Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Council continues Peter Pan fuel‑storage petition after neighborhood concerns
Loading...
Summary
Councilors continued a petition to allow a 5,000‑gallon above‑ground diesel tank at Peter Pan’s 11 Liberty St. facility to the May 12 meeting so neighborhood councils can be notified and ask questions about environmental and safety issues.
The Springfield City Council continued a petition from Peter Pan (operator represented by Frank Fitzgerald II) to install a 5,000‑gallon above‑ground diesel storage tank at 11 Liberty Street, citing neighborhood and environmental concerns raised by councilors.
Frank Fitzgerald II, representing Peter Pan and the property owner, said the petition seeks a permit to install and operate a 5,000‑gallon above‑ground diesel tank after two 8,000‑gallon underground tanks were removed in 2017. Brian McCabe and Jim Custer (J.F. Petroleum) joined Fitzgerald at the hearing; the fire department confirmed it had reviewed the proposal. Petitioners said a larger underground tank was no longer appropriate under more recent state and federal rules and that an above‑ground, double‑wall steel tank was the safer, modern alternative. The installers said such tanks have an expected life of about 20 years and undergo third‑party testing, typically with leak‑detection and periodic inspections mandated by federal and state regulators.
Several councilors — including Councilor Perez, Councilor Davila and Councilor Kern — urged fuller neighborhood notice and a direct presentation to the local neighborhood council (New North/Liberty/Metro area councils were discussed) because of nearby residences and businesses, and because residents had raised concerns about fumes and fire risk in past local incidents. Other councilors said the permit process for underground/above‑ground fuel storage is administered through the fire department, and petitioners had followed the required permitting steps.
After extended discussion the council agreed to continue the matter to the May 12 meeting to allow petitioners to appear before the appropriate neighborhood council(s) and for additional questions to be addressed. The council called the roll and recorded a majority in favor of the motion to continue; the petitioner said they would meet with neighborhood council leaders in the interim.
The council’s continuation preserves the fire‑department review and allows additional community input before final action.
