Opinion ID: 2057001
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 16

Heading: Alleged Zoning Violations

Text: According to the Douglas County zoning regulations in effect at the time of the Brazers' permit application, Private and Commercial kennel and facilities for the raising, breeding and boarding of dogs and other small animals are permitted in an AF-1 zone provided that all buildings and facilities be at least 100 feet from the property line and 300 feet from any AF-2... District. Ekberg testified that when reviewing an application for a building permit, he will not normally issue a building permit to someone who has an existing zoning violation on their property. He also testified that at the time he issued the building permit to the Brazers, he was not aware that they had an existing kennel and grooming operation in their home within 300 yards of an AF-2 zone. He explained that had he been aware of a violation at the time, he would have issued the building permit only if the existing violation was eliminated. A plat prepared by a surveyor at the request of the Brazers suggests their grooming and boarding operation, as it existed at the time they applied for the building permit, was located within 200 feet of the southern Brazer-Conley property line. This evidence presents a genuine issue of material fact bearing upon whether the building permit was lawfully issued and extended. Viewed in a light most favorable to the Conleys, there is evidence from which an inference could be drawn that the Brazers were in violation of zoning regulations at the time of the issuance of the building permit. In summary, we conclude that the district court erred in granting a summary judgment of dismissal because there are genuine issues of material fact which preclude the extreme remedy of summary judgment.