Butler Quick Chek: Lawyers Argue Pros and Cons

After more than a year of hearing arguments for and against the proposed construction of a  on Route 23 North in , between Bartholdi Avenue and Boonton Avenue, lawyers delivered their final summations to the Butler Planning Board Thursday night, with the board expecting to make its decision in June.

Throughout the time the board has been considering the application, they have heard testimonies from various engineers, experts and the public. Thirteen neighbors who live near the proposed development site some citing what they expect to be congested traffic, noise and gas fumes from the 24-hour facility, and most recently, the mother of a 20-year-old multiply disabled man who lives behind the proposed site, healthwise, by the Quick Chek. 

Some residents have spoken in favor of the Quick Chek development and many Butler residents in the surrounding area have had for a year.

Read all of Tri-Boro Patch's coverage of the board's consideration of the Quick Chek Mega-Gas application here.

David Dixon, the attorney representing those who oppose Quick Check, spoke first Thursday and noted several times in his summation that in order for Quick Chek to build the store that they want, a 5,1900-square foot facility, they would need approximately 20 variances. The variances, he noted, include for the loading zone, parking lot, allowing for parking adjacent to the building, fence height, retaining wall height and more.

"What they are asking for is variance from every standard that you have set for this type of use," he said. 

Dixon said he feels that the applicant completely disregarded the specifications and use conditions for the site and did not seek alternate locations because they wanted to place the store in that specific area.

"What they have decided is, 'We have a plan. We're going to plop it on this site and let's see how we can make it fit,'" Dixon said.

Peter McArthur, the lawyer defending Quick Chek, disputed this argument and said that while the applicant would need a number of variances to develop the store on that site, the convenience store chain is particularly interested in that location because the applicant is aware of the board's and borough's desire to develop the Route 23 corridor.

McArthur said the applicant has made several changes to the application since it was first submitted in the fall of 2010 to accomodate the concerns of engineers and the public. He said he respected Janice Harper-Young's comments about how she is afraid the store and gas station could be detrimental to her son's health (she has argued that the smell of the fumes could make him sick, as well as noise that could distract him from sleeping).

"She's pulling out all the stops to do what she thinks is right," he said.

But still, McArthur disagreed with Harper-Young's argument. He said fumes would not be a problem as the gas tanks would be stored underground and permeators would be used on the site. He also said that the argument she has made about increased noise affecting him is not valid, as their home is already located next to a highway commercial zone with Route 23.

Harper-Young has her own lawyer, George Holland, who also delivered a summation Thursday in which he said he and his client did not think it was fair that Ryan Young was not allowed to testify, himself. Holland said the Youngs have already had hardships because of where their home is located near the 7-Eleven on Route 23, but that Janice Harper-Young had received a one-time grant to purchase her home and she would not be afforded that luxury again if she felt she needed to move to protect her son.

"If she sells this home, that's it for her. She doesn't get another chance at that 'American Dream,'" he said.

Holland also argued that if the board allows the application to go through, he and his client believe it is a case of discriminatation, as they belive that Ryan Young would not be afforded the same right to a comfortable living situation as others are afforded. But McArthur noted that the applicant has made specific accomodations to their application because of the Youngs, including which he said would cost approximately $250,000.

"Quick Chek has taken care of many of her concerns and more than any other developer would," he said.

Many other arguments were made by Dixon and Holland and disputed  by McArthur throughout the summations, including how many trips will be made at the site, how many times delivery trucks would come to the store and whether evidence from previous testimonies should be included in the record before the board makes their final decision. But in the end, the summations came down to one side believing that the development of the Quick Chek would be positive for the Borough of Butler and the other side believing it would not. Early in the meeting, Board Member Warren Frerichs asked to recuse himself from the remainder of the consideration of the application, as he said the discussion has gone on so long and that circumstances have arisen that may prevent him from being objective any further.

McArthur mentioned Hurricane Irene and said that when all other grocery stores were closed, the Quick Cheks throughout the state remained open.

"This is your neighborhood grocery store when everything else is closed," he said.

Dixon argued that it is simply not a good development for the community.

"This application is not good for Butler. It's not good for the neighbors, it doesn't meet the standards that you set for development in this town," he said.

The Butler Planning Board will have a special meeting to discuss the Quick Chek application further on June 14 and expects to make a decision in June.

What do you think? Should the planning board approve or deny Quick Chek's application? Participate in our poll below and let us know your thoughts in the comments.

Have you signed up for our daily newsletter? With it, you can get the day's top stories in your inbox every morning. Sign up for free here.