Bridgeport council closes in on workable junk vehicle ordinance

BRIDGEPORT – If you think the presence of multiple, non-working “junk” vehicles sitting on private property within a city limits is simple to solve, think again. The City of Bridgeport has been wrestling with the conundrum for years and while the city council is closer to an ordinance that fits both residents and council members’ opinions, the issue remains a work in progress.
Council members Phil Lee and Anthony Jenkins have assumed the job of reviewing the existing ordinance and making recommendations to the full council of proposed changes and clarifications.
Currently the Bridgeport Municipal Code (BMC) addresses junk vehicles in Chapter 10.36 under Title 10 Vehicles and Traffic. For a definition of a junk vehicle, reference is made to the Revised Code of Washington (RCW) statutes 46.55.010 and 46.80.010.  In part, 46.55 defines a junk vehicle as one meeting at least three of the following four requirements:
•  Is three years or older;
• Is extensively damaged with damage including but not limited to a broken window or windshield, missing tires, motor or transmission;
• Is apparently inoperable;
• Has an approximate fair market value equal only to the estimated value of the scrap in it.
Council members are trying to strike a balance between the nuisance level to neighbors and city image with the rights of private property owners who have junk vehicles parked on their premises.
Lee proposes that junk vehicles in Bridgeport be covered under the city’s nuisance ordinance rather under vehicles and offered his own definition of a junk rig.
“If it’s not legal on the street, it’s a junk vehicle,” said Lee and suggested allowing only one such vehicle that would be stored out of public view.
“If people want to keep an old rig like that they should put it under protection anyway,” Lee said.
Jenkins opposes setting a limitation and said he wants to find a way to allow owners to legally keep more than one junk vehicle without violating city code.
Council member Sergio Orozco used his own situation as an example of an owner of a vehicle that could fall under the city’s definition of a junk vehicle. Orozco said he is in the process of restoring an old pickup and does not have an enclosed structure to store in it during that renovation.
Jenkins said people move to rural communities like Bridgeport where they have more freedom and independence.
Mayor Janet Conklin took another view and suggested that some relocate to a city like Bridgeport with less regulations, so they can “dump their stuff here.”
Conklin said she also sees the issue from another perspective since she is often in meetings and discussions with individuals and businesses outside Bridgeport.
“We have been working really hard trying to attract new business to Bridgeport but have received complaints about the numbers of junk vehicles here,” Conklin said.
One of the issues revolves around acceptable parking areas such as driveways or graveled areas on private property as opposed to lawns.
“One of the big issues people have is vehicles parked on grass,” Lee said.
Vehicles visible from the street or a neighbor’s property presented another problem with screening options.
Public Works Superintendent Stuart Dezellem advised council members that according to city code, “wood fences can only be 48 inches high.”
Jenkins suggested that areas of a property that are graveled or otherwise converted to code-compliant parking surfaces might offer one solution to multiple junk cars.
Conklin wanted to know what the city’s position would be if a property owner decided to gravel his entire premises and turned it into a parking area?
“What about a car cover?” said Dezellem suggesting that covers might mitigate the eyesore factor.
Dezellem also reminded council members that some residents are very possessive when it comes to their attachment to particular vehicles.
“They are not going to do anything with them and they are not going to sell them,” said Dezellem, “and some people just don’t know how to get rid of them.”
Lee said that a junk car is worth about $300 in scrap metal value.
Jenkins and Lee agreed to continue to work on the core issues of an updated and more comprehensive junk vehicle ordinance and bring their recommendations to a future council meeting. In the meantime, owners of junk cars in Bridgeport may want to revisit their options in advance of any new city ordinance aimed at their contested “treasures.”