Will the UPS Store be sent packing?

Whether the Whitefish UPS Store will be allowed to stay at its new location has yet to be decided.

Whitefish City Council tabled their discussion for a second time March 17 on whether to amend zoning codes to allow private postal and shipping stores in the secondary business district on the U.S. 93 strip.

The UPS Store recently relocated into a new building near the Walgreens on East 13th Street. City regulations don’t allow shipping services in that district. They are only permitted downtown, along Wisconsin Avenue or in the business services district along Highway 40.

The UPS Store is being allowed to operate until the matter is resolved. The store’s business license remains on hold with the city. If no changes are made to the zoning code, the city could pursue a zoning violation against the business for being noncompliant.

At a March 3 meeting, council rejected a proposal to create a new definition of business services and add it as a permitted use in the WB-2. Council directed staff to come back with an alternative option for shipping and packaging services as a “conditional use” in the zone.

Planning staff instead presented council with the option to include shipping and packaging services as a “permitted use” in the WB-2 zone. Permitted uses in the district include grocery stores, hospitals, wholesale and warehousing, and automotive sales, among other businesses that require large display or parking areas.

“Shipping and packaging services has no more impacts to the WB-2 zoning district than a grocery store or a professional office nor does it warrant additional scrutiny through the conditional use permit process,” senior planner Wendy Compton-Ring noted in her report.

Council unanimously voted to table their discussion after hearing from both supporters of the UPS Store and residents concerned about protecting zoning regulations. They directed staff to return with an option for shipping services as a conditional use in the WB-2.

Councilor Frank Sweeney noted that council has to look at the issue with a wide lens. They can’t make zoning decisions based on a single business — in this case the UPS Store.

“I recognize the proprietor involved is someone the community holds in great regard,” he said. “The problems here are generated because of the 64,000 foot view we have to take on zoning. This type of use [the UPS Store] is not inappropriate for this area, but it was not zoned for that.”

Supporters of the UPS Store said the business fits well in its new location.

Bent Peterson, area franchisee for UPS Stores, said the shipping store wouldn’t be appropriate downtown where parking spaces are of a premium.

“If I have a 50 pound box that I remove from an SUV, it’s not workable to walk two blocks,” he said. “I want to see a vibrant downtown, but it just isn’t a good fit for us.”

Attorney Janice Mazur said the UPS Store provides essential services to small business owners.

“If Whitefish wants to attract and keep small businesses, we have to accommodate businesses that support small businesses,” she said. “The WB-2 zone is the perfect location. They have a lot of in and out traffic that’s not well suited for the downtown area.”

Rhonda Fitzgerald countered that the WB-2 has a specific intent for businesses that require large storage and parking areas.

“When lots of other businesses migrated in, that damages the zone,” she said.

Fitzgerald said it was unfortunate the conversation was focused on a specific business and not the broader implications of the zoning text amendment.

“Don’t be down in the weeds talking about this business or that business,” she told council.

A few letters to the city were in support of keeping current zoning regulations intact to prevent “sprawl.”

“Do we want the entrance to Whitefish to look like the north entrance to Kalispell?” wrote Diane Carter.

“Deny this zone change to create a new business services zone, for yet another illegal use, as it will erode the strength and character of the Whitefish downtown core,” wrote Susan Schnee. “Hold the line on continued attempts to allow more uses and a sprawling pattern of development along the Highway 93 South entrance.”

Council will revisit the discussion at the April 7 meeting.