Any update on this?

The container has been parked in the street for almost a year. It is an eyesore for people trying to sell their houses but more importantly, it is a dangerous traffic obstruction because it takes up almost half the street. It's being used as a garage rather than a temporary aid.

@ City of Raleigh Rep....any update on this? Please see following from an April 2006 City Council discussion on this issue. The unit has been in the street for longer than 20 days and IS NOT being used as a temporary storage unit.

Item# 05-10-PODS – Regulation – Assistant City Manager Prosser stated the City does not have any specific prohibition against the units and they are treated as a temporary storage unit and have been allowed if they are being used in a short time. He stated Inspections Director Strickland pointed out in his memo dated April 13, 2006 that he has worked with each property owner and has asked them to move their units to the rear yard if the units were going to be on site for more than 20 days (temporary use).

Ms. Taliaferro questioned what happens if a person can’t move the POD in the rear yard. Mr. Prosser stated he has not been aware of this being a problem and he would have to ask Staff. Ms. Taliaferro pointed out sometimes the storage units are located in parking areas and sometimes it is physically impossible to use this type of storage in a backyard.

Mr. Jim Lloyd, General Manager for PODS in the Triangle area, stated he has been here for four years. He stated they place over 10,000 units in the area per year and have had only ½ dozen complaints with about 3000 being placed in Raleigh. He stated the reason the item was brought up is because the container in question is a large steel shipping container which is completely different from the way they operate. He stated he has with him a congenial competitor from PACKRAT and they both work closely with Mr. Strickland and when there is a problem they handle it within twenty four hours. He stated they don’t place the units in the street unless it is absolutely necessary. He stated he does not feel there is an issue. He stated they don’t have a problem with the City of Raleigh issuing some type of guidelines. He pointed out he would not want his neighbor to have a POD or PACKRAT sitting in their driveway for six months. He explained why the units are used.

A representative for PACKRAT stated they are a convenient service and they want to serve the consumer. He stated he has only had two complaints and they were both responded to in the same day and the issue was resolved. He described the scenario is usually a renovation and most of these customers most likely have permits for construction and this may be covered in the permit but he is not sure. He stated in a relocation scenario they are only there for a few days. He stated as a rule of thumb he does not see this as a large issue onsite. He pointed out he is a native of Raleigh and has been in service for three years with PACKRAT and has serviced thousands of units and would like for the Committee to give special consideration to this service.

Mr. Isley stated the twenty day guideline whereas after this time the container is moved to the rear yard should take care of many complaints. He stated he does agree with Ms. Taliaferro there may be a need for exemptions based on the size of the lot, the location, etc. Mr. Isley stated he does not believe a POD should become a permanent fixture or storage shelter. Mr. Isley briefly discussed dimensional provisions as it pertains to the size the units are and how the Code takes this into account.

City Attorney McCormick stated there are dimensional limits for accessory buildings based on the size of the structure. He stated it doesn’t seem the POD operators are causing the problem and if there has only been one complaint about another type of unit, the question is how much time we want to deal with this legislatively.

Mr. Isley stated he would like the Inspections department to take a look at the pending issues and see if there is not another ordinance to deal with this pertaining to structure.

Ms. Taliaferro questioned the natures of the complaints, whether they are from neighbors, home owner associations etc. Mr. Lloyd of PODS stated most of the time the complaint is from a neighbor and most often it is in an apartment complex rather than a single family home and pointed out parking is a significant issue. The group discussed who the various complaints are from briefly with the PACKRAT representative concluding all issues have been resolved in a timely manner and stated he would like to differentiate their service from the shipping containers. He does not mean to slight anyone’s business but there is a difference. He stated they are willing to do whatever it takes to continue to service their customers.

The Committee recommends no change in the City’s current procedure and that this item be reported out with instruction to the Inspections Department to handle complaints as received.

Closed