Not to fan the flames here, but I’m curious. If there’s a unanimous decision to oppose drilling, the why did many of these people sign leases? Or I guess the correct question would be how many did sign?

If they did sign then how can they be opposed to it? Is not leasing your mineral rights tacit/de facto approval of pursuit of said minerals?

Main reason I’m curious is because I’m wondering how this is going to play out. I know I miss out on some of the discussion, but I know many of my neighbors signed leases last year before the sales pitch was even finished.

Is it ok if it’s in another neighborhood? If so what neighborhood? I know one of the other proposed sites in the beginning was the old Texas Steel off Hemphill. If you can’t see it from the Ryan Place arches does that make it ok?

Again, not trying to start an argument. Please don’t take it that way. I’m just trying to educate myself on what resolutions people want to see. On one hand I hear no urban drilling, but then I hear so many talking about the sign on bonus they got for leasing their mineral rights.

Eigth Avenue was a prime example of a group negotiating in good faith with an agreement included that eliminated that site for XTO who I believe had the surface land use that now Chesapeake wants to use. This tainted of bait and switch. I hope to see the fight continue there and at TCU .
As we continue down this slippery slope of urban gas drilling / Industry muti million dollar media ” We are the Good Guys ” media blitz all while their landmen knock doors of unlucky short stray winners of pipeline easement through their residential investment in Texas with threats of Eminent Domain, I am continually convimced that the citizens of Fort Worth MUST and BETTER continue to demand the Best protections from our city. An answer is our city has the right to deny access across streets inconsistent with proper planning for pipelines. They also have the right and obligation to protect health and safety. Another answer is AND MAYBE THE BEST OF ALL TO GET INDUSTRY ATTENTION is for more people to consider stopping the leasing frenzy until the industry gets the message that NOT ALL CITIZENS are happy with the approach and sometimes down right reprehensible disregard for doing things right and NOT walking over the people who can in many cases have the least means to resist or fight back..
Please message your City Council and the Task Force with your ideas, concerns, regarding Urban Gas Drilling in Fort Worth.
G. Hogan
G Hogan

Steve-O and Gary Hogan are right in their assessment in my opinion in this instance. Safety is a primary concern and I would hope that Chesapeake would approach this in a manner taking into consideration concerns of local citizens while at the same time fullfilling their lease obligations. I do not think a 70’s style approach sit-in is the answer however. I think we can all act like adults all the way around. Getting hostile towards each other never works. Look at the mess we are in to begin with because both sides on the national level cannot come together on a national evergy plan.

I totally agree with the general comments about the reality of drilling in Fort Worth and the primary importance of safety in those operations. But in regard to the 8th Avenue site in particular, there seems to have been a shift in the conventional wisdom within the past week. This time last week it was all pitchforks and torches and getting to the council chambers early to get a seat. Now all the talk seems to be about safe drilling and master plans and continuing discussions. I’m not saying this is necessarily a bad development, just that we should recognize what is happening.

Speaking of TCU, I overheard a clerk in the Dollar Store located in the Westcliff shopping center telling another customer that Chesapeake is trying to buy the center. That may or may not be a rumor based in fact. What is fact is that urban mineral owners are willing to take lease bonus dollars but some who take that money don’t want urban wells drilled in their neighborhood. Hypocritical? Maybe. But what is hypocritical is concern for the effects of climate change and not speaking out against any further development of co2 producing energy sources. The complete combustion of gasoline, diesel, coal and natural gas produces co2 as a byproduct. Assuming that only co2 and water are allowed to escape into our environment from the production of energy from hydrocarbons, we are still fouling our own nest. If we are true to ourselves and our kids and grandkids, we will speak out against further development of fossil fuels and speak for Manhattan- moon landing magnitude projects to develop alternative sources of energy that do not produce greenhouse gases.

Ross,

The neighborhood leaders are just acting like adults and showing good faith in talking with Chesapeake. All the leaders are aware of all the “bad” stuff and will ultimately do right by the residents of each of those neighborhoods. I am absolutely, 100% against the site as well.

I don’t think there is a larger agenda and its absurd to think that those leaders would do that to their own neighborhoods.

My hope is that Chesapeake will do the right thing and withdraw the variance completely. But I think Bill Davis would love that b/c he would get to sue them and make even more money.

John,

On what grounds could Davis sue Chesapeake? They have probably spent $50,000 just trying to get the variance. If anything, he would sue the City of Ft. Worth for inversely condemning his land.

Chesapeake is NOT trying to buy Westcliff Shopping Center. That rumor has been going around for months - some well-meaning folks mistook Westcliff for SOUTHcliff, which Chesapeake DID buy.

Let me throw a new concept on the table: What if Chesapeake bought all the properties within 600′ of the Eighth Ave. drill site, essentially buying their waivers. Not 601 ‘, but exactly 600′? Would that be OK with everyone in the neighborhood? But of course not.

I ask this rhetorical question because, that is precisely what is happening in east Fort Worth at a potential drill site adjacent to Tandy Hills Natural Area. This privately owned site is one of the last remaining pieces of original, FW prairie. It is, perhaps, more incredible than Tandy Hills, itself. Chesapeake wants to build a road through it and drill several gas wells - maybe compressor stations, too.

This site is also adjacent to and part of the West Meadowbrook neighborhood. The Carter Ave. pipeline that Chesapeake wants to run through 4 blocks of front yards (http://startelegram.typepad.com/barnett_shale/files/eastside_neighbors_oppose_natural_gas_pipeline.htm) would connect this site with the one at I-30 and Riverside.

I say all this to remind and plead with southside residents to come support your eastside brethren and sistren when the time comes. That time will be in mid July at a public meeting TBA. This site is our line in the sand. We need you to support us as we have and will continue to support you.

One lesson we should all get from urban gas drilling is that, WE CAN NO LONGER BE NIMBY’S. It’s a disgrace that our town has come to this, but if we have to live with gas wells we must work together, for all neighborhoods to, not just limit the damage but demand and end to the tyranny of gas extractors. One reason this happened is that, the drillers divided and conquered us, one bonus check at a time.

I agree with John, above. Maybe we need a city-wide, 70’s style protest, whatever that means. I imagine he means a mass demonstration of resistance. If this issue does not cry out for an act of civil disobedience, I don’t know what does.

I will be there, Don, when the time comes for the public hearing for the Eastside site. It may be more of a travesty than the 8th Ave site. Tandy Hills and the neighboring grasslands is irreplaceable native prairie. Once it is gone, it’s gone.

However, you must return the favor when the 8th Ave site comes up for hearing again.

I hope Mayor Mikey and the rest of council is reading this site and listening to most of FW when deciding on the new regs. I know Joel is on our side.

Don, I’m buying my pitchfork tomorrow for the 1820’s style Frankenstein mobbing of Mayor Mikey!!!

Ben – I don’t understand the talk about Davis suing Chesapeake either, though I’ve heard the same things as Steve. My understanding has always been the opposite - that usually a leasee wants the lease to expire so they can go out and sign another lease with another bonus, and it’s the oil company who always wants to begin production to keep the term of the lease going. There must be something we are missing. Or they could just be lying.

I agree with Chris’s take on the XTO leases. It seems that Chesapeake would be bound by the terms of the lease even if they bought them from XTO. I would also be curious about the $8.7 million figure in Steve’s Deep Throat email. To my mind, it would take a lot more than $8.7 million in improvements along 8th to make any headway with the neighborhoods.

To Bernie -

I see your point now. That never occured to me that people might’ve actually signed a lease thinking that action, in and of itself, was going to keep a well from going in on 8th. Anytime I talked to someone about it I made sure to discuss the fact that it wasn’t like we were stopping the drilling outright, but just removing our acreage from any activity on that site - and this might be a difficult concept for some to grasp.
Was it actually mentioned at the BPA meeting? I really thought it was - but if it wasn’t at that one particular meeting, I would certainly contend it was discussed at some point in some form of communication about 8th avenue. But I’ve been learning about the issue and discussing it for so long now, it may have not been mentioned and I would’ve thought it had been.

Ben,

My answer is no. Here is some language from an XTO lease, “lessee is prohibited and shall not establish a drill pad site on land bordering the street of Eighth Avenue between the two subdivisions nor bordering the same two neighborhood subdivisions of Berkeley Place and Ryan Place. Any such action by lessee to utilitze any 8th Ave. drill site location shall immediately serve to void this lease in its entirety…”

The Ryan Place Chesapeake informational meeting is July 21st and is only open to RP residents. The Fairmount meeting is on July 24th and is only open to Fairmount residents. Berkeley is doing theirs on Tuesday.

Sounds good. LIke I said before, should be good times.

But what I’m really curious about is what Chesapeake is putting on the table. I mean, are they just going to offer to write the neighborhood associations a check? How much would it take to make a difference? More likely, they will outline some improvements along 8th Ave., but what?

Chewy –

Coming from someone who, I assume, is part of the FNA leadership, your responses are measured and thoughtful, just as they should be. But I’m sure you also realize that residents of all the affected neighborhoods are engaging in wild speculation regarding Chesapeake’s plans. For example, I was at a luncheon yesterday where three or four members of affected neighborhoods were openly discussing what they would need to see done to 8th Ave in order to change their vote. Most of this discussion was about creating barriers between the road and the rail track and the beautification and development of the area west of the 8th/Elizabeth intersection. I piped in to accuse these folks of selling out, and was asked what people in the FNA would do if Chesapeake offered to buy the Victorian Inn and other problem properties along Hemphill and restore them XTO-style. I did not have a good answer.

I just think it is important to recognize that these types of serious discussions are taking place in the community, and that while some may feel that the talks with Chesapeake are just a courtesy, my anecdotal experience is that residents of the neighborhoods are giving this issue serious consideration.

Regarding the 8th Ave site, CHK has hired Gideon Toal to make sketches of what the railyard could look like if we agree to the variance. Key word here: could. There is no contract, there is no promise from FWWR that they would agree to this, there is no promise from whoever owns the DairyPac plant…. I would hate to see the people not fight the variance thinking that there will be all sorts of improvements when there will only be broken promises. Like Joel Burns said at the meeting, don’t divorce yourself from the process b/c you think its a done deal or that its been postponed, or that there are many other people that will fight for you. Joel is still against it. I have to ask what are the advantages of drilling for gas on 8th Ave? I know of some disadvantages!

At the Ryan Place meeting on Monday night, Julie Wilson said they would be asking for 2 wells in their permit to the city, but in other meetings with neighborhood leaders, she said she would be applying for a pad site, which could accommodate up to 18 wells. Which is it Julie?

Not by a longshot. A majority of residents at the meeting are still against the project, with the next set of people agreeing only if a legally binding contract stating what will happen to the railyard and committing any other owners (if the wells are sold) after CHK to the same commitments. A small number of people support the project with no stipulations. I can only speak for Ryan Place and the attendees of the meeting.

Pete – I agree that people are trying to make the best of a bad situation. And that is why there will probably be a drill site on 8th Ave.

John – I can’t argue if you know the actual vote. I guess I am just reading tea leaves. Whatever the actual numbers are now, I think a consensus will form around the second opinion you mentioned. I could be wrong and won’t necessarily be disappointed if I am.

@ David AKA Rico
Yes, some of us were disappointed. No one asked the really tough questions re: rig, well and pipeline safety. I did however, include those types of questions in an email to CHK for a FAQ for their and our website. I hope they answer truthfully.
pla
They were somewhat evasive, claiming that all urban drilling can be beautiful, attractive and conducive to urban living. Trucks are going to be minimal after the first 3 days, they landscape ( the “landscaping” I saw at the Trinity Trees site was mostly non-native, 2 inches diameter trees, hardly a 50 year old pecan).

I have heard from RP residents who attended a tour of well sites in various stages of development. They said the wells were very quiet on the outside of the walls, and quite noisy on the inside. Apparently the noise can be mitigated. But I continue to go back to safety, blowout, blowups, explosions, they say for the 1,100 wells they’ve drilled, no accidents have occurred. Well, that’s only 1,100 wells. Its still so new. There’s no track record!

Re: tough questions. What were the tough questions that weren’t asked/answered? I ask with the thought that maybe some of them could be brought up tonight at the Fairmount meeting by readers of this site. I expect the question-askers at this meeting will ask plenty of very pointed questions.

As to rig and pipeline safety, all questions were dismissed with the explanation that “gas disperses” unless in a confined environment. They even had a nice slide of helium balloons being released to demonstrate. Maybe it was only me, but I felt the presenters were a little condescending with their answers.

I haven’t read every comment above, but I must reply to some comments by Ross about “changes in strategy” or “failure to explain the overall strategy” or “pitchforks was only a tactic”, etc.
The only thing that has occurred in the way of possibly changing any attitude about opposition to the 8th ave. pad site is that CHK has reached out to approach the surrounding neighborhoods to explore whether there is any way for them to address the community concerns about that specific site and possibly avoid neighborhood opposition. And the respective neighborhood associations have simply agreed to listen. No one has changed their concerns about the site, nor manipulated any opposition emotions as a tactic to solicit anything from any company. That accusation is simply conspiracy-type speculation born of lack of information or, quite frankly, common sense. The simple facts are that the company has aobvious goal, namely to drill, and they know they face significant opposition. They also know that much of that opposition is based in fact and some in fantasy or similar uninformed speculation. So what are their options? Push it to a fight and just see who can collect the 5 council votes needed? Would that fight, win or lose, be good corporate strategy? Or would it be smarter to explore the details of the opposition and whether it is within their physical power and financial ability to address those details to the satisfaction of the opponents and possibly avoid the fight. It may not be possible, but who can say there is anything wrong with trying, or with the concerned opponents being willing to listen?