Summit County calls for repeal of Utah’s preliminary municipality law

County resolution comes as Lost Creek proposal in Browns Canyon moves forward again at the state level

SUMMIT COUNTY, Utah — Summit County is formally asking Utah lawmakers to repeal a state law that allows qualifying landowners to create preliminary municipalities, arguing the process can conflict with local zoning, long-range planning, and community priorities.

The Summit County Council unanimously adopted Resolution 2026-23 on Oct. 7, calling on the Utah Legislature to repeal changes enacted through Senate Bill 258 in 2024 and end the state’s preliminary municipality program.

Under SB 258, landowners who meet certain requirements can apply to create a preliminary municipality for the purpose of developing land that could eventually incorporate as a town. The law created a process that includes a feasibility study, public hearing, and other state-level requirements.

In its resolution, Summit County points to its ongoing updates of the Snyderville Basin and Eastern Summit County general plans, both of which rely on public participation to guide future land use.

County leaders said future preliminary municipalities could conflict with those plans, existing zoning, and community priorities. The resolution states that local governments are best positioned to balance property rights with development interests while planning for infrastructure, services, and housing.

The county also emphasized that it remains committed to “smart, planned, and affordable development and housing.”

The issue has become increasingly relevant in Summit County as a developer-backed effort to create a preliminary municipality called Lost Creek moves forward in Browns Canyon.

TownLift reported Oct. 7 that the Utah Office of the Lieutenant Governor resumed processing the Lost Creek request in September after initially declining to accept it earlier this year because the state had already reached the annual limit for preliminary municipality feasibility requests.

The state received the Lost Creek feasibility request Jan. 1. In February, the Lieutenant Governor’s Office said two other requests had already been filed statewide, reaching the limit allowed under Utah law.

The office contacted Lost Creek sponsors Sept. 17 to ask whether they still intended to proceed. The sponsors confirmed Sept. 18 that they did, and the state began processing the request the following day, according to information provided to TownLift.

The preliminary municipality filing describes about 490.5 acres and 510 units, including 255 nightly rental units. It lists GRR-Lost Creek LLC and E B R Management LLC as the applicants and property owners and identifies Ivory Development President Christopher P. Gamvroulas as the primary contact and sponsor.

At the same time, a much larger development proposal for the area is moving through Summit County’s land-use process.

Garff Rogers Ranches LLC and Ivory Development are asking the county to create a new Lost Creek Community Zone in Browns Canyon. A January 2026 community plan showed a maximum buildout of 3,002 housing units, while county materials have described a range of 2,285 to 3,002 units on about 407.5 developable acres.

The Browns Canyon property is currently zoned AG-80, which generally allows one unit of density for every 80 acres. Creating the proposed Lost Creek Community Zone would establish a different zoning framework, but would not by itself approve the development. Additional county approvals would still be required.

Planning commissioners have raised questions in previous work sessions about water, traffic, infrastructure, phasing, and whether the proposal could ultimately become a new town.

Summit County’s resolution does not decide the Lost Creek application or stop the state from processing it. Instead, it asks lawmakers to eliminate the preliminary municipality pathway altogether.

The county joins Wasatch County in pushing for repeal.

As TownLift previously reported, the Wasatch County Council adopted its own resolution in September asking the Legislature to terminate the program. Wasatch County officials argued that the law allows large developments to move forward outside the traditional county land-use process and can create questions about infrastructure, housing, oversight and local authority.

That dispute intensified this summer after Steve Waldrip, Gov. Spencer Cox’s senior adviser for housing strategy and innovation, criticized Summit and Wasatch counties during an Aug. 18 Heber City Council meeting and warned that county funding could be at risk over opposition to state housing and development policies.

TownLift reported at the time that no formal suspension of Summit County funding had been confirmed. Wasatch County officials later said they met with representatives from the governor’s office and were told state funding would not be negatively affected.

The broader debate centers on who should have the final say over large developments in unincorporated areas.

Supporters of the preliminary municipality law created the process as another way to facilitate housing and development in Utah. Summit County’s resolution takes the position that those decisions should remain primarily with local governments and the planning processes already in place.

For Summit County, that debate is no longer theoretical. With the Lost Creek preliminary municipality request active again at the state level and a separate development proposal continuing through county review, the question of who controls future growth in Browns Canyon is now playing out on both tracks.