Conditional Uses vs. Supplemental Standards

Our City Commission is questioning the wisdom of converting what had been "Conditional Uses" in our Zoning Code into "Permissible Uses, subject to compliance with Supplemental Standards".
Historically, Conditional Uses were subject to recommendation by the Planning Advisory Board and final determination by the City Commission. This led to many use determinations being made based on the number of folks appearing to oppose the application. Of course, staff recognizes the legal danger of these emotional, political decisions. Uses allowed within a zoning district as Conditional Uses should be appropriate for that district, provided certain requirements are met to minimize adverse impact to adjoining properties. Rather than subject applicants for such uses to multiple public hearings, the new Code was proposed to establish specific standards for each of the former Conditional Uses. Now, an applicant may proceed with the project provided the site plan meets the specific standards for that use, as well as the requirements of the underlying zoning district.
Can anyone help bolster our argument to the Commission that this is a desirable direction for our jurisdiction?