The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About20020115.tiff 4110M9*I; DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING SERVICES PHONE (970)353-6100, EXT.3540 Will Co FAX (970)304-6498 1555 N. 17TH AVENUE GREELEY, COLORADO 80631 COLORADO October 31, 2001 TO: SURROUNDING PROPERTY/MINERAL OWNERS CASE NUMBER: Z-566 There will be a Public Hearing before the Weld County Planning Commission on Tuesday, December 18, 2001, at 1:30 p.m., in Room 210, Weld County Planning Department, 1555 N. 17th Avenue, Greeley, Colorado concerning the request of: NAME: Guy Jensen 's"' FOR: Change of Zone from A(Agricultural)to E (Estate). LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot B of RE-2303; Pt. of the E2 of Section 35, T2N, R67W of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado. LOCATION: West of and adjacent to WCR 23; north of and adjacent to WCR 14 1/2. Your property is within five-hundred (500)feet of the property on which this request has been made or you may have an interest in the minerals located under the property. For additional information write or telephone Lauren Light, Planner. Comments or objections related to the above request should be submitted in writing to the Weld County Department of Planning Services, 1555 N. 17th Avenue, Greeley, Colorado 80631, on or before the date of public hearing. For your convenience,the Department of Planning Services has instituted a Planning Commission Agenda Phone Line. In some circumstances cases need to be continued to a later date. To ensure that this case is being heard, you may call 970-304-6499, up to the day of the scheduled hearing for this information. 2002-0115 EXHIBIT SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS AND/OR SUBSURFACE ESTATES/INTEREST OWNERS Z-566 DONACIANO &JOANN ESPINOZA 6865 CR 23 FT LUPTON CO 80621-8915 SAM & FRANCES FUNAKOSHI 6757 WCR 23 1/2 FT LUPTON CO 80621 RONALD & SUE ANN GRABRIAN 6325 WCR 23 FT LUPTON CO 80621 RICHARD HEIN 5290 E YALE CIRCLE, SUITE 103 DENVER CO 80222 MRS. SAM KOSHIO C/O GEORGE MASUNAGA 725 S BROADWAY AVENUE FT LUPTON CO 80621-1205 MARK ALLEN PETERSON 10813 WCR 14 '% /', FT LUPTON CO 80621 NICANDRO& MARIA SANCHEZ 10521 WCR 14 '% FT LUPTON CO 80621 PATRICIA TERRY 1312 DENVER AVENUE FT LUPTON CO 80621 CERTIFICATE OF MAILING I hereby certify that I have placed a true and correct copy of the surrounding property owners and owners and lessees of minerals in accordance with the notification requirements of Weld County in Case Number Z=566 in the United States Mail, postage prepaid First Class Mail by letter as addressed on the attached list this 31st day of October, 2001. Donita At r AFFIDAVIT OF INTERESTED LAND OWNERS SURFACE ESTATE Subject Parcel: 131135000086 THE UNDERSIGNED, states that to the best of his or her knowledge the attached list is a true and accurate list of the names, addresses, and the corresponding Parcel Identification Number assigned by the Weld County Assessor of the owners of the property (the surface estate) within 500 feet of the property being considered. This list was compiled utilizing the records of the Weld County Assessor available on the Weld County Internet Mapping site, http://www.co.weld.co.us, and has not been modified from the original. The list compiled from the records of the Weld County As so as assembled within thirty days of the application's submission date. Signature /Date Property Owners Within 500 ft. of Parcel# 131135000086 NAME MAILING ADDRESS PARCEL IDENTIFICATION 6865 COUNTY ROAD 23 ESPINOZA DONACIANO L & 131135000052 JOANN R FORT LUPTON,CO 80621- 8915 6757 WELD CO RD#23 1/2 FUNAKOSHI SAM S & FRANCES R 131136000058 FT LUPTON,CO 80621 6325 WCR 23 GRABRIAN RONALD & SUE ANN 131135000070 FT LUPTON,CO 80621 6325 WCR 23 GRABRIAN RONALD M 131135000069 FT LUPTON,CO 80621 5290 E YALE CIR HEIN RICHARD L SUITE 103 131136000039 DENVER,CO 80222 C/O GEORGE MASUNAGA KOSHIO SAM MRS ETAL 725 S BROADWAY AVE 131136000047 FT LUPTON,CO 80621-1205 10813 WELD CO RD 14 1/2 PETERSON MARK ALLEN 131135000085 FT LUPTON,CO 80621 .-� 10521 WCR 14 1/2 SANCHEZ NICANDRO & MARIA E 131135000084 FORT LUPTON,CO 80621 1312 DENVER AVE Ir ERRY PATRICIA L 131 135000064 FORT LUPTON,CO 80621 r AFFIDAVIT OF MINERAL AND MINERAL LEASEHOLD OWNERS jGrant) Subject Property: Township 2 North, Range 67 West, 6th P.M. Section 35: Lot "B" of Recorded Exemption No. 1311-35-1- RE2303, being a part of the SE%NE% STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. COUNTY OF WELD THE UNDERSIGNED, being first duly sworn, deposes and states that to the best of his knowledge the following is a true and accurate list of the names and addresses of the mineral owners and mineral leasehold owners having an interest in the Subject Property. Mineral Owners Leasehold Owners Anadarko Petroleum Corp. K.P. Kauffman Company, Inc. P.O. Box 1330 1675 Broadway, Suite 1970 Houston, TX 77251-1330 Denver, CO 80202 HS Resources, Inc. 1999 Broadway, Suite 3600 Denver, CO 80202 • William G. Crews Certified Professional Landman #3477 Subscribed and sworn to before me by William G. Crews this 12th day of September, 2000. My commission exp, es: �.• G�,, 2G 014 Nt lic KIRK I. GOBLE Mineral Resource Documentation Blue Sky Estates S-570 Mineral resource information was obtained from William Crews of Crews & Zeren Oil & Gas Consultants and resultant communication from the mineral interest holders and their geologists. The attached letter indicates the senior geologist for RME Land review shows coal deposits within the Laramie Formation at a depth of less than 500 feet. There are existing facilities adjacent to the site for extraction of existing oil & gas deposits. The existing lease encumbers the entire site that is the subject of this application. See attached letter. WELBORN SULLIVAN MECK &TOOLEY, PC. 82117th Street,suite 500 Denver, Colorado 80202 ATTORNEYS AT LAW Telephone: 303-830-2500 Facsimile: 303-832-2366 E-mail:wsmt@wsmtlaw.com John E Welborn Stephen I.Sullivan Jul 27, 2001 John E Meek JulyKeith I)."rooky Kcndor P Jones Brian S.'I'oolcy Thomas C.McKee Molly Sommerville William R.Rapson Kathryn Haight Stephen A.Bain Kirk Goble Amy "tang E Danielle V.Smith Agent for Guy Jensen Rebecca N.Welborn The Bell 5 Land Company Special counsel 1928 9th Street, Suite A Norman S.Early,Jr Greeley, CO 80631 Of Counsel Robert E Welborn Re: Jensen Subdivision Proposal Township 2 North, Range 67 West Section 35: SE4NE4 (portion) Weld County, Colorado Dear Kirk: This letter follows up our telephone conversation concerning the property that Guy Jensen ("Jensen") wishes to develop that includes a portion of the SE4NE4 of Section 35, Township 2 North, Range 67 West ("Property"). I am sending this letter to you with a copy of a letter entitled "Notice of Mineral Interests Owned by RME Land Corp. and RME Petroleum Company and Objection"("Notice")which I have submitted to Weld County to comply with a recent bill that was passed by the Colorado General Assembly effective July 1, 2001 entitled "Notification of Surface Development", a copy of which I enclose for your ready reference. As you are aware from my letter to you dated March 14,2001,this law firm represents RME Land Corp. ("RME Land"), formerly known as Union Pacific Land Resources Corporation, and RME Petroleum Company ("RME Petroleum"), formerly known as Union Pacific Resources Company, with respect to the application for development that Jensen has filed with the County ("Application"). The RME entities own all of the minerals that underlie the Property. The RME entities object to the Application on the grounds identified in the Notice as well as those set forth in this letter. The RME entities will withdraw their objection if they reach an agreement with Jensen. The RME entities object to the Application because the proposed development both prospective and existing development of the mineral rights and thereby impair EXHIBIT I 1 (1) Kirk Goble July 27, 2001 Page 2 property rights of the RME entities. As you maybe aware,Colorado law recognizes that the surface estate and the mineral estate are separate and distinct property interests and that one maybe severed from the other. Under Colorado law,the mineral estate continues to be the dominant estate,and the mineral owner has the right to use as much of the surface of the property as is reasonably necessary to develop the minerals.Where,as here,potential conflict arises because the surface owner proposes to develop the surface estate, the owners of the two estates will generally enter into surface use agreements or other agreements with respect to the use of the surface of the property. The oil and gas interests on the one hand and the hard rock mineral interests on the other hand are typically handled differently because the oil and gas can frequently be developed in a way that is compatible with surface development while the hard rock minerals will be sterilized in place from the development. 1. The Oil and Gas Interests Owned by RME Petroleum Company: Oil and gas interest owners generally enter into surface use agreements where the oil and gas interest owners may agree to restrict their surface use of the property to areas specified in the agreement in exchange for certain agreements from the surface owner. As you are aware,KP Kaufman Corp.,Inc. ("KPK")operates a well adjacent to the location for the proposed subdivision. HS Resources,Inc. ("HS")also appears to have oil and gas leasehold rights in the Property. The oil and gas leasehold rights that KPK and HS own were derived from RME Petroleum. Depending upon the proposed plat for the subdivision, there may be no future drilling locations on the Property; however, RME Petroleum wishes to enter into a surface use agreement with Jensen, HS, and KPK in order to protect the existing adjacent wellsite and to allow for future drilling operations at the wellsite, among other things. I suggest a meeting among the parties to discuss the terms of such an agreement. 2. The Minerals Other Than Gas Owned by RME Land: As I indicated to you in my letter,RME Land typically enters into arrangements with surface developers for the disposition of the minerals in cases where hard rock mineral development will be precluded because of surface development. The disposition of the hard rock mineral interests can range from a mineral deed for approximately$400 an acre, a long term nondevelopment lease for approximately$200 to $225 an acre, or a relinquishment of surface rights for $150 an acre. A senior geologist at RME Land has reviewed the Property for coal potential and determined that there are significant coal reserves under the Property. He finds that the Property lies within the Boulder-Weld Coal Field where there has been extensive coal mining in the past. The coal lies Kirk Goble July 27, 2001 Page 3 within the Laramie Formation at a depth of less than 500 feet,has a thickness of approximately 15 to 20 feet and has a BTU in the range of 5900 to 6900 btu/lb and a low sulfur content of between 0.3 and 0.5 per cent. Because of the amount and type of coal reserves that underlie the Property, RME Land would agree to provide Jensen with a relinquishment of surface rights for the hard rock minerals in exchange for $150 an acre with a minimum charge of $5,000. The form of relinquishment that RME Land generally provides is enclosed. Please call me after you have had an opportunity to review the information in this letter so that we can discuss how to proceed. Very truly yours, Molly Sommerville cc: Marla Jones, Esq. Tom Marranzino Don Ballard Dan Casper Chris Greneaux/HS Resources, Inc. (w/portions excised) Jason Lilley/K.P. Kauffman Company, Inc. (w/portions excised) s:\M LS\UniorNenson\Gable_Ih_07260 I.wpd reA The Bell 5 Land Com an p Y 1928 9th Street, Suite A, Greeley, Colorado 80631 PHONE: 970-356-1618 FAX: 970-392-1618 October 10, 2001 Molly Sommerville Welbourn, Sullivan, Meck, and Tooley, P.C. 821 17th Street, Suite 500 Denver, CO 80202 RE: Jensen Subdivision Proposal Blue Sky Estates Pt. SE4NE4 35-T2N-R67W Weld County, CO Dear Ms. Sommerville, Please excuse the delay in responding to your earlier communications. There were several non-mineral issues that needed to be addressed with Mr. Jensen's proposal, but it appears we are ready to move forward. The purpose of this letter is to respond to the objections and potential remedies set forth in your letter of July 27, 2001. 1. Oil & Gas Interests owned by RME Petroleum Company: The density of this subdivision will not exceed four dwellings located on a total of 20 acres, more or less. This density averages one dwelling per 5-acre site, allowing adequate room for setbacks and access for existing facilities and any future drilling activities. The existing well head and support equipment has adequate existing access from Weld County Road 14 1/2 and this proposed subdivision does not propose anything that would alter or impair the access for service and support activities associated therewith. As mentioned in your letter, additional drill sites are very unlikely, therefore Mr. Jensen proposes to meet with the appropriate representatives of the leaseholders, K.P. Kauffman and H.S. Resources to determine a mutually acceptable surface agreement to protect the existing drill site. Please advise as to the best arrangements for such a meeting. EXHIBIT 2. Minerals Other Than Gas Owned by RME Land: This refers to the hard rock mineral interests (coal) underlying the property. According to your letter, a senior geologist at RME indicates coal reserves at depths of less than 500 feet, but not less than 150 feet (prior letter 3/15/01). While the reserves in the Boulder-Weld Coal field have been mined in the past, there appears to have been no substantial mining operations in the area for the past several decades. In the ensuing time, there has been significant growth and development on lands overlying the entire field, thus making extraction of these reserves by surface mining techniques uneconomical and in some cases physically impossible. According the maps at the Weld County Department of Planning Services, there are no existing underground tunnels, shafts, or other mining activities underground beneath this site or neighboring parcels. The size of this parcel and the depth of the coal reserves beneath it make surface extraction of coal • practically impossible. It is Mr. Jensen's proposal to seek County approval of this subdivision without the expense of paying for relinquishment of mineral reserves that are very unlikely ever to be mined. Should future conditions cause the mineral holders to seek these reserves, the extraction techniques will likely not involve surface mining due to the aforementioned growth and development in the area. Mr. Jensen proposes no payment or compensation in this regard. You may contact me at your convenience to further discuss these matters. I thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Kirk Goble, ALC, CLS Broker Agent for Guy D. Jensen KG:mmi CC: Guy D. Jensen Weld County Planning Dept. WELBORN SULLIVAN MECK &TOOLEY, P.00 E C E o v E p8 2117th Street, Suite 500 Denver, Colorado 80202 ATTORNEYS AT LA Telephone:303-830-2500 Facsimile: 303-832-2366 E-mail:wsmt@wsmtlaw.com /Alt John E Welborn ; C-3 Stephen J.Sullivan John E Mcck , 'V h` //�� Keith D.Toolcy I n 14/, \ Kendor P. Jones July 27, 2001 t )�f Brian S Tooley - ctpfri �� Thomas C.McKee Molly Sommerville William R.Rapson Kathryn Haight Stephen A.Bain Via Telefax and U.S. Mail Amy E.MangDanielle V.Smith Rebecca N.Welborn Julie Chester Special Counsel County Planner, Weld County Norman S.Early,Jr Department of Planning Services of Counsel 1555 N. 17th Avenue Robert E Welborn Greeley, CO 80631 Re: Jensen Subdivision Proposal Township 2 North, Range 67 West Section 35: SE4NE4 (portion) Weld County, Colorado Dear Julie: This law firm represents RME Land Corp.("RME Land"),formerly known as Union Pacific Land Resources Corporation,and RME Petroleum Company("RME Petroleum"), formerly known as Union Pacific Resources Company,with respect to a land use application("Application")that has been filed or will be filed with Weld County ("County") by The Bell 5 Land Company for Guy Jensen ("Jensen") for the property referenced above ("Property"). RME Land and RME Petroleum together own all of the minerals that underlie the Property. Enclosed is a letter to the members of the Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners entitled "Notice of Mineral Interests Owned by RME Land Corp. and RME Petroleum Company and Objection"which I ask that you provide to the Planning Commission and the Board to be included in the record of the proceedings to be held on the Application. As I know you are aware, the Colorado General Assembly recently passed House Bill 01- 1088 which was enacted into law as Article 65.5, "Notification of Surface Development," in Title 24 and which became effective on July 1. The law requires that developers give notice to mineral interest owners of hearings on applications for developments and certify to the local jurisdiction that EXHIBIT I a© Julie Chester, County Planner Weld County July 27, 2001 Page 2 the notice was given. Local governments are to require the certification as a condition for the approval of the application. Notices of hearings should be provided to the RME entities as follows: Mr. Tom Marranzino Anadarko Petroleum Corporation P. O. Box 1330 Houston, Texas 77251-1330 Dan Casper P.O. Box 265 Franktown, CO 80116 Thank you for your consideration and attention to this matter. Best regards, Molly Sommerville MLS/jkj Enclosures cc: Tom Marranzino Don Ballard Marla Jones, Esq. Kirk Goble, agent for Guy Jensen Chris Greneaux/HS Resources, Inc. Jason Lilley/K.P. Kauffman Company, Inc. WELBORN SULLIVAN MECK &TOOLEY, P.C. 821 17th street.Suite 500 Denver, Colorado 80202 ATTORNEYS AT LAW Telephone: 303-830-2500 Facsimile: 303-832-2366 E-mail:wsmt@wsmtlaw.com John F Welborn Stephen 3.Sullivan July 27, 2001 John F Meek Keith D.Tooley Kendor E Jones Brian S.Tooley Members of the Planning Commission Thomas C.McKee and the Board of County Commissioners Molly Sommerville of Weld Coun William R Rapson `� Kathryn Haight 1555 N. 17th Avenue Stephen A.Bain Greeley, Colorado 80631 Amy E.Mang Danielle V.Smith Rebecca N.Welborn Special Counsel NOTICE OF MINERAL INTERESTS OWNED BY RME LAND CORP. Norman S.Early,Jr AND RME PETROLEUM COMPANY AND OBJECTION Of Counsel Robert F Welborn Re: Jensen Subdivision Proposal Township 2 North, Range 67 West Section 35: SE4NE4 (portion) Weld County, Colorado Ladies and Gentlemen: This law firm represents RME Land Corp. ("RME Land"),formerly known as Union Pacific Land Resources Corporation,and RME Petroleum Company("RME Petroleum"), formerly known as Union Pacific Resources Company,with respect to the application that has been filed with Weld County for approval of a subdivision for property("Application")located in a portion of the SE4NE4 of Section 35, Township 2 North, Range 67 West ("Property"). RME Land and RME Petroleum together own all of the minerals that underlie the Property. RME Land and RME Petroleum wish to give notice to Weld County ("County") of the mineral interests they own under the Property and to make the County aware that any subsequent approval by the County of a subdivision may make the mineral resources that underlie the Property more difficult to develop. RME Land and RME Petroleum object to the approval by the County of the Application unless and until an agreement on surface use is reached between the RME entities and the Applicant. The following are comments in support of this Notice and Objection: r Members of the Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners July 27, 2001 Page 2 1. The Mineral Resources Owned by RME Land Corp. RME Land owns all of the minerals except for the oil and gas that underlies the Property. A senior geologist for RME Land has evaluated the Property for coal potential and determined that the Property is within the Boulder-Weld Coal Field where there has been extensive coal mining in the past. The coal lies within the Laramie Formation at a depth of less than 500 feet,has a thickness of approximately 15 to 20 feet and has a BTU in the range of 5900 to 6900 btu/lb and a low sulfur content of between 0.3 and 0.5%. 2. The Oil and Gas Resources Owned by RME Petroleum Company. RME Petroleum owns all of the oil and gas that underlies the Property. RME Petroleum believes that HS Resources, Inc. ("HS") and K.P. Kauffman Company, Inc. ("KPK") have been assigned oil and gas leasehold interests in the Property and that KPK operates at least one well in the SE4NE4, adjacent to the proposed subdivision. 3. There is Clear Statutory Authority and Direction for the County to Take Into Account the Rights of Mineral Interest Owners in Its Consideration of Subdivision Applications. The State of Colorado recognizes the important rights of mineral owners and lessees in C.R.S. § 30-28-133O0)which requires that notices of hearings of subdivision plat applications be given to mineral owners and lessees in counties. More important, subsection (10) states and acknowledges that both the mineral estate and the surface estate are interests in land and that the two interests are "separate and distinct." The subsection specifically directs county planning commissions to recognize that the owners of subsurface mineral interests and their lessees have"the same rights and privileges as surface owners." Further,the Colorado General Assembly recently passed House Bill 01-1088 in Article 65.5, Title 24, "Notification of Surface Development", which requires that applicants for development approvals give notice to mineral estate owners of hearings to be held before local jurisdictions for applications for development and further requires that the developer certify that he has given the required notice to mineral estate owners as a condition to the approval of the application by the local jurisdiction. Members of the Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners July 27, 2001 Page 3 4. Government Action Which Allows Surface Development in a Manner Which Precludes Mineral Development May Impair the Vested Property and Contractual Rights ofthe Mineral Interest Owner. Colorado case law continues to provide that the mineral owner owns the dominant estate and has the right of reasonable access to and use of the surface estate to extract minerals.' Actions by a government entity which may have the effect of reversing this basic tenet of Colorado property law and thereby deprive the mineral interest owner of its vested property and contractual rights may be violative of federal and state constitutional provisions. Union Pacific Railroad Company ("Railroad") gave a deed to Theodore Taylor dated September 21, 1909 and recorded in the Weld County Clerk and Recorder's office on October 18, 1909 in Book 233 at Page 251 in which it reserved all of the minerals. The Railroad granted the minerals to Union Pacific Land Resources Corporation (predecessor to RME Land) by quitclaim deed dated April 1, 1971 recorded on April 14, 1971 in Book 644, Reception No. 1565712. Applicant had record notice at the time he acquired his interests in the Property that the minerals were severed from the surface estate and that he received less than the entire interest in the Property. 3. An Action by the County to Approve the Application may Amount to a Regulatory Taking within the Meaning ofthe State and United States Constitutions for which the County Could Be Required to Pay the RME Entities Fair Compensation. Action by the County to approve an application for surface development may constitute a regulatory taking, especially where the operator is deprived of all economically viable use of land or his investment-backed expectations to develop his property.' The United States Claims Court and the Federal Circuit Courts have awarded compensation or affirmed decisions to award compensation to energy and mining companies based upon claims by the companies that their mineral properties had been taken by the government without just 'See Frankfort Oil Company v.Abrams,413 P.2d 190(Colo. 1966). Note also, Gerrity Oil&Gas Corporation v.Magness, 946 P.2d 913 (Colo. 1977), which discusses in a footnote on page 927 the principle that the owners of both estates must exercise their rights in a manner consistent with one another. r 2See,for example,Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council, 505 U.S. 1003, 112 S.Ct. 2886, 120 L.Ed. 2d 798(1992). Members of the Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners July 27, 2001 Page 4 compensation because of government regulations which disallowed the development by the companies of their mineral rights.3 5. The RME Entities Have Entered into Many Agreements with Developers With Respect to the Disposition of the Minerals at the Time that the Developer Proposes to Develop the Surface Estate, and the Public Interest is Served by the Parties Entering into Such an Agreement. RME Land and RME Petroleum ("RME entities") have extensive mineral interests throughout Colorado where the surface estate and the mineral estate have been severed. The RME entities have worked with many parties who wish to develop the surface estate in order to assure the compatible development of the surface and the minerals or to effect some other disposition of the minerals. The RME entities wish to work with the Applicant in the same manner that they have worked with other developers.The RME entities object to the Application,however,until such time as they reach an agreement with the Applicant and request that the County make any approval of the Application conditioned upon an agreement between the Applicant and the RME entities. Very truly yours, WELBORN SULLIVAN MECK& TOOLEY, P.C. By: Molly Sommerville MLS/jkj Enclosures cc: Dan Casper Marla Jones, Esq. Don Ballard Tom Marranzino Chris Greneaux/HS Resources, Inc. Jason Lilley/K.P. Kauffman Company, Inc. Kirk Goble, agent for Guy Jensen 3See for example Whitney Benefits,Inc.v.United States, 18 CI.Ct. 394(1989),corrected,20 CI.Ct. 324 (1990), affd.,926 F.2d 1169(Fed.Cir.), cert.denied, 112 S.Ct.406(1991);United Nuclear Corporation v. United States, 17 CI.Ct. 768,affd.,912 F.2d 1432(1990). S:\MLS\UnionVenson\Weld_County_Jo 072601.wpd Hello