Board of Trustees voice disapproval for a proposed Valvoline Instant Oil Change facility in Huntley Crossings Phase I
HUNTLEY — At the Dec. 1 Huntley Village Board meeting, petitioner Core Huntley, LLC came before trustees to get feedback on conceptual plans of a proposal to subdivide Lot 4 of Huntley Crossings Phase I to construct a Valvoline Instant Oil Change facility and a speculative standalone retail building.
The petitioner has recently acquired Lots 4, 6, and 7b of Huntley Crossings Phase I, which are located on Route 47 north and south of Huntley Crossings Drive.
Back in September, Core Huntley had come before the board to review conceptual plans for speculative retail on Lot 7b. Huntley’s Director of Development Services Charlie Nordman told the board that the formal development application for that property is expected to be presented before the Planning Commission on Dec. 12.
As for the conceptual plans submitted at the Dec. 1 meeting, Core Huntley proposed a subdivision of the existing Lot 4 which would result in two individual outlots, 4a and 4b, fronting Route 47.
The proposed newly divided 1.47-acre Lot 4a would be located at the southeast corner of Route 47 and Huntley Crossings Drive, with the separate 1.24-acre Lot 4b located directly south of Lot 4a.
Core Huntley planned to construct a 4,000 square-foot freestanding single-tenant building for a speculative soft goods retail user in Lot 4a followed by constructing a 2,087 square-foot Valvoline Instant Oil Change facility in Lot 4b.
Following Nordman’s presentation of the conceptual plans to the board, trustees were allowed to voice their opinions, most of which were in disapproval of the Valvoline facility.
“I want to thank you for coming up with some ideas because obviously, we’d like to see more of [Route] 47 improved in terms of retail and businesses. I don’t know what you’re considering for the second business, but I’m not happy with the idea of Valvoline coming,” said Trustee Ronda Goldman. “I’m going to tell you now that I will not vote for it. That is not my image for [Route] 47 [in] that area. We’re too close to [I-90]. We have too many oil change [places] already.”
Trustee JR Westberg echoed Goldman’s comments, telling the petitioner that he is not a fan of subdividing Lot 4.
“I know restaurants are struggling, but I don’t envision a Valvoline there. I’m thinking like a family-friendly kind of restaurant that if I pulled into the Hampton Inn, I can walk there and get a meal or whatnot and not really an oil change,” stated Westberg.
Trustees Mary Holzkopf and Curt Kittle agreed with Westberg, also expressing that they are not against a Valvoline facility coming to Huntley, just not in that location.
Mayor Tim Hoeft told the petitioner that while Trustee Harry Leopold wasn’t in attendance at that meeting, he too did not like the idea of a Valvoline in that subdivision.
Having heard the board’s comments on the conceptual plan, Council for Core Huntley, LLC, Mike Purcell, told trustees that their reaction to the Valvoline facility was not the review the petitioner had anticipated.
“I know Valvoline will be extremely disappointed. We represent them in many different communities, but you represent the people of Huntley and we respect your decision,” he told the board.
Purcell’s son, Adam, who also acts as the principal developer for Core Huntley, also voiced his disappointment with the board’s comments.
“This land has sat vacant for a very, very long time…We are taking a huge amount of risk to bring new business to this community and in a very short period of time. So, I know Valvoline may not be the ideal use that you want, but this is who’s here now. This is who can pay the bills and with this comes other development,” Adam told the board. “So, if it’s not Valvoline, I do think that it’s going to come back as a two-lot subdivision with two buildings, and again, we brought you what we think is a really attractive building.”
He added that despite the negative feedback to the Valvoline facility, Core Huntley is looking forward to advancing with the plans they have for Lot 7b, which they hope to start on construction in the spring of next year.
“I appreciate your comments and understand being a developer in business. You’ve got marks that you’ve got to hit to make it work for you, just like the seven of us sitting up here are representing the village and the best interest of what that is,” Hoeft told the petitioners in his final remarks. “My only recommendation would be to find something that compliments the hotel and the surrounding businesses around it and I think we’d be more susceptible to work with you.
Since the plans for the subdivision of Lot 4 was only a conceptual review, the trustees did not have to take any further action.
