Lake County supervisors continue hearing on code violations at Middletown property, set 15‑ and 45‑day deadlines

At a public hearing, the Lake County Board of Supervisors continued an appeal of code‑enforcement notices issued to the owner of 19355 South State Highway 29 in Middletown and gave the owner deadlines to move the case toward a resolution.

Marcus Beltram, manager of the county’s code enforcement division, told the board staff had issued a notice of violation and a notice of nuisance/abatement order after finding unpermitted structures, occupied recreational vehicles, inoperable vehicles and scattered refuse on the site. "We issued a notice of violation and a notice of nuisance in an order to abate," Beltram said, and recommended the board uphold the notice and either require voluntary abatement within 30 days or adopt a compliance plan.

Property owner Michael G. Burns, who identified himself to the board, said he has worked in the county’s scrap business since the 1970s and acknowledged some cleanup had already occurred. "I've been in Lake County in the scrap business since 1972," Burns said, adding he had allowed some people to occupy RVs as an attempt to address homelessness and that he had removed significant material since staff’s initial inspections.

Board members pressed staff and the owner on two central issues: environmental risk from historical use of the site and the land‑use status of the property. One supervisor raised concerns about groundwater in the Hidden Valley area and the site’s history as a county dump, asking whether contaminants could be seeping into soils and wells. Staff warned that if environmental analysis shows unmitigable impacts, a full environmental impact report could be required — a process that can take more than a year and cost in the low hundreds of thousands of dollars.

County staff explained the parcel’s prior use permit had expired, a reapplication was denied, and the land‑use designation was changed during a 2010 area plan update, leaving the site without a legal nonconforming entitlement. Mireya Turner, the Community Development director, and planning staff recommended a staged approach: address immediate health and safety violations, pursue a pre‑application or development meeting to scope studies and costs, and consider a written, enforceable compliance agreement.

Code enforcement officer Christopher Cohen, who inspected the site, said Burns had already removed some structures between inspections and supported the idea of a compliance plan. "I do believe he is capable to do what he says," Cohen said.

After discussion, the board adopted a motion directing the owner to submit a pre‑application within 15 days, directing staff and county counsel to draft a compliance agreement to return to the board within 45 days, and directing immediate attention to health and safety violations (including occupied RVs, sewage and fire risks). The board continued the public hearing to July 14 at 11:00 a.m. The motion carried by a 5‑0 vote.

The board and staff said the compliance agreement could include a financial security mechanism (bond) to ensure abatement if the owner fails to meet the agreement’s terms. County counsel also noted the board could continue the hearing to allow staff to prepare a report and recommendations before making a final determination on the notice of nuisance and abatement order.

Next steps: the owner is to file the pre‑application within 15 days; staff will work with county counsel to prepare a compliance agreement and return to the board in 45 days; immediate health and safety items should be addressed on a faster timeline. The continued hearing is scheduled for July 14 at 11:00 a.m.