HomeMy WebLinkAbout20101972.tiff HEARING CERTIFICATION
DOCKET NO. 2010-43.A
RE: HEARING TO SHOW WHETHER CAUSE EXISTS FOR REVOCATION OF USR #1351
FOR A USE SIMILAR TO A JUNKYARD/SALVAGE YARD (POLICE IMPOUND LOT) IN
THE A(AGRICULTURAL) ZONE DISTRICT-JAMES WRENFROW
A public hearing was conducted on September 8, 2010, at 10:00 a.m., with the following
present:
Commissioner Douglas Rademacher, Chair
Commissioner Barbara Kirkmeyer, Pro-Tem - EXCUSED
Commissioner Sean P. Conway
Commissioner William F. Garcia
Commissioner David E. Long - EXCUSED
Also present:
Acting Clerk to the Board, Jennifer VanEgdom
County Attorney, Bruce Barker
Planning Department representative, Tom Parko
Health Department representative, Troy Swain
The following business was transacted:
I hereby certify that pursuant to Probable Cause Resolution #2010-1805, dated August 9, 2010,
a public hearing was conducted on September 1, 2010, to Show whether cause exists for
revocation of Use by Special Review Permit #1351 for a Use Similar to a Junkyard/Salvage
Yard (police impound lot) in the A (Agricultural) Zone District. At said hearing, the Board
deemed it advisable to continue the matter to September 8, 2010, to allow adequate time to
meet publication requirements. On September 8, 2010, Bruce Barker, County Attorney, made
this a matter of record.
Tom Parko, Department of Planning Services, stated the property is located west of County
Road 11, and 1,300 feet south of County Road 6, and property owner James Wrenfrow has a
100 percent interest in the ownership of the property. He clarified Use by Special Review (USR)
Permit #1351 was approved in October, 2001, for this property to be utilized as a police
impound lot. He indicated the violation on this property was initiated when staff from the
Department of Public Health and Environment requested information and assistance regarding
a health violation occurring on the property. He indicated it appears the site is being used as a
commercial junkyard or salvage yard, which is a violation of the Development Standards, and
he confirmed he has attempted to make contact with the property owner; however, he was only
able to leave messages. He explained the Probable Cause hearing was held on August 9,
2010, and Mr. Wrenfrow was notified of the hearing by certified mail; however, he was not
present during the hearing on August 9, 2010. He indicated he again attempted to contact
Mr. Wrenfrow on the phone, and left several messages for him at his place of business;
however, as of today, Mr. Wrenfrow has not returned any telephone calls. He clarified he was
able to make contact with April Wrenfrow, the property owner's wife, and Ms. Wrenfrow
discussed the situation with staff and allowed access to the site for an inspection to take place.
QL NL 2010-1972
a -1O PL1569
SHOW CAUSE HEARING CERTIFICATION -JAMES WRENFROW (USR-1351)
PAGE 2
Mr. Parko clarified he provided a copy of the USR permit to Ms. Wrenfrow during the site visit,
and informed her that the use of the property was approved for a police impound lot; however, it
did not appear that the property was being utilized for that use. Ms. Wrenfrow indicated at that
time that the site was being utilized as an impound lot; however, she has not provided any
documentation from law enforcement authorities to staff to substantiate her claim. He confirmed
it is staff's understanding that the site has not been utilized as an impound lot for a period of
several years, and in fact operates similar to a salvage yard. He clarified Development
Standard #5 of the USR permit clearly indicates the use of the property is solely for an impound
lot, and an amendment to the permit is required to utilize the site as a salvage yard/junkyard.
He further clarified the file does not contain any documentation of a request for an amendment
to this permit, and the is also not in compliance with Development Standards #4 and #6. He
explained the site is not paved, and it appears that dust suppressant chemicals have not been
applied at the site for a long time. He reiterated the property owner has the ability to apply for
an amendment to the permit; however, there has been no attempt to do so, therefore, the
Department recommends revocation of the USR permit. Mr. Parko reviewed his PowerPoint
presentation, and displayed photographs which indicated the site did appear to be utilized as an
impound lot within the year 2003. He confirmed there are vehicles located on the site which
appear to have be located there for a long amount of time, and there are other trucks and trash
located on the property. He indicated the trucks for Delux Towing do not appear to be operable,
and there is a mobile home located on the site, which was supposedly impounded by the
property owner. He explained an auction was held on the site, after the site was ordered to be
cleaned up, and he reviewed the various name changes for the business on the site which he
obtained from the Secretary of State's Office.
In response to Chair Rademacher, Mr. Parko confirmed it does not appear that the business
operated from the site has obtained a good standing with the Secretary of State's Office since
before the year 2009. Further responding to Chair Rademacher, Mr. Parko confirmed he
provided a certified letter with information regarding the Probable Cause hearing, with the
receipt of that letter signed by Mr. Wrenfrow and sent back to staff, and he has left numerous
messages for Mr. Wrenfrow; however, he has not had the chance to ever speak to
Mr. Wrenfrow directly. He further confirmed the Clerk to the Board's Office provided notice of
the Show Cause hearing. Mr. Barker confirmed the file contains evidence that notice was sent
to Mr. Wrenfrow regarding the Show Cause hearing; however, the mail was returned as "not
deliverable." He further confirmed it is his opinion that Mr. Wrenfrow has been provided
adequate notice of the matter.
In response to Commissioner Garcia, Mr. Parko confirmed it appears that all of the trash
associated with the health violation has been removed from the site, as there are not visible
pieces of trash on the site; however, there are some random pieces left over from the previous
auction on the site. Further responding to Commissioner Garcia, Mr. Parko clarified it is his
understanding the auction did occur on the property, and if an auction were to occur on the
property on multiple occasions, the USR permit would be required to amended; however, staff
does not have concerns with the one-time auction. In response to Chair Rademacher,
Mr. Parko confirmed the initial complaint for this property was provided to the Department of
Public Health and Environment, regarding the amount of trash on the property, and this violation
regarding the misuse of the USR permit was initiated when the files were reviewed by staff at
the request of the Department.
2010-1972
PL1569
SHOW CAUSE HEARING CERTIFICATION -JAMES WRENFROW (USR-1351)
PAGE 3
At the request of Chair Rademacher, Troy Swain, Department of Public Health and
Environment, explained the trash on the site was not cleaned up by the property owners within
24 hours, as ordered by the Board during the initial violation hearing, therefore, bids for the
clean-up work were solicited. He confirmed the low bid was selected and the trash was
removed from the site, abating the nuisance condition of the site. He clarified only the
household trash was removed from the site, along with any items mixed in the trash, since the
order of the Board was to abate the nuisance condition, not to completely clean up the entire
property. In response to Commissioner Conway, Mr. Parko explained the USR permit does not
contain a Condition of Approval that a valid business license must be renewed annually;
however, he provided the information to indicate it does appear that the site was appropriately
utilized as an impound lot within the past; however, after the year 2004, it appears the site has
been utilized by a towing company and a trash hauling business registered at the property.
Commissioner Conway concurred the items on the site do appear to be storage items, and not
recently impounded vehicles.
April Wrenfrow confirmed she is the wife of the property owner and she clarified it is her
intention to continue to utilize the property for the use of an impound lot, especially because she
operates a towing business from the site. She clarified Saturn Towing, which was originally
started by Michelle Wrenfrow, was vacated, and together with her husband, she started A Delux
Towing. She confirmed during the process of trying to divorce her husband, the name was
changed to Delux Towing. She acknowledged that the recent economic downturn has been
very difficult for Mr. Wrenfrow, and she confirmed he did begin dumping trash on the property;
however, it was his intention to get all of the trash cleaned up when he did a cleanup of the
entire property. She clarified Mr. Wrenfrow originally thought he was going to lose the property
through the foreclosure process, which prompted the need for the auction on the site, to
generate funds to save the property. She confirmed the only leftover items on the site are a few
impounded cars and an auction trailer which has not yet been picked up by the auction
company. She explained a trash company is not currently operating from the site, and the trash
trucks located on the site were impounded from another trash company. She clarified the site
has recently experience a rash of break-ins, and some of the cars located on the lot have been
stolen during times that no one is on the site. She acknowledged Mr. Wrenfrow is currently
dealing with a lot of problems, which has been hard of him; however, the property does look
much better after it was cleaned.
In response to Chair Rademacher, Ms. Wrenfrow clarified she is not exactly sure if her name is
listed on the title of the property; however, her name is listed on the mortgage documents. She
confirmed the original plan was for Mr. Wrenfrow to surrender the property to her through the
divorce proceedings; however, she has not moved forward with the proceedings because of the
mental issues it has created for Mr. Wrenfrow. Further responding to Chair Rademacher,
Ms. Wrenfrow confirmed she is the owner of A Delux Towing, which she is operating, and she is
also contemplating opening a limousine service business. She indicated she desires to still
utilize the property for the allowed use of an impound lot, and she does not have any current
contracts with law enforcement; however, she does still do private impounds, after contact with
law enforcement. In response to Chair Rademacher, Mr. Barker confirmed Ms. Wrenfrow
cannot be considered as the property owner at this time, as the warranty deed for the property
only lists the name of "James Wrenfrow" and there have been no recent transfers.
2010-1972
PL1569
SHOW CAUSE HEARING CERTIFICATION -JAMES WRENFROW (USR-1351)
PAGE 4
Ms. Wrenfrow indicated she intends to seek transfer of the property to her name when the
divorce proceedings are reinitiated. Commissioner Conway acknowledged the best situation
would be for the property to be transferred to Ms. Wrenfrow's name, since she is the one
operating the business at the site, and he questioned how much time would be necessary for
Ms. Wrenfrow to obtain a court order to take possession of the property. In response, Ms.
Wrenfrow indicated she is not sure how much time it will take for the divorce to be finalized;
however, she expects that it will take at least several months. Responding to Chair
Rademacher, Mr. Parko confirmed the USR permit is transferrable as long as the property is
being utilized for the same purposes.
Responding to Commissioner Garcia, Ms. Wrenfrow clarified she has actually filed for divorce
on five separate occasions; however, she has backed out each time because of the stress it
caused for Mr. Wrenfrow. Commissioner Garcia clarified in most instances, the parties can
move quickly to mediation and a temporary order regarding the division of assets can be made
within a period of 30 days, if both parties agree. He confirmed the Courts may issue a
document which directs who will have possession of the property until the divorce is finalized.
Ms. Wrenfrow indicated she is not sure if she will be required to start from the beginning again,
or if she will be allowed to utilize the information she has previously provided in her attempts at
filling for divorce. Further responding to Commissioner Garcia, Ms. Wrenfrow explained Varra
Company, which owns the property directly behind this property, maintains the access road, and
she is not aware of any changes within the contract. Mr. Parko clarified this property, through
Development Standard #6, is required to provide on-site dust suppression, and is not required
to provide maintenance of the road. He explained, because the property is not paved, the
property owner must apply water or magnesium chloride, in order to control dust on the site.
Ms. Wrenfrow clarified water is applied to the site to help mitigate dust; however, a lot more dust
has been stirred up recently because of the potential foreclosure activity and because
Mr. Wrenfrow has not been at the site on a regular basis. Chair Rademacher acknowledged the
property appears to have a large amount of vegetation, and it may be possible that the
application of dust suppressant is not necessary on a regular basis. In response to
Commissioner Garcia, Ms. Wrenfrow indicated there are a few areas of fencing that need to be
repaired, since the wind has weakened or damaged several areas; however, the fence does
surround the property, as required within the USR permit. Mr. Parko clarified staff is not
concerned with the fence itself; however, the fence is required to contain privacy material, to
make it opaque and help provide screening, as required within Development Standard #4.
Ms. Wrenfrow clarified it has been hard to keep the opaque material within the fence when it is
extremely windy. Responding to Chair Rademacher, Ms. Wrenfrow indicated she lives in fairly
close proximity to this property, and Mr. Wrenfrow is not currently living on the property. She
expressed her concerns regarding recent criminal activity on the property, and she confirmed
the surrounding property owners are not in close enough proximity to help watch out for the
property.
Commissioner Garcia clarified the dust on the site does not appear to be a major issue, and he
is confident Ms. Wrenfrow should be able to work out a plan with Mr. Parko. He indicated it
appears the screening of the site is lacking, which is most likely due to the fact that the property
is not experiencing continued maintenance at this time. He questioned what length of time
would be necessary for Ms. Wrenfrow to address the criminal activity on the site, along with
repairing the screening, if she were to able to formalize her ability to occupy the premises and
2010-1972
PL1569
SHOW CAUSE HEARING CERTIFICATION -JAMES WRENFROW (USR-1351)
PAGE 5
continue to utilize the property for its intended purpose. In response, Ms. Wrenfrow confirmed
she is hopeful that all of the details will be worked out within the divorce decree, and she will try
her hardest to bring the property into compliance within the time frame mandated by the Board.
Chair Rademacher clarified it is not fair for Ms. Wrenfrow to create a specific timeline for
compliance when she is the not the property owner of record. He further clarified these are not
her issues to resolve until she becomes responsible for the property. Commissioner Garcia
clarified his question relates to when Ms. Wrenfrow thinks she will be able to gain control of the
property from Mr. Wrenfrow. Ms. Wrenfrow indicated she should be able to assume ownership
of the property within six months.
Commissioner Conway indicated he understands the divorce process is time-consuming, and
he questioned whether it would be possible for Mr. Wrenfrow to agree to sign a quit-claim deed,
transferring the property to Ms. Wrenfrow so that she could begin the process of resolving the
outstanding issues on the site. In response, Ms. Wrenfrow confirmed she is willing to talk to Mr.
Wrenfrow and make this request, and she believes he might be willing to agree. Commissioner
Conway reiterated there are remedy options available for this property; however, until Ms.
Wrenfrow is the owner of the property, the issues cannot be resolved by her. He further
indicated the Board cannot agree to remedies being made at the property by another interested
party without the owner of the property being present. In response to Commissioner Conway,
Ms. Wrenfrow confirmed she will be able to speak with Mr. Wrenfrow within the next ten days, at
which time she will discuss the possibility of transferring the property into her name.
Mr. Parko emphasized that the property must continue to be utilized as a police impound lot to
be in compliance with the USR permit. Ms. Wrenfrow indicated she understands, and she will
work on pursuing contracts and provide the necessary documentation to substantiate the use of
the site. Mr. Parko clarified any other type of business operating from the site will require an
amendment to the USR permit, and the impound use could eventually be removed from this
site; however, doing so will also require an amendment to the USR permit. In response to Chair
Rademacher, Mr. Barker confirmed Ms. Wrenfrow has provided testimony that private property
owners have been contacting her to remove vehicles off of their property, and the use listed on
this USR permit could include a variety of clients, including law enforcement and private
property owners. Mr. Barker suggested the Board issue a continuance of the matter, in order to
allow adequate time for clarification regarding the ownership of the property.
Chair Rademacher indicated he is willing to grant a continuance of the matter, as suggested by
Mr. Barker. Mr. Barker clarified a substantial amount of time will be necessary for the
continuance request, as there are a lot of issues which still need to be worked out. He
confirmed the trash situation has been resolved; however, the payment for the clean-up of the
property is still an outstanding separate issue. He indicated this zoning violation is a separate
matter, and the Board is only allowed to consider whether the property is being utilized for its
intended purpose through this action; however, it is acceptable for the Board to allow a
continuance for the purpose of allowing additional time to properly sort out the ownership of the
property. In response to Commissioner Conway, Commissioner Garcia confirmed
Ms. Wrenfrow should be able to obtain authorization to receive the property fairly quickly, if
Mr. Wrenfrow is agreeable, and the time frame for the dissolution of the marriage will depend
upon whether the previous attempt was officially closed. He indicated the parties should be
able to at least move forward to a temporary order within approximately 60 days, and if they are
2010-1972
PL1569
SHOW CAUSE HEARING CERTIFICATION -JAMES WRENFROW (USR-1351)
PAGE 6
able to complete the process as co-petitioners, an amicable agreement could be drawn up
within a matter of days. He acknowledged a two to three-month continuance of the matter
should be adequate for Ms. Wrenfrow to take the necessary steps to move forward with this
property. Commissioner Garcia advised Ms. Wrenfrow that it is within her best interests to
discuss the details of the USR permit with Planning staff, so that she is aware of the necessary
requirements issued to the original applicant. He indicated Ms. Wrenfrow needs to be made
aware that if she receives the property, she will be responsible for the costs associated with the
clean-up of the property, as well as fixing the fencing/screening issue, and controlling the
criminal activity on the site. He confirmed the property needs to be maintained for the allowed
use, which is an impound lot; however, Ms. Wrenfrow does have the option of applying for an
amendment to the permit in the future. Commissioner Garcia referenced a similar situation
which occurred with a tire landfill site, indicating there were future owners interested in
purchasing the property and not wishing for the USR permit to be vacated. He confirmed the
Board did allow additional time for issues to be resolved in that case, as it was determined that
the goal was for the property to be able to be utilized for its highest and best use. He
acknowledged he understands Ms. Wrenfrow's need to preserve the business, including the
generation of income, and he is willing to approve a continuance of the matter. Chair
Rademacher concurred and indicated Ms. Wrenfrow is facing many issues, and he would like
for her to have adequate time to succeed.
Commissioner Conway clarified the violations on this property were initially due to the illegal
trash dumping occurring on the property, and he would like Ms. Wrenfrow to understand that
this was a big issue for the Board. He confirmed the Department will not tolerate any more
dumping of trash on the site, and the Board is willing to work with Ms. Wrenfrow regarding the
zoning violation on the site. He expressed his appreciation to Ms. Wrenfrow for being present
today and providing clarification, and he sympathizes with her circumstances. He indicated he
concurs with the statements provided by Commissioner Garcia, and he hopes that
Ms. Wrenfrow will use the continuance time as an opportunity to get the issues on the property
resolved, as he prefers for the business on the site to remain successful; however,
Ms. Wrenfrow must be willing to follow the rules.
Commissioner Garcia moved to continue the matter to December 8, 2010, at 10:00 a.m., for the
purposes of allowing adequate time for clarification regarding ownership of the property.
Mr. Barker clarified any action regarding the illegal dumping of trash on the property is dealt with
in a separate manner, and the Board and Ms. Wrenfrow both indicated concurrence. The
motion was seconded by Commissioner Conway, and it carried unanimously. There being no
further discussion, the hearing was completed at 10:55 a.m.
2010-1972
PL1569
SHOW CAUSE HEARING CERTIFICATION -JAMES WRENFROW (USR-1351)
PAGE 7
This Certification was approved on the 13th day of September, 2010.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
O
La ELD COUNTY COLORADO
ATTEST • Chair
°�_
- r glas 'ademach-r r,, Ch
Weld County Clerk to the Bo' '.
t dirt CUSED
1 I
arbara Kirkmeyer, Pro-Tem
BY: { .,L . , �
Depu Jerk t he Board
Sean P. Co
William . arcia
EXCUSED
David E. Long
2010-1972
PL1569
Hello