All those wonderful wind farms that have been built in West Texas don’t have enough line capacity to carry all the power to the damn Yankees that are assing up my AO, so long story short, they’ve managed to get the PUC to approve a new 345kV transmission line. But then all the hippy dumbasses in Denton managed to get together and pull a NIMBY, and get the approved route to shoot 20 miles north from the Krum switching station, then jog east, then drop another 20 miles south to the Anna switching station, rather than just doing a (relatively) straight shot from Krum to Anna. Absolutely ridiculous and a waste of resources if you ask me, even if I didn’t have property affected. Map & info here:

http://www.oncor.com/electricity/transmission/crez/projects/KrumWest.aspx

http://www.oncor.com/electricity/transmission/docs/Krum_West_-_Anna_-_Approved_Route.pdf

Problem is, this new route goes straight through our property. We’ve already got a Brazos powerline easement going through our place, but it is only a couple of telephone poles with lines; the new line is going to be one of the big metal structures.

Existing ones look like this and are spaced two wide:



They had a public meeting last night to provide more info to affected property owners, and they told us that they will be taking a new 160’ easement, but that they can’t consolidate the existing lines into the new structures. However, we found out that some other property owners along the approved route have already gotten approval to have the lines consolidated through their land, apparently because they did something early on in the process. Not sure what.

Additionally, they are proposing putting the line to the east of the existing Brazos line, which will put it right down the middle of the western half of our land and take out a bunch of 50+ year old pecan trees. Jogging to the west will spare the trees, avoid passing over a stock tank, get it out of the flood plain, and put it on the edge of the property. Looking at the map, the approved route through our place and several others north of us is an absolutely straight shot, but when you look at other sections of the route, it doglegs and jogs all over the place.

So, if any of y’all here are property law/easement specialists I could use the help. First off, what do we have to do to force them to consolidate the lines to minimize impact and use the existing easement, and secondly, if that doesn’t work, how can we force them to not just go straight through a prime area of our property and rather go through an area that would have a much lower impact?

Email is in my profile if you want to take it offline or have any recommendations on someone to talk to. We’re already screwed (from the point of view that it is coming through our place; no way to stop that), but I’d really like to minimize the impact as much as possible.

Try your best to find an endangered/threatened animal in the area that they need to clear and make a case that the destruction of it's babitat will surely have a negative impact on the speicies potential survival in the area.

You can get really technical if you want. Good luck, let me know if you need any help with anything.

[This message has been edited by OnlyForNow (edited 4/27/2011 10:41a).]

Sounds like it will be good dove hunting , sorry to hear that though

Catch a couple Golden-cheeked Warblers from the Hill Country, photograph on your property, done.

"find" a horned lizard...

It's coming through our place, nothing we can do about that. Our biggest concern right now is actual placement of the line. Proposed area is going to really jack things up, whereas if they use the existing ROW or go further to the west, the impact will be much less.

email sent

What county are you in?

<---"hippy dumbass"

I participated in the argument against the southern route and was happy that we "won" as it kept the line from being installed on our property.

Sure changes one's perspective when the result affects someone you know...

Sorry Log.

Cooke County.

RE: Hippy Dumbasses: I was at the gym one day, looked up and saw my 85 year old great-uncle (town mayor, Aggie '50) being interviewed on WFAA. Managed to catch a rebroadcast later, and it was about this line. Then they cut to Denton locals, and everyone they talked to was going on about saving their greenbelt, etc., etc. I could smell the patchouli through the screen. I'm aware that alot of people's land (land just like ours) was spared because of the re-route, but it really rankled me that they were putting more emphasis on keeping a powerline from crossing the Ray Roberts-Lewisville greenbelt and keeping the aesthetics up for someone that wants to go on a Saturday stroll with Fluffy the Lapdog, rather than respecting property owners and people who actually use and live on the land. I'm not sure how heavily it weighed in the decision to go north, but they made it sound like saving the greenbelt was the #1 factor in the re-route.

How's Olive BTW?

[This message has been edited by Log (edited 4/27/2011 12:45p).]

Right off the bat, i am speaking from a designer's and construction point of view. i work closely with our ROW dept. but am not a landman myself.

Them telling you that they can't sounds like B.S. When they show up with permission to survey forms and easement forms take a close look at them. I would not sign the easement form until after they have staked out a route to survey. (Luckily i work in ok. with an entirely dif. G&T so i can say that about this line. Now if you ever move to ok. and we come at you with an easement form you better sign in a heartbeat.) Push them hard about the consolidation issue. Ask for reasons as to why some areas are and some aren't. If you are lucky they may be willing to work with you but i wouldn't count on it. I am looking at the map but am not quite sure what these nodes are. normally that would be a tap point which might shed some light on the consolidate vs. nonconsolidate issue but i don't think this is the case here. Also i think ERCOT might require this but i am not sure, DO NOT sign a blanket easement (should the time come to sign it off). Make sure it is detailed and specific.

If the consolidation becomes a no go and it results in the chopping of pecan trees, make sure you ask for an appraisal. The company will probably use an appraiser but get your own also. usually you can meet in the middle of these two values and sometimes if you are a big enough pain in the arse you can get them to meet the high number. The last thing you want is for this to end up in court as a condemnation case so be an arse but string them along as long as possible to try to get the most value out of their easement price.

Sorry if that was confusing, it was typed in a stream of conciousness method. If you have specific questions i might be able to help get some of them answered.

Our understanding was that the decision to go north was based on it having the lowest estimated impact on structures and populated areas. Along your lines of complaint, what upsets me is the liberal point of view that desires "green energy" while not considering the impact on the individual land owners. Of course, they're liberals, so land owners are part of the evil "Little Red Hen" following supported by conservatives, which they despise. At any result, it is amazing to me how property rights can legally be circumvented in the interest of the masses. I work in the solid waste landfill industry and see this everyday. It's the Golden Rule, plain an simple.

Olive is doing well. She's anxiously awaiting November, as am I.

I'm assuming that the PUC has already approved the route?

In most of these cases that we've been involved with, the route chosen is the route of least resistance. The landowners on the "Preferred Route" lawyer up and the guys on the alternate route think they're in the clear. Then all of the parties get together and decide to go through the other guy's land. They sometimes get so bad that the lines look like an Etch-a-Sketch drawing, cutting south for a few miles, east a few, then south, then west, then back south, etc.

Once the route is chosen, you have lost quite a bit of bargaining power, but some companies will still talk to the landowners and will accommodate special requests (within reason). Have you negotiated the purchase price? Are they willing to pay damages for the remainder?

Are the ROW people out of Alice,Tx. ? I would get in touch with a good eminent domain attorney, also. There is a good Ag that posts under the name of "Country....he could probably answer most, if not all, of your questions. I had to deal with a 345kvw thru us a couple of years ago.

An actual attorney will be better suited to answer this but i don't believe you have a good chance to fight the eminent domain here. The big condition (at least for us) is that you can impose eminent domain for a condemnation case as long as the company that owns the facility (pipe, line, etc.) is based in and serves the state(both with financial contributions and with resources) of the line, pipe, etc.

Ok that may be confusing because i just confused myself. Basically you can fight eminent domain if the line or pipeline does not provide and betterment to the community (state), if that is not the case then your chances slim significantly. Once again i am by no means an expert on that and could be mistaken.

Our own queso1 on her is a land/O&G attorney. He's in B/CS and I think he's a sponsor on the site.

He's on MaroonBook.com

http://www.maroon-book.com/MaroonBook/Content/Detail.aspx?bid=137

Thanks Finn. Eminent domain is a difficult matter to explain to my clients. On one hand it's necessary, on the other hand it's abhorrent. Unless a person can negotiate with the company, they are going to do their best to run right over the landowner. There are a lot of things that might be able to be negotiated before heading to court (price, location, surface issues, etc).

FWIW, an eminent domain attorney does a little more for you than fight ED...they know how to write the contracts for the easements, etc egress, ingress, etc etc. as well as get as much for you as possible. AEP put the line thru us, and I am very glad I had an attorney versed in this shiat...

The PUC is really encouraging the TSP's (transmission service providers) to work with property owners to minimize impacts fromt the CREZ transmission projects. I know on some of these projects that are forcing the TSP to allow the property owner to make suggested minor route adjustments (within their own property).

Send them a letter with a map showing where your would propose the line get put on your property. They will work with you.

queso- just trying to send you business to prevent us from going fishing anytime soon.

Rhomulus: Blanket easements are no longer legal in Texas. The easement itself and the rights to be acquired (how much voltage, how many lines, what type of towers, etc.) must be precisely defined in the easement document or eminent domain petition.

I agree with the poster earlier who said that if the permitting process is complete there is not a lot you can do except negotiate compensation issues. They must negotiate in "good faith" and if they don't, that could be possible grounds to stop the project (or really make them nervous to the point where they might find an alternate route). I think good faith negotiations is one of those vague legal terms that no one except an attorney really can define (kind of like reasonable probability).

A big problem is that most eminent domain attorneys will be paid on a contingency basis (a percentage of what they earn you over and above the initial offer made by the power company) so there is no incentive for them to stop the project. If you pay them based on an hourly rate to fight the project, that could get real expensive.

Good luck with the justice system.

From the perspective of a subcontractor on similar projects, you can make requests when the landman shows up. Things like a bitterweed wash before any vehicle comes through, 160 ft wide at structure sight only, construction hours limitation (during deer season) these are a huge pain in the hindparts for the contractor.

Then "give up" some of your demands in order to move the structures or consolidate. Stand your ground and don't give in unless you get what you want.

Make certain you get prices for similar size pecan trees and demand the price plus a "establishment fee".

You are correct that you cannot keep them out but you can get some consolation for your trouble. If you would like to PM me I would be happy to give you some other ideas to get the result you would like. I have seen some VERY crazy demands met in order to acquire the land.

quote:

---

Rhomulus: Blanket easements are no longer legal in Texas. The easement itselfand the rights to be acquired (how much voltage, how many lines, what type of towers, etc.) must be preciselydefined in the easement document or eminent domain petition.

---

Yet they are written that way much of the time. There is a lot that is written to confuse and scare the land owner into signing that is still written into any agreement. Just think of any agreement to be made with a land owner. Not meant to be anything other than confusing.

We just got done (well, a few months ago anyway) helping Bexar Met obtain easements for about 9 different property owners in order to place a water main.

Granted, a relatively small water company is nothing compared to power generation/transmission companies, but I would assume that many of the aspects are essentially the same.

I would put a lot of effort into negotiating the route. Odds are that it will be, over the cost of construction, cheaper to add a few thousand additional feet and a couple of towers by altering the proposed route than fighting you (and other landowners) in court over something as trivial to the transmission company as alignment. That's just an educated guess though. I would seriously recommend getting queso1 or some other real estate attorney on board, and if you can combine resources with neighboring landowners, you increase your bargaining leverage.

One thing that I would demand in any easement agreement is access to property - I know more than one pipeliner and have heard more than one story about pipeline transmission company employees taking liberties with their access rights during hunting season. Just something to think about.

In the end, the transmission line will be viewed as a necessary evil that serves the greater good, so it will get put in. Sucks, but it's the nature of the world we live in right now. The best you can do is maximize your benefit out of it either via money, services, improvements to your property (say you've been wanting a tank for a few years now but haven't had the time or the funds to build it - that is a good negotiating tool). I lived on a ranch just NE of CS when I was in school and the landowner negotiated a couple of tanks installed on his property when a much smaller power line needed to cross part of his spread. Little things like that, things that can easily be accomodated by the contractor and will benefit you, are good negotiating tools.

And while this has the potential to suck for you, I am envious that you at least have the fortune of having to deal with this issue because you own land.

Get to findin' them salamanders buddy. We've got one coming through our place as well.

Gig'em

No real charismatic T/E species in Cooke county.

With a company like Oncor i didn't figure they would use a blanket easement even if they are legal. Very few Investor owned G&T's use them. it is mainly rural coops that try to use them. We typically approach them with a blanket and if they request more then we accomodate them.

Like they said, transmission line is one of those "necessary evils". When the ROW agent approaches you talk his ear off. Play ball with them but make sure that both of you have a full understanding about all compensations and regulations. much like anything else in life, take notes and send follow up emails to confirm everything.

http://www.npmapestworld.org/docs/ePestWorld/CBD%20National%20%28Lawsuit,%201.19.11%29.pdf

This lawsuit against the EPA shows 367 pages of endangered plants and animals...got to have at least one of these in Cooke County.

Looks like you are screwed...

here is your federal list that matters http://www.fws.gov/southwest/es/EndangeredSpecies/lists/ListSpecies.cfm

Only one on there that would even be remotely believable/possible is the black capped verio, which you very well might have but it mitgrates so you need to try to talk to the local audobhan society and get their records of sightings and locations.

Prove that this birds' habitat (nest etc) will be destroyed with the construction and you have a good leg to stand on.

Here is the state list (required for TxDot projects etc, you might make lots of calls to TPWD and other state/local biologists about these critters.
http://gis2.tpwd.state.tx.us/ReportServer$GIS_EPASDE_SQL/Pages/ReportViewer.aspx?%2fReport+Project2%2fReport5&rs:Command=Render&county=Cooke

Out of this list your best bets are the verio again the burrowing owl and wood stork are also possible.

The horned lizard and spotted skunk are also suspect.
Don't bother with the wolves... the red wolf has been "extinct" for a long time with the only possible individuals left on some island off of Virgina I think.

[This message has been edited by OnlyForNow (edited 4/28/2011 8:55a).]

I think you might be out of the range of the burying (burrowing?) beetle but if you would like some i know where i can find a bunch. they just held up a job of ours for about three years.

Thanks everybody for the advice so far. As mentioned, I doubt we can't stop the thing coming through our place at this point, but getting them to consolidate lines or shift the proposed route to the west by a couple hundred yards would be what we ideally want.

I didn't see any insects on the state list.