Ordinances were not followed as required and when they were pointed out, there was no action taken, except maybe on the little guy, Woodhaven Self Storage.
Due to the long list of discrepancies, irregularities, lack of safety considerations and not meeting the required setbacks of the Fort Worth Gas Drilling Ordinance, I request that no permit be issued to Chesapeake Energy for the Rutherford 1H well site location. I would also request penalties be asses for violations as provided by the city Ordinance. Chesapeake knows the regulations and should be required to obey them.
Sincerely
0 nhận xét:
Đăng nhận xét