ULCT training: Use conditional use permits sparingly and write clear standards, presenters say
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
At a Utah League of Cities and Towns Land Use Academy session, speakers urged cities to reserve conditional use permits for exceptional cases, document review standards in code (citing Title 10, Ch. 20), and consider delegating administrative review to staff or planning commissions.
Meg, identified in the session as the senior land use planner, told attendees that conditional use permits (CUPs) are an administrative tool that must be grounded in written standards. She cited state law (Title 10, Chapter 20) requiring jurisdictions that use CUPs to include standards in their zoning code and said that, if an application meets those standards, the permit "shall be approved."
Meg recommended limiting the use of CUPs and, where a use is expected and common, making it a permitted use in the code instead of relying on conditional review. She described common standards cities write for CUP review — transportation and circulation, sewer and water, hours of operation, lighting, trash, and emergency services — and warned that ad‑hoc conditions added by reviewers are inappropriate if the standards were not written into code.
On who reviews CUPs, Meg said cities decide their land use authority: staff, the planning commission, or the council can be designated depending on local size and capacity. She emphasized that CUPs are in the administrative lane and that public hearings are not required by state law for CUPs, though local governments may choose to hold hearings for additional input.
On subdivisions, Meg said recent state changes sped up administrative plat review for single‑family, two‑family and townhome plats and imposed a statutory time clock for the administrative review process. She said the change reduces routine final‑stage review by councils and planning commissions in many communities and requires creation of an "administrative land use authority" to manage final plat approvals. Meg suggested communities update ordinance language and fee resolutions and pointed to ULCT resources and legal support for drafting those changes.
The guidance closed with a practical note: if a jurisdiction routinely wants the public to weigh in beyond the administrative review, consider alternative public‑input formats rather than automatically treating CUPs like legislative zone changes.