Safeway expansion hamstrung

Council to revisit project on June 18

A $12 million renovation of the Safeway grocery store was left in limbo on Monday as a split Whitefish City Council attempted to come to grips with the city's new box-store law.

The project will be back on the council agenda on June 18 for further consideration.

At issue is a conditional-use permit Safeway needs to expand the store into the former Ben Franklin/True Value Hardware space on the north side of the grocery store. It's the first project subjected to the city's ordinance requiring a permit for stores bigger than 15,000 square feet.

Whitefish's architectural review committee has met with Safeway officials three times, and although the committee hasn't issued final approval for the project, it recommended the council proceed with the conditional-use permit and return the project to the committee for final design approval.

"We've had a pretty good go at it," committee chairman Chad Grover told the council. "So well that we thought we would send it to the council for approval."

Committee member Scott Elden said "the big picture here is to approve them through the process.

"We want them in that location," he said, adding that the committee is still working through design options.

HALF OF the council members wanted more control over the project.

"I'm personally uncomfortable with us not seeing the final design," council member Nancy Woodruff said. "I feel the council should get the last word."

Council member Nick Palmer agreed, saying that while the architectural renderings looked "pretty," they didn't reveal details of elements such as the loading lock. He wondered if Safeway could make the building smaller.

Grover told the council that projects normally are approved by the council and then designs are fine-tuned by the architectural committee. Whitefish Senior Planner Wendy Compton-Ring reiterated Grover's comment, noting it is unusual to already see "this level of design" from Safeway.

Safeway provided new drawings to the council that showed a building reminiscent of Glacier Park lodges, with awnings and windows on the store's back side to break up the expanse of the west wall.

Palmer called the westside accoutrements "theatrical and fake." Deputy Mayor Cris Coughlin later said she found the architecture somewhat "prisonesque," which prompted a frustrated Safeway official to reply, "Oh, come on."

Woodruff, Palmer and council member John Muhlfeld stuck by their desire to continue the public hearing, while council members Shirley Jacobson, Velvet Phillips-Sullivan and Coughlin wanted to vote on the project.

"The architectural review committee is perfectly capable of making a final decision," Jacobson said.

A vote to continue the public hearing failed on a 3-3 vote; then a vote to approve the project failed on a 3-3 vote. Mayor Andy Feury, who casts the tie-breaking vote, is in China on business for an extended time.

Since the second tie vote didn't kill the project, the council will vote again on June 18.

SAFEWAY REAL ESTATE manager Jeff Parker said the corporation wants to rebuild the store using the corporation's "elite format," an upscale design reflected in its Boulder, Colo. store. Contrary to rumors, Safeway is not planning a Starbucks coffee shop inside the facility.

The new store would have service meat and seafood cases, a vastly expanded organic food section, expanded floral shop and pharmacy, scratch bakery and a new deli. About 50 to 60 more employees would be added to the current work force.

The store would not close during the reconstruction.

"We think the design brings the city's vision to fruition," Parker said.

The footprint, at 52,578 square feet, is slightly smaller than Safeway's 55,000-square-foot prototype store.

If Safeway can't begin building by August and misses this year's construction season, the corporation may divert the $12 million to another store elsewhere.

"Then I basically get in line to fight for the money again," Parker said.

It's possible Safeway would relocate in Kalispell if it can't get approval for the Whitefish store, real-estate agent Turner Askew said after the meeting. He represented Safeway in the purchase of adjoining land it needed for the expansion.

"There's a strong possibility they'll pull out of Whitefish, but they don't want to do that," Askew said.

Askew's wife, Nan, testified at the hearing, pointing out that architects studied other buildings in Whitefish and retained the character of the town's prominent buildings.

"I think the Safeway proposal has picked up the character of Whitefish," she said.

Safeway officials met Tuesday morning with the architectural review committee, but the two sides remain at an impasse over some design details. Committee members want the southern roofline redesigned and lowered, but the corporation plans a scratch bakery in that area, making it impractical to alter the roof, Askew said.

"They admit there's no box store in this valley that looks as good" as the Safeway design, he added.

THE LOADING dock is one of the sticking points for the council. Safeway proposes putting the dock on the north side to take advantage of lower elevation and a traffic light at 13th Street. The council, citing traffic-flow concerns, maintained the dock should be on the south side.

Although Safeway's landscaping plan meets city criteria, some council members said it was too little.

A SNOW bus stop at the corner of 13th Street and Baker Avenue behind Safeway, and two planned access roads on 13th, were other traffic concerns for some council members.

Public sentiment tipped in favor of Safeway.

"I commend Safeway for trying to jump through all these hoops," Patrick Sullivan said. "It would be a shame to lose them to Box Store Central in Kalispell."

Jill Evans said Safeway has been an integral part of the Whitefish business community since 1940.

Although council member Woodruff voted to continue the hearing, she said her research on Safeway showed the corporation is progressive and innovative.

"I feel confident we can work with them," Woodruff said. "We're all going to live with this [decision] for a long time."

Features editor Lynnette Hintze may be reached at 758-4421 or by e-mail at lhintze@dailyinterlake.com