Livonia council denies rezoning request for proposed Sheetz at 8 Mile and Newburgh

Livonia City Council members on Monday denied a request to rezone a commercial parcel at the southeast corner of 8 Mile (M-102) and Newburgh Road to allow a 24-hour Sheetz convenience store and gas fueling operation.

The council voted 5-2 to deny the rezoning after extensive public comment and a lengthy exchange among council members about traffic, neighborhood character, environmental risk and municipal planning goals. Councilwoman Laura Toy made the motion to deny; the motion passed with Toy, Councilmember Donovic, President McCullough, Councilmember Budzinski and Vice President Tashnik voting in favor. Councilmembers Shield and Morgan voted no.

The petition before council sought to rezone the parcel from C-1 (local business) to C-2 (general business) to permit a ~6,139-square-foot convenience/restaurant building with a 12-station, 6-pump fueling canopy on a roughly 1.83-acre developed site. Sheetz representative Alex Sawicki told the council the project would involve roughly $10 million in construction, create 30–35 full-time positions and would include an on-site kitchen, a drive-through ordering point and a “made-to-order” food program.

Why it matters: The site sits across from Greenmead Historical Park and adjacent to golf courses and residential subdivisions. Opponents argued a highway-commercial rezoning and a 24-hour convenience store with fueling would be inconsistent with the city’s Vision 21 planning guidance and Greenmead plan and would harm neighborhood character, create safety and traffic concerns, and present environmental risks because of the site’s soil issues. Supporters cited job creation, tax revenue, redevelopment of a vacant corner and Sheetz’s corporate compliance programs.

Council discussion and procedural steps: Council considered a substitute motion to send the item to committee of the whole for further study. That substitute motion failed on a 4–3 vote (Councilmembers Scheel/Shield, Morgan and Donovic voted to send to committee; Toy, McCullough, Budzinski and Tashnik opposed). After additional public testimony and council comments, Toy offered the denying resolution that ultimately passed 5–2.

What proponents and opponents said: In a presentation to council, Alex Sawicki, representing Sheetz, described the company’s operations, safety practices and community contributions. “We are requesting a rezone from C1 local business to C2 general business for a 6,139 square foot restaurant convenience store and gas station,” Sawicki said while outlining site plans and economic projections. He told council the company performs third-party environmental inspections and operates a central security operations center that monitors stores 24/7.

Opponents — many of whom live within a few blocks of the site — urged council to preserve the area’s residential and recreational character. One resident summarized neighborhood concerns about traffic and safety and asked council to “listen to the people that put you in this position.” Several speakers cited the city’s Vision 21 and the Greenmead plan and urged adherence to those planning documents. Other residents said they welcomed redevelopment but not a 24-hour fueling and convenience operation at this corner.

Council members split along differing emphases. Councilman Scott Morgan repeatedly said he wanted more time to review technical materials and supported referring the petition to committee for additional study. Councilwoman Laura Toy said she shared residents’ concerns about harmony with surrounding uses and moved to deny the rezoning. Vice President Tashnik and Councilmember Budzinski cited environmental and planning concerns in explaining their no-on-rezone votes.

What council did not decide: Council’s action was limited to rezoning; it did not approve any site plan, building permit, or operational detail. Several council members and planning staff noted that site-specific matters such as lighting, stormwater controls and delivery turns are finalized later in plan review if zoning is changed. The denial prevents the petitioner from advancing with the proposed C-2 site design under Livonia zoning.

What’s next: With the denial, the property remains zoned C-1. Petitioners and property owners could revise a future application that fits the current zoning or potentially reapply for rezoning at a later date. Several residents and speakers indicated they would continue to monitor future proposals for the corner.

Ending note: The Sheetz proposal drew one of the largest turnout and most sustained public comment sessions the council has seen in recent months; council members acknowledged the intensity of public engagement when explaining their votes.