Milton council tables decision on appeal of propane field site

The fate of a propane tank farm in Milton's Cannery Village community is still up in the air. Town council tabled a decision on an appeal of the farm's approval by planning and zoning.

Cannery resident Jon Patterson submitted the appeal, hoping council could find a way to relocate the tanks. The approved location is near the community's clubhouse and pool, a site Patterson said is not appropriate.

“We should reconsider doing this or at least work with the developer and say, 'Can't we do something else?” he said. “If anybody went out there and saw that, they would say this is not so good for a number of reasons. For one, it's an unsightly utilitarian thing that belongs in the back of the development.”

Council members agreed with Patterson and his neighbors, but their attorney said they are legally bound by the planning commission's decision. Town Solicitor Seth Thompson said the role of council in an appeal is to verify the applicant has followed the process from preliminary site-plan review to final site-plan approval. Council's role is more judiciary than legislative, he said.

Even if the appeal had occurred following the preliminary site plan review, Thompson said, it is likely the town could do no more than encourage developer Chestnut Properties to build the farm in another location because utilities are an approved use for the property.

Mayor Marion Jones said council defered a decision for up to 60 days in order to give council time to review the appeal.

“I've always endorsed thinking outside the box,” she said. “We might not have the regulations right now in place to help these folks, but that doesn't mean we can't use our senses and appeal. I've charged myself with going to work on that. Until I've had a little bit of time do that, I had to ask for it to be tabled.”

Charles Sockriter of Poore's Propane said the initial plan was for a 30,000-gallon propane tank to be placed in an undeveloped section Cannery Village – a parcel later sold to Dogfish Head in 2011.

“It gave us no where to put a tank field, and if the temporary tank field gets too many more houses on it and it keeps getting cold, people aren't going to have heat,” he said.

The new plan is to place 10 tanks, each 2,000 gallons, in the approved location, he said.

Councilman John Collier said he understands residents' concerns and has tried to find a loophole to overturn the commission's decision.

“Every time I felt I found a crack in the armor, somebody showed me something else that filled that crack,” he said. “When it really comes down to it, I have to make my decision based on what the ordinances direct me to do.”

Patterson also said a planning commission member acted unethically when voting because his home neighbors the temporary tank farm. Thompson noted the preliminary site plan vote is not part of the appeal because it occurred more than 60 days ago. He also pointed out the plan was approved by more than a one-vote margin.

Cannery resident Judy Shandler said the preliminary vote should be included.

“It seems such an awful shame that those mistakes are allowed to move forward and nullify what clearly is the will of everybody in this room,” she said.

Collier said Cannery residents' concerns would have gained more traction had they been raised earlier in the process.

“You have to participate. You have to speak up and make yourself known,” he said. “Maybe this neighborhood, in a sense, might have failed themselves by not making it to the preliminary hearing when the public was [permitted] participation.”