Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Containers topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
De Pere discusses allowing modified shipping containers downtown; staff directed to draft ordinance options
Summary
The commission discussed whether to permit shipping containers in mixed‑use or commercial districts, heard a pro‑activation pitch for one downtown site, and directed staff to draft ordinance options and design guidelines rather than adopt rules tonight.
De Pere Plan Commission members on June 22 discussed whether the city should allow shipping containers to be used as structures in selected districts, including a downtown site proposed behind Pasquale's and the future Nicolay Ale Works.
Peter, development services staff, showed examples from other communities and grouped uses into residential (including ADUs), mixed‑use/downtown, commercial/employment and special districts. He reported that other cities most commonly regulate containers as temporary storage, accessory storage or residential units and that few allow them as primary downtown buildings without design controls.
Tom Gavic (1818 Rainbow Ave.), who spoke during the public portion, urged a targeted, design‑forward approach for one alley site. "I think this site is uniquely positioned for something unique," Tom said, arguing a single well‑designed venue container could activate the alley without leading to proliferation. He asked for clear design guidelines to prevent an influx of multiple containers across downtown.
Several commissioners voiced discomfort with unmodified containers in residential areas and said they would be open to allowing containers in mixed‑use or commercial areas if the units are modified, skirted, or blended with masonry and other materials. Staff described building‑permit and inspection requirements, and cautioned commissioners that a code allowing containers must include guardrails (limits on stacking, placement, number, and required screening) to avoid preferential treatment or unintended outcomes.
Rather than take action tonight, the commission directed staff to draft model ordinance language and design principles for review at a subsequent meeting; staff said they will research model ordinances, conditional‑use approaches, and possible limits (separation distance, number limits, or conditional permits) and return with options.
Next steps
Staff will prepare draft ordinance options and design guidelines for commission review and public comment that specify permitted districts, design standards and permit conditions. No regulatory change was adopted at the June 22 meeting.
