Royal Oak approves conditional rezoning and modified Brownfield plan for 3200 W. 14 Mile amid heavy public opposition
Loading...
Summary
The City Commission approved a conditional rezoning (first reading) and a modified Brownfield reimbursement agreement for a three-parcel redevelopment at 14 Mile and Coolidge to allow a convenience store, car wash and cemetery support uses. Commissioners required traffic upgrades funded by the developer and limited canopy lighting after extensive public comment about safety and local impacts.
Royal Oak’s City Commission on June 9 approved a conditional rezoning (first reading) for 3200 West 14 Mile Road and adopted a modified Brownfield reimbursement plan tied to the same redevelopment after an extended public hearing and debate.
The petitioner is proposing to split a roughly five-acre, formerly industrial site into three parcels: parcel C would remain general industrial for a cemetery maintenance/storage purpose, while parcels A and B would be conditionally rezoned to general business for a convenience store (packaged alcohol permitted), a small dine‑in component (drive‑through), canopy-covered fuel pumps and an automated car wash. The planning staff and the planning commission recommended forwarding the application; after hearing from city engineers and two independent traffic consultants, commissioners voted to advance the rezoning. The motion carried by voice vote and was recorded as passing unanimously at first reading.
Why it mattered: The site has been vacant for years and is contaminated, according to the petitioner’s environmental reports. Redevelopment proponents argued that activating and remediating the property would remove a blighted, fire‑prone structure and bring stormwater detention, lighting, job opportunities and pre‑planned conduit for future electric‑vehicle chargers. Opponents, including many nearby residents, said a 24‑hour convenience store would worsen traffic at the congested 14 Mile/Coolidge intersection, threaten school‑area safety near Upton Elementary, and amount to a taxpayer subsidy for a large out‑of‑state retail operator.
Traffic, signals and costs: City staff and peer reviewers focused on left‑turn stacking and signal timing. The developer committed to pay for required intersection improvements and signal upgrades; city engineering estimated those upgrades could cost in the range of $300,000–$500,000, and staff will retain final control of signal timing and implementation. The city’s peer reviewer and the applicant agreed that, with the proposed reconfiguration and signal work, the overall level of service on the corridor would remain essentially the same as today outside of occasional peak‑hour stacking events.
Lighting, EVs and landscaping: Sheetz representatives told the commission they request brighter canopy lighting for safety at pumps; the company offered a compromise, lowering a proposed maximum from 35 foot‑candles to 25 foot‑candles and agreeing to a lighting plan submitted before second reading that keeps illumination within the property and within ordinance limits at property lines. Sheetz also said it plans to pre‑install conduit for 6–7 EV spaces and that the site will include subsurface stormwater detention and native landscaping, with final plant lists to be reviewed by staff.
Brownfield reimbursement and demolition: The developer sought Brownfield capture to reimburse environmental cleanup and related expenses. Staff and the Brownfield Redevelopment Authority recommended a reduced reimbursement package. After debate the commission approved a modified Brownfield plan that (1) sets a cap on reimbursable eligible costs at $1,200,000, (2) makes building demolition and asbestos abatement eligible under that cap, and (3) applies an 80/20 capture arrangement (developer captures 80% of the eligible tax increment; approximately 20% remains in local taxing jurisdictions up front). The commission recorded agreement that the petitioner must still meet state review and reporting requirements for any state participation in the tax capture.
Public reaction and next steps: Dozens of residents spoke during multiple public comment periods urging denial — citing traffic, school safety, late public notice of agenda materials, and perceived conflicts of interest related to outside consultants. The petitioner and city staff framed the project as remediation of a difficult, contaminated parcel that would otherwise remain vacant. The commission approved the rezoning on first reading and approved the Brownfield modifications; when the item returns for second reading commissioners expect a final lighting plan, finalized cross‑access easements and completed condominium/plat/construction documents and engineering details for the intersection improvements.
What’s next: The conditional rezoning will return for a second reading with the conditional zoning agreement and any required development documents. The Brownfield reimbursements will proceed through the statutory state process if the petitioner seeks state tax capture.
