[ back ]
Smaller gas station wins council approval
(by Sue Reid - April 05, 2012)
Smaller gas station wins council approval
By SUE REID
A smaller Get-Go gas station won the favor of the majority of Solon City Council Monday, who also voted on the site plan for the Giant Eagle redevelopment and associated zoning variances.
The size of the Get-Go station had been undecided until Monday.
A split vote of the city’s planning commission last month for zoning variances associated with the proposed gas station resulted in a smaller building design by Giant Eagle, which owns Get-Go, as well as the supermarket chain.
The original size of the Get-Go plan was 3,500 square feet, but Giant Eagle representatives said they would be satisfied with a 2,080 square-foot building. The larger store would include submarine sandwiches made on site. With a smaller building, there would not be a food-preparation area, but it would still offer beverages and small snack items.
A 721-square foot accessory building variance before City Council was needed due to a zoning classification adopted by voters in November 2009 that restricts the size of any outbuilding to 3 percent of the size of the anchor building.
Since the expanded Giant Eagle supermarket is planned to be just over 92,000 square feet, the Get-Go would be limited to approximately 2,800 square feet.
As the consensus of council was to choose smaller building at 2,080 square feet, the 721 square foot accessory building area variance needed for the larger building was removed. Voting in favor of the smaller building were Councilmen Robert N. Pelunis, William I. Russo, William D. Mooney, Richard A. Bell, Edward H. Kraus and Councilwoman Nancy E. Meany. Favoring the larger building was Councilwoman Toni M. Richmond.
Mr. Russo said the applicant did not have a solid basis for practical difficulty in requesting the variance. In addition, Mr. Russo said, the city went to the residents for a vote in 2009.
Ms. Richmond said she was concerned with the smaller building looking out of place in context with the surrounding buildings, including DO Summers and the Sprint Store.
City Planning Director Robert S. Frankland said that “it is purely an aesthetics issue” and that the larger building would be more attractive. The elevations are more aesthetically appealing when it comes to the larger building, he said, and “you get a higher quality building” with the larger one, with more glass. A smaller building has more spandrel, or fake, glass, he said.
“I agree,” Ms. Richmond said. “It looks incongruent with its surroundings. Considering this is a project you want to be proud of, a larger building would certainly be more attractive in the area.”
Ms. Meany said she prefers the smaller building. “No offense, but I don’t think any gas station looks good.”
“We are talking about aesthetics of a gas station,” Mr. Pelunis said. In addition, we submitted this to the voters.
“I tend to think that if voters approve something, we should follow what they approve,” Mr. Pelunis said. “I can’t go with aesthetics alone on this.”
Mr. Mooney said he likes the green space with the smaller building. Also, a larger building would not be consistent with other buildings on SOM Center Road (Route 91), he said.
Mr. Bell said he does not see the practical difficulty associated with the variance for the larger building.
“I don’t see a strong, vigorous argument with practical difficultly,” Mr. Bell said. Also, he said, Giant Eagle seems agreeable to the smaller building.
[ back ]
