Plan Commission (Meets 2nd Tuesday of each month at 5:00 p.m.)
Regular MeetingSuperior, WI · July 20, 2022
Minutes
PLAN COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
SUPERIOR, WISCONSIN
Wednesday, July 20, 2022
The Plan Commission Meeting for the City of Superior was called to order by Mayor Paine at 4:01 p.m.
in the Meeting room 204.
ROLL CALL
Members present: Mayor Jim Paine, Tylor Elm, Lindsey Graskey, Brent Fennessey, Anne Porter,
Garner Moffat, Dennis Dalbec, Dave Strum
Members excused: Brian Finstad
Staff present: Jason Serck, Stephanie Becken, Online: Terry Johnson
Others present: Shelly Nelson, Councilor Ledin, Online: Councilor Van Sickle
There being a quorum present, the meeting was in order.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
MOTION by Commissioner Dalbec, seconded by Elm.
Discussion by Commissioner Porter to change ‘now’ to ‘not’ on page 4 of the minutes. Staff will
make the change. Motion carries with change.
Commissioner Paine noted the room change of 204 is meant to offer a less restrictive area for
discussion, but the commission can and will use the board room for hearings and meetings with larger
public participation.
OLD BUSINESS
1. REFERRAL FROM CITY COUNCIL: Item number 7 from Plan Commission meeting on May
18, 2022. O22-4273, an ordinance introduced by the Department of Planning and Development
to amend the City Code, Chapter 122, Zoning, to allow firearm sales in C2 – Highway
Commercial District.
Commissioner Paine explained that the council requested something different from the Plan
Commission in regards the original ordinance from May. The Plan Commission can take new action
or take no action, but submitting the same ordinance would most likely not pass the council.
Planning, Economic Development, and Port Director Serck explained the research behind the
framework of the special use permit language in the meeting’s memo. Research was done by
checking in with peer cities in Wisconsin to find out how they handled firearm sales and any special
use permits associated with them. He recommended the special use permit route as it would have the
most room to be successful at council. He noted it is unique as the other cities we spoke with had not
taken this route, instead keeping firearm sales to specific zoning districts and not further extending
nor limiting their range. Serck added that currently firearm sales are allowed in C4, M1, and M2.
Commissioner Moffat asked about the enforceability of a special use permit. Serck said they are very
enforceable, especially on the front end, where failing to meet any of the set criteria is grounds for
denial and any infractions after the permit is awarded can be grounds to revoke.
Commissioner Porter reflected on the original ordinance as adding C2 to the existing zoning
allowances and reminded the group they’d had a representative from a firearms retailer expressing
positive response to adding another approved zone. Serck said the special use permit would not
necessarily be for those firearm shops whose main business was firearms—currently written as
secondary or even tertiary in terms of the overall business. Commissioner Paine noted the goal
seemed like it was to allow for business, who by the nature of their business, may occasionally sell
firearms to continue their business without actively adding gun stores to the landscape.
Commissioner Dalbec asked how things like the fish and game show in the community would be
impacted. Commissioner Paine asked about the difference between an event sort of sale or
occasional sales. Commissioner Moffat added it didn’t matter once the permit was given, as long as
the sales were still not the primary source of the income and they kept to only 6 per year. The
number of sales 6 was discussed. Assistant Becken added the 6 came from conversation with the
business that is requesting the change, as they now anticipate firearm sales 3-4 times per year.
MOTION: Commissioner Fennessey asked for the proposed language to strike 6 and supplement
12. Commissioner Graskey seconded and carried.
MOTION: Commissioner Fennessey to approve the proposed special use permit language as
written. Commissioner Dalbec seconded.
Discussion followed with Commissioner Elm asking about UWS gun show allowance as it is in R1B
zoning. Director Serck noted UWS has some unique abilities within the city. Commissioner Graskey
asked what the event was like. Commissioner Moffat added that it sounded like the situation could
simply be out of the city’s control to enforce some policy on campus.
Commissioner Paine asked the commission if they were open to hearing from councilors and upon
approval, Councilor Van Sickle joined the conversation. She shared her thought that adding
proximity regulations to the special use permit would be needed for her approval for any
recommendations allowing firearm sales beyond what they already are. She named schools,
daycares, and places of worship as places that proximity additions to the permit should be
considered. She said proximity and other very specific things have been added to special use permits
like for strip clubs.
Commissioner Paine asked if she meant opening up the special use permit to all zones and then
adding the proximity need. Commissioner Graskey added that with the lease and rental situations
businesses face, that could be especially tricky, as what could be appropriate in one rental cycle,
could be different in the next as businesses move. Councilor Van Sickle noted that is a business’
choice. Director Serck said the strip club ordinances were largely written by strip club owners with
the goal of reducing competition. Commissioner Graskey asked if there is anything preventing ‘pop
up’ firearm sales for businesses like this—where they can access space within approved zones to do
their sales. Commissioner Fennessey shared that was what the current business was doing.
Commissioner Porter asked if the process and change seemed like a lot of turmoil over a request
from a single business due to something that is happening 3-4 times per year. Commissioner
Fennessey said the business was looking at how to have a complete business under one roof instead
of having special days and an additional location for sales.
Commissioner Paine noted that in the very specific case of this one business, that might work well,
but Councilor Van Sickle’s point that the permit could be used by more businesses in different ways,
but still legal ways, could be interpreted and look different. Commissioner Fennessey asked if ‘for
sale’ vs ‘selling’ is language that needs to be looked at, noting that is it the transaction or the
stocking that is being regulated. Commissioner Moffat added the policing of that distinction would
be difficult.
Commissioner Dalbec asked if federal sales status would be impacted through this. Director Serck
said no, as that is a different thing all together and is regulated by the ATF. The city gets contacted
by the ATF agent assigned to our area when private individuals are approved for federal sales status,
and then those individuals are able to sell firearms—not out of their homes as a destination for
business—but still able to make sales.
Commissioner Paine asked how big this problem actually was for the business requesting the
change. Commissioner Fennessey said it at least required them to have a secondary site and the rent
and upkeep required there. Commissioner Graskey noted her connection with the owners and that
these kinds of sales could have financial impact for the business—but that personal and business
choices, like moving to a different zone that does not allow the sales—is a business choice and not
necessarily a planning department issue. While this individual business may fit the nature and spirit
of the designed special use permit that may not always be the case, even if another business fits the
parameters.
Director Serck shared that making changes for 1 specific business, while it has been done well and
successfully in the past, can be problematic. Commissioner Porter asked if there was a way to
approve case-by-case. Director Serck said it was difficult, but maybe not impossible. Commissioner
Paine reflected again that he needed to know if the current zoning was actively stopping business
from happening and if making a change for 1 business would adversely impact the overall landscape
of the area and what impact would it have for the community as a whole. How does this permit help
the community at a whole? How to do case-by-case approval without spot zoning? Director Serck
shared he didn’t have a known mechanism at the moment, but could look into it.
Commissioner Fennessey shared he thought the current business making the request did make a
positive impact on the community and surrounding businesses. Commissioner Paine agreed that it
was absolutely a good thing to see full parking lots and engagement for businesses, but that it was
happening currently without firearm sales. Commissioner Graskey noted that some sensitivity can be
added in some situations with leases, as there can be push factors where businesses need to find their
next locations due to unforeseen circumstances.
Commissioner Fennessey asked if the commission could hold this is committee another month and
maybe invite the business owners to speak on what their model looks like and what kind of fit might
work. Commissioner Moffat shared that even if the special permit fits this one business and is a good
fit, others may use it differently. Commissioner Paine asked if there was a world where a special use
permit would pass the council. Commissioner Paine invited Councilor Ledin to speak.
Councilor Ledin shared he prefers a special use permit, but also would like to see proximity
restrictions added as well to prevent sales close to schools, churches, etc. Commissioner Paine asked
Director Serck to look into proximity more. He reflected a license may be a better way to proceed, as
the number could then be restricted, whereas special use permits cannot be. Commissioner Dalbec
asked why proximity mattered, and noted they had been ineffective with the car title loan places.
Commissioner Paine referenced mass shooting situations. Commissioner Dalbec asked if the
commission was making choices based on national events and stated he didn’t think a proximity
addition was needed.
Commissioner Paine shared that proximity restrictions had the potential to become spot zoning. The
solution, he felt, was somewhere in the commission’s comfort zone. Commissioner Strom asked if
anyone had asked and been denied opening up a firearm-related business in C2. Director Serck
wasn’t aware of any. Commissioner Strom asked if other businesses had been impacted by zoning.
Director Serck said that yes, zoning restrictions most likely had encouraged businesses to seek out
storefronts and areas that allowed their business type. Strom also asked about how advertising is
currently handled by the business seeking the change. Commissioner Graskey shared about a large
sign on Belknap. Assistant Becken added they use small signs in the boulevard and window paint.
Commissioner Strom said the business is finding other ways to advertise, so those restrictions would
not be inherently limiting for the business. Commissioner Paine added with proximity in mind, it
could be built into a license and the amount of licenses could be limited.
Councilor Van Sickle said the proximity was so important because C2 cuts through a neighborhood
and commercial is already so close. This is not the case in all neighborhoods and she asked if adding
firearm sales close to all neighborhoods would be acceptable. Commissioner Paine noted the
highway district in Superior is unique. Whereas most places their highway district is a bit removed
from residential, in Superior’s case, there are a few zones including residential and commercial
squeezed together along the highways.
Commissioner Graskey shared she’d like to invite the business owners to talk about what is actually
happening and why a change is needed and how it would be used. Commissioner Moffat added the
struggle may be in how to make a positive change for one that is a positive change when expanded
further. Commissioner Paine asked the group to keep looking at how the whole community is
benefited and asked about the urgency of the situation and how to narrow the permit enough to keep
it to the spirit of allowing occasional sales. Director Serck offered to visit the business with
Commissioner Graskey to get a bigger look at the urgency question and get feedback for ideas of
meeting the need.
MOTION: Commissioner Elm to hold the topic in committee for further discussion in August.
Second by Dalbec, and carried.
OTHER BUSINESS
Commissioner Moffat shared some planning education resources and addressed the topic of rezoning
and updating the zoning code. The different educational resources he shared are ones he felt would be
good to keep in mind as the process is approached, as there are different styles and schools of thought
behind zoning code. He is working on a grid that makes allowable uses more clear and visual and will
share after edits. Assistant Becken will send the planning education resources to the commission via
email after the meeting.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 5:10
Respectfully Submitted by:
Stephanie Becken
Planning Assistant
Agenda
PLAN COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
SUPERIOR, WISCONSIN
Wednesday, June 15, 2022
The Plan Commission Meeting for the City of Superior was called to order by Mayor Paine at 4:00 p.m.
in the Board Room 201.
ROLL CALL
Members present: Mayor Jim Paine, Tylor Elm, Lindsey Graskey, Brent Fennessey, Brian Finstad,
Anne Porter, Garner Moffat
Members excused: Dave Strum, Dennis Dalbec
Staff present: Jason Serck, Stephanie Becken
Others present: Shelly Nelson, Greg Reibel, grant applicants. Online: Councilor Van Sickle, Councilor
Ludwig, Councilor Herrick
There being a quorum present, the meeting was in order.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
MOTION by Commissioner Fennessey, seconded by Porter, and carried to approve the minutes of
May 18, 2022.
Point of Order: Commissioner Fennessey reviewed agenda and asked that Old Business be taken into
account before New Business.
MOTION by Commissioner Fennessey, seconded by Finstad, and carried to take agenda out of
order and bring Old Business 1 to the top of the agenda.
1. COMMISSIONER FENNESSEY: Motion to reconsider the approval of the items 4-6, “Vacant
to Value: New Construction applications” from Plan Commission meeting on May 18, 2022.
Commissioner Paine referenced the terms of ‘reconsideration’, first outlining that the reconsideration
on the floor was whether the commission wanted to re-open discussion on the previously made vote.
If the vote were to be positive for reopening the vote, discussion would return to the vote of May
18th. Commissioner Fennesey stated the procedure as written in the Vacant to Value: New
Construction was not followed May 18th when proof of financing was not included in the
application. Commissioner Elm asked Planning Director Serck for more background. Serck
explained the process of proof of financing being required before development agreements were
drafted and paperwork was sent to Council for approval. The previous applicants for the Vacant to
Value: New Construction had happened in this order. In talks with local bankers, the approval for the
land is needed before the pre-approval process can begin—putting the need for approval about the
land before the ability to attain financing. Commissioner Paine noted that later in the agenda the
commission would look at updating the policy to reflect actual practice. Commissioner Fennessey
stated the application in May was still incomplete per existing guidelines. Commissioner Paine noted
to follow the policy now would be to treat Green New Deal differently than all of the other
applicants seen so far, and that practice has a binding effect too. Commissioner Porter asked why
this applicant should be treated differently, if all others have passed through the process.
Commissioner Fennessey noted that he noticed the difference this time, and had not previously.
Commissioner Moffit asked if the Plan Commission’s approval was a strong enough assurance about
the properties in attaining financing. Serck said yes, as the banks have already been approving
financing this way. Commissioner Paine said the Plan Commission approval holds weight, because it
halts the property from other interested parties.
Commissioner Paine called for any further discussion and asked for a Roll Call vote on the
original motion to reconsider the Vacant to Value vote from May 18, 2022.
Paine, Graskey, Finstad, Elm, Porter: NO. Moffat, Fennessey: YES. Motion failed 5-2.
NEW BUSINESS
1. Bluff buffer appeal from Gregory Reibel, 418 Marina Drive
Planning, Economic Development, and Port Director Serck explained the Reibel buffer appeal as
presented met and exceeded the requirements for appeal and encouraged approval.
MOTION by Commissioner Fennessey, seconded by Elm and carried to approve the Reibel buffer
appeal.
2. CSM 102 Belknap St
Director Serck explained the property as one all were familiar with as it was on Belknap Street
with the CSM allowing for adjustments in how the existing building and land are used in the
future.
MOTION by Commissioner Fennessey, seconded by Graskey and carried to approve the CSM of
102 Belknap St.
3. Small Business Grant Program Allocation
Commissioner Paine explained the grant applications presented can be taken in any order as far
as discussion, with the first step being to decide how to process and make decisions, as the
amount requested was more than available for the 2nd quarter of 2022. Director Serck made small
amendments to the packet, including a missing page from a bid for Anchor Bar, the income of
Jimmy’s Saloon ($350,000 rather than $10,000). He assured the commissioners that all
applicants before them had met the requirements of the application, including submitting
financial documents and multiple bids where needed. Serck noted the applicants were all present
in the room and available for questions.
Commissioner Paine noted Commissioner Moffat had put together his ideas on how to adjust
totals and if wanted later, Moffat could make a motion to approve those ideas if desired.
Commissioner Elm asked for clarity on budget on if the commission could borrow from the
past/future, as Q1 had left over money and Q3 was budgeted to have $50,000. Commissioner
Paine asserted that spending what was left from Q1 was the current plan, and borrowing from Q3
was not part of the current policy and program, but the Plan Commission had made that
policy/plan and could therefore change it to allow for Q3 borrowing if they wanted.
Commissioner Elm added that for the future, if spending shows any quarter as substantially more
popular than others, then the commission may want to consider a different schedule for
allocations. Commissioner Moffat explained his spreadsheet and totals he’d like to see to fit
within the budget. His recommendations were based to average down the larger projects and
reduce ones that did not seem as essential or had a lower economic impact. Commissioner Paine
asked for discussion to continue, but allowed that when it came time to make motions,
Commissioner Moffat was first on the list. Commissioner Porter asked for the mission statement
to be read. Provide grant-funding support for Superior’s new and existing small businesses who
are investing in the community by improving, beautifying and stabilizing our storefronts and
streetscapes within the city. The City will focus on aesthetic improvements as being a priority for
this program.
Commissioner Fennessey noted all the applicants fit with what the grant has funded in the past,
but in light of staying within budget, some did fit the focus better than others. He provided a
spreadsheet that came in under budget, but reflected preference to fully funding projects that
more fully met the grant parameters, while still funding the others at lower rates.
MOTION by Commissioner Moffat to approve the spreadsheet of recommendations he submitted
to the group. No second. Failed.
Commissioner Graskey said she was in favor of dipping into quarter three to fully fund all the
grant applications, as the projects were most likely seasonally sensitive.
MOTION by Commissioner Fennessey and seconded by Elm to approve the spreadsheet of
recommendation he submitted to the group.
Commissioner Fennessey explained he’d chosen numbers based on projects and reduced
reimbursement for the projects that fit in the ‘upon approval’ section of the grant description.
Commissioner Finstad stated he thought normal wear and tear fit for the same value as new
construction and wanted to see Eddie’s application fully funded. Commissioner Graskey stated
she’d like to see the Tower Plaza application be fully funded. Commissioner Moffat noted the
criteria was becoming 2-track with some commissioners looking at public good and others
looking at economic growth while staying in budget, and reminded the group his proposal did
both. Commissioner Porter asked the options for comparing or amending to come to an
agreement. Commissioner Paine brought up ‘creating a blank’ that would allow for side by side
comparison. Commissioner Fennessey stated his proposal was imperfect and wouldn’t want it
passed as-is, suggested amending and to bump up the totals to spend all the available funds.
Commissioner Paine said the group could get that done today or go into special session.
Commissioner Elm suggested to amend the amounts by percentages of what was left.
MOTION by Commissioner Finstad, seconded by Fennessey and carried to amend the proposed
budget to fully fund Eddie’s and Tower Avenue Plaza.
MOTION by Commissioner Elm, seconded by Porter to amend the amendment to reduce SAHA
and DSC to reach the $190 balance difference. Motion failed.
Commissioner Fennessey suggested to borrow the $190 from the future. Commissioner Graskey
agreed or offered up reducing everyone by $30.
Commissioner Graskey asked if those who aren’t fully funded could become fully funded at the
end of the year if the commission still had unspent money. Director Serck stated that’s now how
the program is currently written. Commissioner Paine said it was something the commission
could revisit at the end of the year. Commissioner Moffat stated after approval, grant recipients
can’t apply again for 3 years per the current policy and also stated he was against borrowing
from Q3 and would like to stay within budget. Commissioner Elm asked about the weight of the
precedent if the commission decided to borrow from the future. Commissioner Paine stated
precedent matters, but it was up to the commission. Commissioner Graskey stated the
commission had set a precedent of supporting businesses and to move forward to amend the
budget to allow for the $190 over.
Commissioner Paine asked if the commission would be open to public feedback. Commissioner
Paine welcomed Keith Kern for 3 minutes. Kern invited the commissioners to stay within budget
by reducing the grant to Jimmy’s Saloon by the $190.
MOTION by Commissioner Finstad, seconded by Elm to amend the proposed allocations budget
to reduce Jimmy’s Saloon by $190 and carries.
Commissioner Paine asked for any further discussion and asked for vote based on the
amendments to the original motion and carries unanimously.
Approved Grant Amounts totaling: $73,586
a. Anchor Bar & Grill 22-04 $4,692 (full)
b. DSC Communications 22-05 $9,750 (partial)
c. Eddie’s 22-06 $14,011 (full)
d. Jimmy’s Saloon 22-07 $12,935 (partial)
e. SAHA 22-08 $5,798 (partial)
f. Superior Tavern 22-09 $11,400 (full)
g. Tower Plaza Development Corporation 22-10 $15,000 (full)
4. Amend policy language for Vacant to Value: New Construction
MOTION by Commissioner Elm, second by Finstad to approve the change in language in the
Vacant to Value: New Construction language.
MOTION by Commissioner Fennessey, seconded by Porter to amend the motion to strike out all
new language and keep the existing language.
Commissioner Fennessey stated the rehab program requires financial information up front and
any real estate agent would require a pre-approval, so it was reasonable for this program to as
well. Commissioner Porter said the requirements for the application already included financial
commitment with the architect plans and drawings. Commissioner Paine noted that banks say
‘no’ if there is not an asset to loan against and the program should not be reduced to only serving
those who can independently finance. Commissioner Fennessey competition is good and
suggested awarding those who are doing their work ahead of time is a good thing. He asked
about what kind of delay happens in the program when financing comes after approval. Director
Serck said the last applications have been 1-2 months and that the commission would not have
seen any of the other applications if the finances hadn’t been requested after approval.
Commissioner Paine asked for a roll call vote on the amendment motion on the floor:
Paine, Graskey, Finstad, Elm, Moffat, Porter: NO. Fennessey: YES. Motion fails 6-1.
Commissioner Paine asked for a vote on the original motion to approve the amended language to
the Vacant to Value: New Construction policy, carried.
OLD BUSINESS
2. REFERRAL FROM CITY COUNCIL: Item number 7 from Plan Commission meeting on May
18, 2022. O22-4273, an ordinance introduced by the Department of Planning and Development
to amend the City Code, Chapter 122, Zoning, to allow firearm sales in C2 – Highway
Commercial District.
Commissioner Paine explained the City Council had asked for the ordinance to be referred back to
the Plan Commission to look at moving back to the original idea of doing a special use permit rather
than an ordinance change. He then asked the commission to consider postponing any discussion until
next month when the City Planning Department will have had time to put together some options for
updated language for a special permit.
MOTION by Commissioner Finstad, seconded by Elm and carried to hold the firearm ordinance
discussion in commission until the July Plan Commission meeting.
OTHER BUSINESS
Commissioner Paine requested the Plan Commission meetings be moved to 204—the Committee
Room—to allow for more discussion based communication. In the case of public hearings or large
groups, the commission would go to the board room. A sign will be posted for future meetings
alerting people to the new location.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 5:33
Respectfully Submitted by:
Stephanie Becken
Planning Assistant
Get email alerts for Superior
A daily email when new agendas and minutes are posted.