(1) (a) It is unlawful to erect, construct, reconstruct, or alter any building or structure in violation of any regulation in, or of any provisions of, any zoning resolution, or any amendment thereof, enacted or adopted by the board of county commissioners under the authority of this part 1. Any person, firm, or corporation violating any such regulation, provision, or amendment thereof, or any provision of this part 1 commits a civil infraction. Each day during which such illegal erection, construction, reconstruction, or alteration continues shall be deemed a separate offense.
(b) (I) It is unlawful to use any building, structure, or land in violation of any regulation in, or of any provision of, any zoning resolution, or any amendment thereto, enacted or adopted by any board of county commissioners under the authority of this part 1. Any person, firm, or corporation violating any such regulation, provision, or amendment commits a civil infraction. Each day during which such illegal use of any building, structure, or land continues shall be deemed a separate offense.
(II) Whenever a county zoning official authorized pursuant to section 30-28-114 has personal knowledge of any violation of this paragraph (b), he or she shall give written notice to the violator to correct the violation within ten days after the date of the notice. Should the violator fail to correct the violation within the ten-day period, the zoning official may request that the sheriff of the county issue a summons and complaint to the violator, stating the nature of the violation with sufficient particularity to give notice of the charge to the violator. The summons and complaint shall require that the violator appear in county court at a definite time and place stated therein to answer and defend the charge.
(III) One copy of said summons and complaint shall be served upon the violator by the sheriff of the county in the manner provided by law for the service of a criminal summons. One copy each shall be retained by the sheriff and the county zoning official, and one copy shall be transmitted by the sheriff to the clerk of the county court.
(c) It is the responsibility of the county attorney to enforce the provisions of this subsection (1). In the event that there is no county attorney or in the event that the board of county commissioners deems it appropriate, the board of county commissioners may appoint the district attorney of the judicial district to perform such enforcement duties in lieu of the county attorney.
(2) In case any building or structure is or is proposed to be erected, constructed, reconstructed, altered, or used, or any land is or is proposed to be used, in violation of any regulation or provision of any zoning resolution, or amendment thereto, enacted or adopted by any board of county commissioners under the authority granted by this part 1, the county attorney of the county in which such building, structure, or land is situated, in addition to other remedies provided by law, may institute an injunction, mandamus, abatement, or other appropriate action or proceeding to prevent, enjoin, abate, or remove such unlawful erection, construction, reconstruction, alteration, or use. In the event that there is no county attorney or in the event that the board of county commissioners deems it appropriate, the board of county commissioners may appoint the district attorney of the judicial district to perform such enforcement duties in lieu of the county attorney.
Source: L. 39: p. 308, § 24. CSA: C. 45A, § 24. CRS 53: § 106-2-24. C.R.S. 1963: § 106-2-23. L. 77: Entire section R&RE, p. 1459, § 3, effective June 9. L. 2006: (1)(b)(II) amended, p. 233, § 1, effective July 1. L. 2021: (1)(a) and (1)(b)(I) amended, (SB 21-271), ch. 462, p. 3249, § 509, effective March 1, 2022.
Notes of Decisions
Bd. of Cnty. Com'rs of Pitkin Cnty. v. Pfeifer, 546 P.2d 946 (Colo. 1976).
· cites it 30× “1973, provides the Board with the requisite authority to seek judicial aid in setting aside the completed conveyance; (2) Such authority exists as a matter of public policy; and (3) Section 30-28-124, C.R.S. 1973, grants the Board such authority.”
Johnson v. Dist. Court of Seventeenth Jud., 576 P.2d 167 (Colo. 1978).
· cites it 6× “(R & R) under the provisions of section 30-28-124, C.R.S. 1973. We issued a rule to show cause and now discharge that rule.”
Cnty. of Adams v. Hibbard, 918 P.2d 212 (Colo. 1996).
· cites it 4× “" [3] As recognized by the court of appeals, zoning violations are more properly enforced by the withholding of building permits, criminal prosecution, or an appropriate civil action in district court.”
Sundheim v. Bd. of Cty. Com'rs of Douglas Cty., 904 P.2d 1337 (Colo. Ct. App. 1995).
· cites it 2× “Finally, contrary to plaintiffs’ contention, § 30-28-124, C.R.S. (1986 Repl.Vol. 12A), which sets forth penalties for zoning violations, does not, by its plain terms, preclude investigation of alleged zoning violations by the Board.”
Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners v. Rohrbach, 226 P.3d 1184 (Colo. Ct. App. 2009).
· cites it 2× “1984); see also § 30-28-124(2), C.R.S.2008. A. The 1988 Regulation At trial, the Board introduced copies of the amended zoning regulations it adopted on July 5, 1988.”
Garland v. Bd. of Cty. Com'rs, 660 P.2d 20 (Colo. Ct. App. 1982).
· cites it 5× “One of those remedies is injunctive relief. When considering the Board's request for an injunction and the Garlands' affirmative defenses to that request, unlike the C.”
Hibbard v. Cnty. of Adams, 900 P.2d 1254 (Colo. Ct. App. 1995).
· cites it 5× “§ 30-28-124(1), or by an appropriate civil action in the district court, § 30-28-124(2), C.”
Eichhorn v. Kelley, 111 P.3d 544 (Colo. Ct. App. 2005).
· cites it 2× “2004 (powers and duties of attorney general explicitly include representation of the state in criminal and civil actions); § 30-28-124, C.R.S.2004 (penalties for violation of county planning codes enforced by county attorney, not district attorney); § 30-28-209, C.”
Bd. of Cty. Com'rs v. Echternacht, 572 P.2d 143 (Colo. 1977).
· cites it 3× “Consequently, the appellees brought this action seeking an injunction, pursuant to section 30-28-124, C.R.S.1973, and section XXI, 21.”
Garland v. Cnty. Commissioners (Larimer), 660 P.2d 20 (Colo. Ct. App. 1982).
· cites it 5× “One of those remedies is injunctive relief. When considering the Board’s request for an injunction and the Garlands’ affirmative defenses to that request, unlike the C.”
Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners v. Echternacht, 572 P.2d 143 (Colo. 1977).
· cites it 3× “Consequently, the appellees brought this action seeking an injunction, pursuant to section 30-28-124, C.R.S. 1973, and section XXI, 21.”
Colo. Rev. Stat. § 30-28-124(1): 5 cases
Cnty. of Adams v. Hibbard, 918 P.2d 212 (Colo. 1996).
“" [3] As recognized by the court of appeals, zoning violations are more properly enforced by the withholding of building permits, criminal prosecution, or an appropriate civil action in district court.”
Garland v. Bd. of Cty. Com'rs, 660 P.2d 20 (Colo. Ct. App. 1982).
“One of those remedies is injunctive relief. When considering the Board's request for an injunction and the Garlands' affirmative defenses to that request, unlike the C.”
Hibbard v. Cnty. of Adams, 900 P.2d 1254 (Colo. Ct. App. 1995).
“§ 30-28-124(1), or by an appropriate civil action in the district court, § 30-28-124(2), C.”
Garland v. Cnty. Commissioners (Larimer), 660 P.2d 20 (Colo. Ct. App. 1982).
“One of those remedies is injunctive relief. When considering the Board’s request for an injunction and the Garlands’ affirmative defenses to that request, unlike the C.”
Colo. Rev. Stat. § 30-28-124(2): 5 cases
Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners v. Rohrbach, 226 P.3d 1184 (Colo. Ct. App. 2009).
“1984); see also § 30-28-124(2), C.R.S.2008. A. The 1988 Regulation At trial, the Board introduced copies of the amended zoning regulations it adopted on July 5, 1988.”
Cnty. of Adams v. Hibbard, 918 P.2d 212 (Colo. 1996).
“" [3] As recognized by the court of appeals, zoning violations are more properly enforced by the withholding of building permits, criminal prosecution, or an appropriate civil action in district court.”
Hibbard v. Cnty. of Adams, 900 P.2d 1254 (Colo. Ct. App. 1995).
“§ 30-28-124(1), or by an appropriate civil action in the district court, § 30-28-124(2), C.”
Garland v. Bd. of Cty. Com'rs, 660 P.2d 20 (Colo. Ct. App. 1982).
“One of those remedies is injunctive relief. When considering the Board's request for an injunction and the Garlands' affirmative defenses to that request, unlike the C.”
Garland v. Cnty. Commissioners (Larimer), 660 P.2d 20 (Colo. Ct. App. 1982).
“One of those remedies is injunctive relief. When considering the Board’s request for an injunction and the Garlands’ affirmative defenses to that request, unlike the C.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.