Loading...
2010_04.06 BOA Minutes_DRAFT206 MINUTES BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT REGULAR MEETING – APRIL 6, 2010 KENNEDALE MUNICIPAL BUILDING – 405 MUNICIPAL DR. COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7:00 PM CALL TO ORDER Chairman Adams called the meeting to order at 7:10 P.M. ROLL CALL Ms. Roberts called roll. Board of Adjustment members present: Rick Adams (Chair); Cheryl Abbott; Brian Cassady; Patrick Vader; alternates Darrell Dixon and Jeremy Redding. Staff members present: James Cowey (Director of Development Services); Rachel Roberts (Planner) As Ms. Elam was not present, the Board called Mr. Dixon to serve in her place. Ms. Roberts swore in those present who wished to speak during the meeting. I. VISITORS/CITIZENS FORUM No one wished to speak during the Visitors’/Citizens’ Forum. II. CONSIDER BOA CASE # 10-03 a) STAFF PRESENTATION OF CASE Ms. Roberts and Mr. Cowey presented the staff case. Ms. Roberts told the Board that since the time the staff report was written, staff had been meeting with Chesapeake representatives. She said that Mr. Cowey had been meeting with them all that day, so he may have some follow-up comments that are slightly different than what was in the report. Mr. Adams asked if there was lot different from the last time they went through a gas drilling case. Ms. Roberts said there were a few issues; drainage was not an issue at the Renfro site but is at this one, and the drive way did not meet the original site plans, which called for a concrete drive way. Because drainage had been such a problem, Chesapeake said they would be willing to concrete the low areas to help with drainage, but that was before staff had pointed out the earlier site plan to them. Ms. Roberts said they had asked for the amount of trips that would be created through waste water flow back, and she had those numbers from Chesapeake. She told Mr. Anderson that he might want to give more information during his presentation, but from a phone call she’d had with Mr. Anderson the previous week, the expected truck traffic was: during the first month, six (6) to seven (7) trips per well per day; then two (2) trips per day 207 per well; then after a year, one (1) trip every four (4) days per well. Mr. Adams asked if the only way in and out is through the main drive through the neighborhood. Ms. Roberts said it was along Swiney Hiett, unless they go out through the emergency exit through Steeplechase. Ms. Roberts said Chesapeake was planning to install pre-cast walls on the north and west sides of the site instead of waiting until all drilling is completed and then to install the other two sides after all the wells are producing. She told the Board that Chesapeake said they would have the sound walls down by August 15th if they received all the permits tonight, and that they said they had already installed the amber covers on lights visible above the sound walls. Ms. Roberts said she talked with someone at TCEQ and a civil engineering professor at UTA about air sampling, and she had some recommendations from them about how the sampling should be done. She said she’d spoken with Chesapeake’s environmental scientist John Satterfield about what staff would be expecting at that site. She also said that information from Chesapeake about leak detection had been included in their packets. Ms. Roberts asked Mr. Cowey if he wanted to add anything based on his meetings with Chesapeake that day, and Mr. Adams asked if anything was different from the last gas drilling case [BOA Cases 10-01 and 10-02]. Mr. Adams said there were a lot of people there [at the meeting], and let’s make sure they hear what they came to hear. Ms. Roberts said she had received some complaints from residents about the noise, and apparently the drilling this time was louder than last time. She said she talked to Chesapeake that morning and was told they had added some sound blankets and other equipment to help with the noise. She said she had received a couple of complaints and the city manager and the mayor had received one, as well. Mr. Adams asked about the Titan Engineering report that had been handed out to the Board. Ms. Roberts said it was for the Renfro site. She had discussed it with Chesapeake’s environmental scientist that morning. She said the report was very generic, and she sent him the list from TCEQ and said we would prefer they sample for all of those items. At the request of Mr. Cassady, Ms. Roberts read the conditions for the benefit of the members of the public in attendance and said that staff recommended approval of the special exception, with the conditions provided by staff. Mr. Adams asked what were the timeframes for when the trucks would be moving in that area. Ms. Roberts said she didn’t have the times but that once the wells were fraced and the water started coming back, it would be six (6) to seven (7) trips per day, per well, which was a lot of trucks. Mr. Adams asked if we were going to be widening Sublett Road at the same time these trucks were going to be going through. Mr. Cowey said the trucks were not going to be on Sublett because they had created a crossing from Mansfield Cardinal to get onto Tower Drive. He said that we would be doing work down the road on Mansfield Cardinal where Mansfield Cardinal and Little cross [? unclear], but the trucks would cross to Tower, so the truck traffic from the site would not affect any of our road construction. Mr. Adams said he didn’t want there to be a bottleneck with citizens going in and out and with the school buses running up and down the road, he didn’t want big trucks running around with school buses full of children. 208 Mr. Cowey said what we were trying to accomplish as much as possible from this pad site because it’s easier to get in and out of. b) APPLICANT PRESENTATION OF CASE Ms. Roberts said the city’s project was missing, so Chesapeake representatives couldn’t do the slideshow they normally do, but that they did have handouts of the slideshow. Ms. Tiesa Leggett of Chesapeake addressed the Board and gave an overview of the applicant presentation. Ms. Leggett requested permission for a special exception permit for additional wells at the site. She introduced Dusty Anderson and Julie Jones of Chesapeake Energy. Ms. Leggett handed to Ms. Roberts petitions from residents who were in support. She said they were currently leasing in the Steeplechase neighborhood. Ms. Leggett reviewed the history of the site and told the Board that Chesapeake planned to drill eight (8) to ten (10) wells total at the pad site. Ms. Leggett said their plan was to drill wells back to back. She said they had drilled the Bogi 1H, Lilly 1H, and Lilly 2H already, and they were drilling the Bogi 2H currently. They anticipated pipeline installation to be completed in late summer 2010. She said they were requesting permission to drill four (4) more wells, the Bogi 3H, 4H, 5H, and Lilly 3H. She then gave a presentation about plans for the four wells requested. Mr. Adams verified that they had three wells completed, were drilling a fourth, and were asking for four more. Ms. Leggett said Steeplechase residents who hadn’t been included before would benefit from the wells [depicted in the handout], if they get all the leases they need. Ms. Abbott asked if they would be included in these or future wells. Ms. Leggett said it would be the Bogi 3H, 4H, 5H, and Lilly 3H. The Board asked if they hadn’t yet acquired the leases they need to drill those wells, and Ms. Leggett said they had the necessary leasehold, but they were going to include the Steeplechase residents as well. Mr. Vader asked when the wells would be producing, and Ms. Leggett said the pipeline should be completed late June 2010. She asked if by producing he meant sold to market, and Mr. Vader asked about the pipeline. Mr. Adams asked if they were getting gas out of the wells yet, and Ms. Leggett said that they weren’t yet but were close. Ms. Leggett described the transportation route and the landscaping plan submitted with packet. Ms. Leggett and Ms. Jones then discussed sound mitigation. Ms. Leggett said that concerning the noise complains Ms. Roberts had mentioned earlier, she went to the Bogi site over Easter weekend and listened. She said they were in compliance but did push to get additional sound blankets on the site immediately because of resident complaints. Mr. Adams asked why the sound had gone higher than usual. Ms. Leggett replied that it was the sound of the brakes on the rig. Ms. Jones said Chesapeake had extended the sound walls on the north side of the site. She also told the Board that they were doing continuous sound monitoring and had moved the monitoring station closer to the Steeplechase residents to help make that what they were monitoring was the sounds the residents were hearing. Ms. Jones described the 209 sound monitoring handout in their packet and said they had been in compliance the whole time they had been drilling, which was since March 14th. Mr. Adams said that even if activities were in compliance, noise could still be an issue because it’s something different from people were used to. He said he appreciated Chesapeake’s adding extra sound mitigation. Mr. Anderson next addressed the Board. He talked about site improvements and said Chesapeake had met with staff on this issue. He said they would install a concrete drive approach the week of April 12, that they would take out some of the culverts and put in concrete approaches [aprons?]. Mr. Adams asked for clarification, asking if they had lower areas where water runs across, which Mr. Anderson confirmed. Mr. Adams asked if it was better for them to put concrete or to keep it level and put a culvert. Mr. Anderson said they had a concrete culvert, the road was pretty much at grade put they think now they would be better off to make it more of a low water crossing and put in a concrete apron. He said they had set a date [for the construction], and they would construct those half at a time so the road could remain open while they’re drilling. He also said they would go ahead and put up permanent fencing, and that they had submitted fencing plans with their application. Mr. Anderson then talked about truck traffic. He said they had newer numbers than what he had discussed with Ms. Roberts the week before. The first thirty days would generate approximately twelve (12) trips per day for all eight wells for the whole pad, then for the first year it would be four (4) trips per day, and then two (2). Mr. Adams asked about the traffic during fracing, and Mr. Anderson said that there would probably be thirty (30) to forty (40) trips per day. He also said they had an existing pond to draw water for fracing, drastically reducing the truck traffic. He said the numbers they had quoted were the haul-off numbers. In response to questions from Mr. Adams, Mr. Anderson told the Board that there would be eight (8) to nine (9) tanks on site, and these would not be visible once the site was finished because they would be screened. He then gave a timeline for drilling. He said there were three wells drilled already, they had a permit for one more, and if they received the well permits that night, they would drill the next three consecutively and the fourth one in October. Mr. Adams asked if he had said they would be done by August. Mr. Anderson said the three wells in addition to the one they’re drilling currently would take them through the end of June, and then one last one in October. Mr. Vader asked if the site would be dormant of activity from June to October, and Mr. Anderson replied that it would be unless they can go ahead and get the wells fraced, but they haven’t had a clarification on the timetable. He added that they usually come back and frac about six or eight weeks after fracing. Mr. Adams asked if Chesapeake could meet the schedule they proposed, and Mr. Anderson said yes. Mr. Adams asked if the sound walls would say up until the well was drilled in October, and Mr. Anderson replied that that would be Chesapeake’s preference, with the sound walls coming down toward the end of the year. Mr. Adams said there were a lot of the people at the meeting who heard Mr. Anderson telling the Board it was an aggressive schedule, but there might be some deals that would push back the schedule, and he wanted to let everyone know that. Mr. Anderson said they were there for four permits, the rig on site would remain there to get the three wells drilled. He was hopeful they could move the last well up, but from what he had been told, it would be October. 210 Mr. Vader asked if they had read the staff recommendations, and Mr. Anderson said they had and they were fine with that, and they were similar to the Renfro site. He also stated that they had visited the Renfro site that day with Mr. Cowey and had found some things they were going to fix. Mr. Adams asked if the complaints about the site were mostly noise-driven. Ms. Leggett said the complaints were mainly sound and dust. She added that they had watered down the roads on Monday. Mr. Adams asked if the roads would be paved with recycled asphalt to get rid of the dust. Mr. Anderson said yes, there was some recycled asphalt already there, and they were open to putting more on there or having daily water trucks. Ms. Abbott stated that she drove by the site today, and the drive was rather narrow and was glad to see in the staff comments that staff thought it should be widened. She asked if that was part of what they were planning to do to make it so that trucks could pass? Mr. Cowey said it was a combination of maybe widening the road, adding some signage, and addressing the shoulders. He added that part of the problem of the road failure was the drainage, which we’re addressing, and then with the roads not being wide enough, trucks were getting off on the shoulders, which compounded the drainage problem. Part of the widening would be making the shoulders adequate to carry the truck traffic. Mr. Adams asked if staff had been happy with the landowner’s upkeep of the property and reminded everyone that when the first wells were granted for this site, they were concerned about overgrowth and the possibility of a major fire coming through there. Mr. Cowey replied that the property had been cleaned up, and undergrowth had been cleaned up. He told the Board that the site was going to plant Bermuda grass, and grading for the planting has been part of the dust problem lately. He added that the gas line is finally there, and there’s a lot of activity for now, but that by January 31st it should be complete. Ms. Abbott asked for clarification about dates for sound walls coming down because someone had said they would be down August 15th. Mr. Cowey replied that there has been discussion about that. Ms. Roberts added that the date was based on a phone call they had had with Chesapeake the previous Thursday, and that since then they’ve had a revised drilling schedule. Mr. Vader reminded Ms. Roberts that she’d said the sound walls would be down August 15th. Ms. Roberts agreed and said that she had not been in the meetings with Chesapeake that day and didn’t know the about revised dates, and she apologized for any confusion. Mr. Cowey said that the city was trying to be more in control in a reasonable manner as far as fracing, that there was a pond built on site for fracing, and if they were going to frac, they need to try to do it where we can supply them water. He added that we want them to try to stay on site and finish the drilling, and that he did have a concern about the fourth well. He told the Board they could make it a stipulation to take down the sound wall when the three wells were done. Mr. Cowey then went over the timeline for drilling and fracing. There would be three more wells completed in June, with fracing in June or July, and the fourth well may not be drilled until October. Mr. Vader replied that they had been faced with that at the Sublett [RENFRO] site for so long. Ms. Abbott asked if the fourth well would be the Lilly 3H if Chesapeake got the leases, and Chesapeake representatives said it would. She then asked if the fourth one would be if they got the leases in Steeplechase. Ms. Leggett said they had enough leases to drill, but they wanted to include formerly excluded residents. Mr. Adams asked why there was a gap between the first three wells and the fourth one. Ms. Leggett said they wanted to secure all the leases. Mr. Adams then asked if they could drill if they got the leases, and Mr. Anderson replied that that was his understanding. 211 Mr. Adams said that since they’re drilling so many wells on that site, and including the Renfro site, there must be a lot of gas down there. Mr. Anderson replied that they hoped so. Mr. Adams asked if there were any other questions, and Mr. Vader asked why it was a special exception for oil and gas drilling [instead of just gas drilling]. Ms. Roberts replied that it was because the ordinance was an oil and gas ordinance. c) PUBLIC HEARING ON BOA CASE #10-03 Ms. Roberts said that Chesapeake had submitted eighteen petitions from residents in favor of the special exception request. She said that some of the residents who had submitted petitions were at the meeting. Marvin Lough, 7301 Briarwyck Ct, Arlington, representing Bowerman Oil & Gas [landowner], spoke in favor of the special exception. He said the pipeline had been put in place and the traffic should be reduced. He said he was probably the creator the dust right now, trying to get the property ready to plant. He said there should be growth coming up in 21 days, and he apologized for the dust. Ms. Abbott asked about the direction of the pipeline. Mr. Lough and Mr. Cowey described the pipeline route. [Technical problems occurred, beginning with Mr. Lough addressing the Board. and parts of the meeting were not recorded.] Ralph Shelton, 1308 Canterbury Ct, Arlington, spoke in favor of the special exception. He said he had served on city council and boards [in Arlington or Kennedale?] and said one of the hardest things he had to do was to serve the whole community. He also said the economic impact of these wells, the wells represent values to the tax bases larger than shopping centers or huge manufacturing facility. He added that every household generates six or seven trips per day. He said the development of anything creates dust for a period of time and traffic for a period of time. Donna Tijerina, 1403 Wren Ct, spoke against the special exception. The back of her property faces the Bogi well. She said they had had no communications from Chesapeake, except to say there were being excluded from getting any benefits from this endeavor. She said they had had to live with the dust and the noise, the dust today was horrible. She added that she appreciated the cleaning up that they had been doing on the property because her house was damaged in the fire a few years ago. She also said that things had been hurried along without involving the neighbors in Steeplechase and what they’ve had to tolerate. She described the problems a neighbor had had with two feet of dirt in his pool when the frac pond was built, and she said her landscaping died because of the dirt and the dust. The following people registered an opinion in favor of the special exception but did not wish to address the Board: Domingo Jimenez, 1434 Swiney Hiett Rd; Donald McCrary, 1425 Swiney Hiett Rd; Charles T. Blish, 1437 Swiney Hiett Rd; Gilbert Smith, Jr, 1233 Swiney Hiett Rd; Everett Head, 1209 Swiney Hiett Rd Roy Stott, 1260 Elmbrook Dr, spoke against the special exception. He said the committee [BOA] needed more time to do research on air sampling and water sampling. He told the Board that when he goes outside in the morning, he can smell stuff from the site but there 212 hasn’t been any air sampling. Mr. Stott told the Board that three people on his block had bought noise meters and had registered sound from the site over the allowable level. He wanted someone from Chesapeake to come out to the site and compare their readings to what the residents’ meters read. He was concerned that Chesapeake had been doing average sound readings instead of instantaneous, so peaks in sound would not register. Mr. Stott then said that Chesapeake had done a poor job of planning and setting up the rigs and that they could have known there was a brake problem [noise], and said that he hadn’t heard the grinding noise from the site when they drilled the year before. He mentioned the dust problem and not just because the yard was being prepped for grass and said that if they would put recycled asphalt on the whole thing, the dust problem would go away. Mr. Stott expressed concern about the length of time it could take to drill the wells and asked the Board to put a drilling deadline if it approved the special exception. Mr. Stott suggested requiring Chesapeake to pay a penalty if they don’t meet the deadline. He asked about compressors, and Mr. Adams said there would not be a compressor [compressor station]. Mr. Stott also expressed concern over air quality and long-term effects of the vapors coming from the wells, and Mr. Adams told him that the city had a plan for air sampling. Mr. Stott said Chesapeake gave equipment to the fire department to use at gas well sites, so if he needed to, he would call the fire department. Mr. Adams said he hadn’t heard about that. Ms. Roberts said she hadn’t heard about it and that she would have to with the fire chief. Then Mr. Vader told him that the city council and the Planning & Zoning Commission had been working rather diligently on revising the oil and gas ordinance to address a lot of these issues. Mr. Stott said he appreciated that and that there had been a lot of misinformation from Chesapeake for the first two (2) wells, Chesapeake had told Steeplechase residents that they would get benefits from the wells. Susan Nichols, 201 Joplin Rd, spoke against the special exception. She told the Board that the roads out there were bad to begin with, and they were barely passable now, including J R Hawkins, Joplin, and Swiney Hiett. She added that Swiney Hiett was the best of the three and was now deteriorating quickly. She said that was her only comment because everything else had already been answered. Hollis Matthews, 1252 Elmbrook Dr, spoke against the special exception. He thanked the Board for its work concerning the Renfro site. He said the roadways were was breaking up pretty fast. He added that the trucks were caving in the emergency access road, and it would probably need a cement road to maintain the truck traffic. He said they’d dealt with air quality and commended Chesapeake for sampling at the Renfro site but expressed concern that the air sampling should be done on a periodic basis and not just at three times. Mr. Matthews said that the laterals would be going approximately 8,000 feet from the drill site and said in many cases they go or will go in the near future under three of our water wells, and recommend the city water be sampled for hydrocarbons on at least a weekly basis. He described how on the ranch where he grew up, gas and oil broke through and contaminated the fresh water supply, even though it was considerably down in the ground. He told the Board that drainage was an issue, and that water backs up into the road in the Steeplechase subdivision. He also said the area is on the edge of a floodplain and that Chesapeake should address these issues. Mr. Matthews said that his concern was that all these issues be addressed in writing and recommended the exception be turned down until the city had everything in writing. 213 Mr. Vader asked why there had been Chesapeake truck traffic on Steeplechase [Trail] since it’s an emergency road [which runs through the Steeplechase subdivision]. Mr. Adams asked if the big trucks actually get onto Steeplechase, and Mr. Matthews said they did. Mr. Vader said that concerned him and asked if anyone else had seen the trucks driving through Steeplechase, and three or four members of the audience raised their hands. Mr. Adams asked how the trucking companies get through the gate. Mr. Cowey said the only lock that should be on the gate is the knox box and that we would coordinate that so that we know, as there’s no reason for Chesapeake to have a key and access to it. Mr. Matthews asked about sound equipment and said he had seen operations running at 91 decibels at peak. He Chesapeake was using a leveling device on the sound equipment. Mr. Matthews said the only complaint he had was the Chesapeake wasn’t solving their problems as they occur. Jerry Pierson, 1235 Falcon View Dr, spoke against the special exception. He said the noise woke him up three or four times a night, when something was dropped. He also said the dust covers his plants and killed them. Mr. Pierson said he replaced the plants and now has to go out and wash them off so his landscaping won’t die again. He told the Board he had been happy that the drilling as supposed to end soon, and he asked the Board to compel Chesapeake to speed things up. Dennis Faulkner, 1217 Swiney Hiett Rd, spoke against the special exception on behalf of himself and of his mother, Addie Lee Faulkner, who lives at 1225 Swiney Hiett. Mr. Faulker told the Board he lives on the side of the site that gets a lot of the abuse. He said the truck traffic is on his road, some of the trucks drive very fast and are very careless, that some of his neighbors had been virtually run off the road, and his wife had been run off the road. He stated that safety is a major concern because he doesn’t feel there’s been any effort to control the trucks and the way they drive. Mr. Faulkner said he had the same complaint as everyone else about the dust, and that wetting the road down on the site because then the trucks track the mud up there, that dries, then everyone else drives up and down it, and they still get a lot of mess. He added that he gets a lot of noise and haven’t been using one part of his house because the noise is too loud. Mr. Faulkner said overall it hasn’t been a pleasant experience; he couldn’t wait for this to end, and he’s not too happy about more wells. He said he was concerned with the safety issues and told the Board that Chesapeake isn’t proactive and doesn’t do anything unless there are complaints. The following people submitted a sign-in form after the meeting adjourned; they registered opinions in favor of the special exception but did not wish to address the Board: Francisco Garcia, 6631 Joplin Rd; Beatrice VonHatten, 6631 Joplin Rd; Tommy VanHatten, 5308 J R Hawkins Rd d) APPLICANT RESPONSE Ms. Leggett apologized for the lack of communication and invited people to talk to her after the meeting. Mr. Vader asked who had organized the meeting held that night in Steeplechase, and Ms. Tijerina said that there was sign posted in the neighborhood by the Home Owners Association. Mr. Cassady asked Ms. Leggett if Chesapeake had considered meeting with residents, and Ms. Leggett said yes. 214 Regarding the vapor smells, Ms. Leggett said she thought there was a steel mill in close proximity. Ms. Leggett said she didn’t know if the smell was totally from Chesapeake operations but that she would look into it. Mr. Anderson responded to comments about Swiney Hiett Road. He said that Chesapeake had worked with the city to find the least intrusive truck route. He also said that Chesapeake had done some repair work, and today they had found another crack to repair. He said the best fix is the concrete drive approach, and they weren’t opposed to putting more asphalt millings. Mr. Anderson stated he believed Chesapeake was being proactive to address the concerns that were brought up. As far as the lease road, it is a private road that is adequate for Chesapeake, but they were taking it further to get some of the draining issues and mud and debris addressed. Mr. Adams asked about the flowback truck traffic and said that was going to have to be addressed and that the people who live there want quality of life. Mr. Adams added that the people there are putting up with the noise, but dust killing their plants and filling up their pools was unacceptable to him. Mr. Anderson said he thought there were a couple of contributing factors, and that the sound walls will help, and so will planting the grass. Mr. Adams said the roads will still dry out and get dust. Mr. Anderson said that using a dust control suppressant, magnesium chloride, had been discussed. Mr. Adams asked what the magnesium chloride would do to the water when it ran off, and Mr. Anderson said the ingredients pass the test and they can send specs to the city. Mr. Vader asked if it would have been more cost-effective to put in asphalt to begin with. Mr. Anderson said they had a road repair agreement with the city. [technical difficulty; the tape missed part of the recording from the above statement from Mr. Anderson about sending specs to the city until the discussion below with Mr. Anderson about trucks using the emergency access for non-emergency access] Mr. Adams asked if residents could call someone with complaints, and Mr. Cowey replied that any citizen could get in touch with staff. Mr. Vader asked how to address the issue of trucks using the emergency access. Mr. Anderson replied that they perhaps could remove the Chesapeake lock on the gate, if there was one. He added that the gate should only be used for emergency access. Mr. Vader asked if Chesapeake would be prepared to shut down operations for thirty days for using the emergency access for non-emergency purposes. Mr. Anderson suggested fining the trucking companies. He added that they had not yet installed truck route signs. Mr. Adams asked if they always used the same trucking companies, and Mr. Anderson said yes, they were very consistent. Mr. Adams said he hoped they didn’t have to address this issue any further. He said if he hears of continued truck problems, we’re going to have to take action on that. Mr. Anderson told the Board Chesapeake believes it had been in compliance with the noise regulations. They have a third party who does the monitoring, and the third party readings show they’re in compliance, but they are working hard to address complaints. Addressing resident complaints about hurrying up finishing work at the site, Mr. Anderson said they had it on paper to get aggressive to get in and get out if the exception is approved Mr. Adams said the problem he saw, the reason they might not get approval is because he saw a lot of people not getting benefit from the wells but their property was being damaged. Mr. Anderson said that it was clearly understood when the wells at the site were first approved that the wells would be going south [instead of north to the Steeplechase area], 215 but with the laterals going north, if they have a lease with Chesapeake, they will get the royalties. Mr. Adams said that all the other issues would go away in time, except if the water wells are contaminated. He asked if Chesapeake would be willing to sign a statement saying they will compensate the city if they contaminate the water wells. Mr. Anderson replied that state permits require TCEQ [Texas Commission on Environmental Quality] water board letters, they have casing pipe that goes past the water table and things of that sort. Mr. Adams replied that he understood that, but accidents happen, and then asked if Chesapeake would be willing to indemnify the city if they contaminate our water wells. Mr. Anderson said they had insurance that met the standards, and he assumed it would be covered under that blanket of insurance. Mr. Adams replied that the one saw was $2 million, which wasn’t a whole lot of water. Mr. Anderson said he wasn’t sure what the insurance requirements were, but whatever was set forth is what Chesapeake has. Mr. Adams said he understood that, and he wasn’t saying whether it [water contamination issue] was true or not true, it was brought up. Mr. Anderson replied that as things have come up, they have looked to address them. He added that there 14,000 wells drilled in the Barnett Shale, and there are so many precautions that have been taken, those issues haven’t come up. He said he thought the safety record should speak for itself. Mr. Vader asked how long they had been drilling in the Barnett Shale. Mr. Anderson replied that it had been since 2002. Mr. Vader said that that was only eight years ago and that a lot of environmental issues don’t show up for decades. He said that for now they were meeting the requirements with the current technology, but this isn’t the first time this has come up. He said he believed this is one of the few municipalities still using well water. Mr. Adams repeated that dust and noise would go away over time, but if you contaminate a water well, it’s not going away. He’d hate the Board to be short-sighted and not take something in place. Mr. Vader said it wasn’t just the wells, you’re drawing water from the aquifer, and wherever the lateral lines go, they’re probably under the aquifer somewhere. Ms. Leggett stated that technology has improved over the years, and they haven’t had any of issues like that, that she is aware of. She said she didn’t have the authorization for a legal document, but she with their technology, they haven’t had any issues. Mr. Adams said he could appreciate that, but if the technology is as good as they say it is and they haven’t had any issues, then he would think their company could sign off on an indemnification. Ms. Leggett said she wasn’t authorized, and Mr. Adams asked her to take this back to Chesapeake and find out. Ms. Leggett agreed to do so. Mr. Matthews asked if they would address the water issue, but the Mr. Adams and Ms. Roberts stated that the public hearing had closed. Ms. Leggett reiterated that if there were concerns, the TCEQ could be reference as well, if residents think additional sampling needs to be addressed. Mr. Adams said they would only come out once, and Ms. Leggett said that in reference to a comment during the public hearing, the TCEQ is an independent source. Mr. Adams stated that they [TCEQ] will come out but will only come out one time. Ms. Leggett said she just wanted the resident to be able to reference the TCEQ [web?]site, if he’s uncomfortable with the testing Chesapeake is doing. Mr. Adams said the air sampling requirements applied to Renfro could be applied here. Ms. Leggett said they were hoping to work closer with city staff on this issue. Mr. Adams responded that when there is a history at the site, when they have records, people will have a less a problem, but right now they have nothing to go on but noise and smell. 216 Ms. Leggett said that staff and Chesapeake have some ideas on how to work out how to sample. Ms. Leggett, Mr. Adams, and Mr. Vader discussed Steeplechase residents were left out of leasing when the first Bogi wells were permitted and how the pad site had been moved because its original planned location was within 600 feet of houses. Ms. Abbott asked a question about an item in the staff report at the top of page 3. She said the crossing at Tower and Swiney Hiett was not addressed in the staff recommendations. Mr. Cowey said that’s because it was something we’re already doing and working out with Chesapeake. Mr. Adams asked if it was covered under existing city code, and Mr. Cowey said yes. Mr. Adams asked Mr. Cowey for his thoughts on the water well issue. Mr. Cowey said it was a tough issue. He said they had good technology, but nothing is 100% safe. He said how many wells are below the aquifer we’re drawing from. He said staff would speak with the city manager, the city attorney, and the public works department. Mr. Vader asked if Chesapeake had read through staff’s recommendations. He said he’d noticed item number six, stating that all improvements had to be made before permits would be issued. He said if Chesapeake was okay with that, he was okay with that. He asked who was going to monitor to see if they do that. Mr. Adams said that was another question, had they already agreed to put the fencing material up? He said they’d discussed that with the Renfro site, and Chesapeake didn’t want to do it. Ms. Roberts said they’d agree to do two sides now and the other two when they finished drilling. Mr. Vader said, that’s not what the recommendations say. The recommendation says improvements must be made first. Mr. Adams asked what type of fencing staff had agreed upon, and Ms. Roberts said they hadn’t decided on a particular type, but it would be pre-cast panels made to look like masonry. e) STAFF RESPONSE AND SUMMARY OF CASE Mr. Cowey asked if there were any areas they wanted him to go over again. Mr. Adams remarked on Mr. Vader’s comments on staff recommendation number six. He said the recommendation said everything would be done, but Ms. Roberts had said it would be two walls, so which was it going to be? Mr. Adams also asked about monitoring. Ms. Roberts said Chesapeake was using a monitoring company, Titan Engineering, and she had spoken with Chesapeake’s environmental scientist that afternoon. She said that at the last meeting, the Board had said that staff would work out what to sample for and when. She said that Chesapeake wanted to know if they could meet with staff on Thursday [after the meeting] to discuss the requirements, and she’d said she would be open to that as long as staff would have the final say if we couldn’t come to a final agreement, and that her recommendation at this time was to follow the TCEQ list of what they sample, which is a TO-15 list, or the TO-14 list used by the EPA with Tentatively Identified Compounds. She said it should be the TCEQ list, downwind and offsite, and that’s what she recommends unless the Board recommends something else. She said we could also ask Chesapeake to purchase equipment for us. Mr. Adams asked if this was something you could average, like with the sound monitoring. Ms. Roberts responded that unless you sample for a 24-hour period, we’ll sample at that time, so the civil engineer she’d spoken with at UT Arlington recommend sampling at multiple times. She added that as you leave the site, you’ll increase and hit a maximum 217 and then you’ll decrease, and if you don’t hit the maximum, you may not be getting the full concentration of what is out there. So she recommended that they do multiple sampling times and locations. Mr. Adams asked if Titan Engineering could do that. Ms. Roberts replied that she didn’t know if they could, but that they’d indicated they would do what was required. Mr. Adams said he would be more comfortable using a company of the city’s choice. Ms. Roberts said another option was to purchase the equipment and have city staff do the monitoring, with the city not paying for the equipment. Mr. Cassady asked if that was something they could handle. Ms. Roberts said she’s spoken to a representative who sells some of the equipment, and they seemed to indicate that it was something staff could do, although they couldn’t do the detailed analysis. But the representative seemed to think the sampling was something staff could be trained to do. Mr. Adams asked if there were any other questions; there were no other questions from the Board. f) ACTION ON CASE Mr. Vader said his understanding was that the biggest consideration was how the company reacts to problems residents are having and if they would do something to offset expenses. Mr. Vader made a motion to approve BOA Case 10-03 based on the conditions recommended by staff, with modifications, with the final conditions in the motion as follows: (1) Operator shall install a sign on site addressing truck routes and shall install truck route signs along the required routes. Operator shall coordinate sign design and installation with city staff. Operator shall also address tracking materials at the exit site. (2) Operator will ensure that trucks going to and from the site carry a truck route map, along with notes addressing the issue of tracking materials onto city streets. (3) At least one week prior to commencement of fracturing activities, Operator shall notify all owners of real property within 1000 feet of the pad site (including property owners outside the city limits) of when fracturing is scheduled to begin and approximately how long it is expected to last. Operator may state in the notice that the dates of fracturing activities are subject to change. A copy of the notice sent and a list of recipients shall be submitted to the city. Notice should also be sent to the management office of the apartment complex located across from the pad site (across Joplin Road). (4) Operator shall prepare a sound management plan specifying how noise levels from fracturing operations will be managed. When a violation occurs, Operator shall take immediate action to correct the violation, or operations will be required to cease. During fracing operations, Operator shall monitor sound on multiple sides of the site. (5) Operator shall improve the drive approach and drive way on site to meet the standards in the Public Works Design Manual to the approval of city staff prior to permits being issued. (6) Operator shall work with city staff to ensure that other physical aspects of the sites are compatible with the surrounding area. Operator shall submit a detailed site plan to the Director of Development for review and approval, showing how the site will be made compatible to the adjoining properties, including recently developed properties, and how it will meet the city’s development guidelines and regulations. The site plan should include 218 plans for installing permanent fencing or screening, along with landscaping. Improvements shall be made prior to moving equipment to the site for drilling. (7) Operator shall submit to city staff a detailed drainage plan showing how drainage problems identified by staff will be addressed. Disturbed areas shall be properly graded and shall be revegetated with acceptable vegetation\grass. (8) Operator shall submit to city staff the number of wells that have been and will be completed, the projected flow back in gallons, how much each truck can transport and the number of estimated trucks, and how this process will take place, specifically the number of trucks being used at one time and the hours of operation. (8) The special exceptions shall expire one (1) year from the date they were granted. A new special exception shall not be required to maintain existing wells permitted under the special exceptions, but any wells not drilled by the date of expiration will require a new special exception. (9) Staff recommends that the Board establish a deadline for removing the sound walls currently on site. (10) Operator shall compensate the city for hiring independent testing to conduct air sampling per city recommended methods and criteria and report on the sampling at least once during each of the following times: prior to drilling; during drilling; at completion; 10 days after drilling is complete; 30 days after the well is operational, and each 30 days thereafter. (11) City staff shall have the discretion and authority to determine any questions about the meaning, intent, implementation, or enforcement of these conditions. (12) Site will be monitored for dust mitigation each day and treated if no measurable rain has fallen for three (3) consecutive days. Mr. Cassady seconded the motion, and all Board members voted in favor. III. REGULAR ITEMS a) Minutes from the March 2010 Board of Adjustment meetings Mr. Cassady made a motion to approve the minutes from the March 2010 meeting; Ms. Abbott seconded the motion. The motion passed with all in favor. IV. STAFF REPORTS a) Update on City Projects Ms. Roberts reminded the Board about the following upcoming events: Bark in the Park, Art in the Park, and the Kennedale TownCenter groundbreaking. 219 Mr. Cowey reminded the Board about the board appreciation dinner. He said Bowman Springs was pressing on, and there would be more discussion on Sublett and Little School roads at the upcoming city council meeting. Mr. Vader commented on the effectiveness of “no through truck” signs, saying that they’re only effective if they’re up. Mr. Cowey asked if the signs were still not up, and Mr. Vader said they were not. Mr. Adams asked about the best way to monitor truck traffic, and Mr. Cowey said staff would coordinate with the police department. Mr. Cowey added that if Chesapeake couldn’t get the truck routes straight, it may come down to having someone on site all the time to monitor it. Mr. Vader said that if citizens kept complaining, we will have to do something. Mr. Cowey said that Chesapeake tries to be proactive, but we’ve heard the same comments for two years, and at some point we have to deal with them. He said he felt it was something that could be resolved. Mr. Adams asked if citizens could come talk to Mr. Cowey if they had issues they thought weren’t getting resolved, and Mr. Cowey said they could, and they can come talk to the city manager or to Ms. Roberts. V. ADJOURNMENT Ms. Abbott made a motion to adjourn the meeting. The motion was seconded by Mr. Dixon and passed with all members in favor. The meeting adjourned at 9:23 P.M. _____________________________ Rick Adams, Chairman Board of Adjustment ATTEST: __________________________ Rachel Roberts Planner