Pipeline Right of Way proposal from Cheif headed straight for game land #13.

Two weeks ago we were contacted by Cheif's landman bearing a pipeline easement proposal.  The language was scanty and the landman refused to define the proposed route with a survey and legal description citing that Cheif did not yet have the many landowners in place, so they were unable to be certain of their route.

 

Cheif desires a ROW across 5500 ft of our northern lands that border Game Land #13 in Sullivan Co.  They want a 60' width that will shrink to 30' of permanently maintained pipeline easement.  I cannot recall, and the paperwork does not indicate, the width of the 2 pipelines that will run through this easement.  I seem to recall one was to be 12".  The landman stated that Cheif wishes to run parallel to the Game Lands along the ridge so they can avoid dealing with the Game Commission.  The problem with this story is our lands border the Game Lands to the north and to the east.  The proposed line drawn on a google image shows it exiting our eastern border onto State Game Land #13.  When I challenged him the landman stated he did not know that the adjacent parcel was Game Land #13.

 

The map we were shown indicated that this pipeline came under rt 42 and ran north, then jogged east to cross our lands just south of Game Land #13.  It may run into the large line that will run along rt 220 once it goes beneath 42.   It appears so, but the map was limited to our immediate area.

 

For the moment we are unmoved to action.  Our intent is to demand a survey and legal description of their proposed pipeline, then take it to our attorney for revisions.

 

I have 3 main questions:

 

1.  Cheif is offering $12/linear foot.  If they do indeed wish to avoid the Game Commission, is our 5500 ft worth more than 12/linear foot?

2.  Are gas companies now permitted to drill on Game Lands?  I know they drill state forest lands, but game lands?  Are wells & pipelines placed throughout the lands or just on the periphery?  I have heard they wish to drill on private lands bordering the Game Lands so as not to disturb the surface of the Game Lands.

3.  We are leased with Chespeake.  Can we even grant an easement to Cheif?

 

WAIT!  Sorry, there is a question #4:  WHAT THE HECK WOULD YOU DO?   Thanks!

 

 

 

Views: 879

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

0l1a6laz7smpfPermalink Reply by 0l1a6laz7smpf on May 10, 2011 at 5:15pm

You know if the O & G company had approached me as a landowner with a reasonable amount down ...as they were asking for holding the land up to two years before they would pay $6500 per acre with no guarantee that they would really do that...for all they offered was $100 with a two year option and I am not the only owner of the land.   That was unreasonable ...wouldn't even pay for the time with an attorney to review the contract and then up to two years to wait to be paid? with no assurance that they would even complete the deal? and that would tie up the land with them....oh, they raised the upfront to $500 even per owner.   But why not be reasonable with the first offer in such a deal...I mean they are intending to transport billions of dollars worth of natural gas.   How insulting that was.   They should have offered at least $5000 up front with asking for a two year option.   Had the option time been shorter then perhaps a lower amount upfront to help pay my time and the other owners (even with an attorney) for reviewing their contract.

 

Now if you are comparing their ROW with a utility line...remember most utility lines are in the setback area and realistically these ROW's are not defined always in such a way that they are nicely tucked in with utility lines, water, sewer, gas, cable.    So if you have like 50 acres with a home and they really need to come across your land in such a way that perhaps your resale value would greatly be affected...then how is $6500 per acre (one time payment) going to offset future real estate values?   especially if the ROW has other surface buildings.  Think about it..if you were a buyer for a home and property and were looking at available listings...how would you feel if most all the listings for sale did not have a NG gas pipeline with a water line with fracking materials and you came across this one...would you offer more, less, or the same?   I would think you would as a buyer try to negotiate down with such an encumbrance on the property.

  They were wanting to come across the front of the acreage ....very near the old house and using up the frontage where the paved road is accessible....Had they had wanted about 1/2 or more of the acreage I could see that perhaps $6500 would be ok...but they were only wanting to cross under 6 acres...and the best acreage on the parcel.   So I did not see merit on changing the value of the land for the use of a few acres....(not much profit that way either seeing as there is more than one owner...and of course the taxes to pay).    I also was concerned how it would affect the insurance value of the homestead as would it make insurance rates be higher?   Didn't find that out...and they went evidentally elsewhere.

But it all started with the ridiculous $100 option money down.   You wouldn't most likely even look at a real estate offer for your home for $100 down...much less your entire acreage.

Permalink Reply by JamesG on May 11, 2011 at 12:00am
Here is a recent article giving some background on pipelines and offers in our SW pa area panhandle of WVa. 
 
 
Hope this helps.
Permalink Reply by Laurel on May 11, 2011 at 9:58am
Gas companies like to hold their proverbial cards close to their proverbial chests this I know, however the ROW proposed to us by Cheif was in their words, "to avoid the Game Lands because they are just too hard to deal with."  What does not add up for me is the fact that if you look at their proposed route it runs off of our acreage directly into Game Land #13!  If they wish to avoid the Game Lands they will have to veer south for at least a 1000' to exit off of our eastern border onto our neighbor's land.  When I challenged the landman from Cheif he simply said he has no idea where the line is running beyond our property stating that Cheif has not informed him beyond our immediate lands.  I believe this is disingenuous and find myself wondering if indeed they intend to avoid GL #13, then their projected route will have to be drastically altered.  Naturally, we will not sign a thing until we have a legal discription of the proposed (and flagged) area.   Clearly their present route as proposed will run them directly into GL #13.  If a blind man can see this, why cannot they?  That leads to the suspician that they are lying about their proposed route as they intend to run across lands we may object to having in a ROW, or they intend to actually run across GL #13.  It is one or the other in my opinion.

RSS

© 2024   Created by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher).   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service