Vested Rights

NOTE:  This summary is very simplified, and is provided for informational purposes.  Any questions on this topic should be directed to The Office of the Property Rights Ombudsman.

What is Meant by the “Vested Rights Rule”?

The “Vested Rights Rule” means that an applicant for a land use or a development is entitled to approval if the application is complete, and if it complies with all zoning requirements in place at the time of the application.  Put another way, the right to develop “vests” when a complete application that complies with zoning ordinances is submitted.

What Do Vested Rights Mean to an Applicant?

An applicant whose rights have vested is entitled to approval of the application under the zoning ordinances in place at the time the complete application is submitted, even if the ordinances are subsequently changed.  See Utah Code § 10-9a-509(1)(a) and § 17-27a-508(1)(a).

Are There Exceptions to the Vested Rights Rule?

An applicant cannot claim vested rights if the process to change a zoning ordinance that would affect the application has been initiated when the application is submitted, and the ordinance change is approved.

An applicant may not gain vested rights if the local government can show that there is a “compelling, countervailing” public interest that would be jeopardized if the proposed development were carried out.

The Utah Code provides that the validity of an approved application is conditioned upon proceeding with reasonable diligence.  Several jurisdictions have ordinances which cancel land use approvals after a period of time with no development activity.

When is an Application Considered Complete?

An application is complete when it is submitted in a form that complies with the applicable requirements of a local zoning ordinance and all required fees have been paid.  See Utah Code §§ 10-9a-509(1)(f) and 17-27a-508(1)f).

What is Zoning Estoppel?

Zoning estoppel is a rule established by Utah Courts to address situations where it would not be fair to strictly enforce a zoning ordinance, because a property owner relied upon representations made by a local government.  Zoning estoppel is somewhat similar to the vested rights rule, but no development application is submitted.

Zoning estoppel is usually difficult to establish.  To claim a development right under a zoning estoppel theory, a property owner must show that (1) the local government made representations regarding allowable uses on property; (2) the property owner made a substantial change in economic position based on those representations, and (3) it would not be fair for the local government to recant its earlier representation.

How Can the Ombudsman Help?

The Office of the Property Rights Ombudsman can help property owners understand the vested rights rule, and how it would apply to development proposals.  In addition, the Office may issue an Advisory Opinion analyzing a specific situation involving a property owner’s vested rights.

Cases on Vested Rights

Western Land Equities v. City of Logan–Discusses the Vested Rights Rule

Scherbel v. Salt Lake City–No vested rights unless application conforms to zoning ordinance

Click HERE to Access Advisory Opinions on Vested Rights

RETURN to Legal Topics Section