In 2013, Park City Premier Properties ("Premier") acquired property in Weber County, along with 94 shares in Co-op Farm Irrigation Company. The irrigation company water had historically been used for agricultural irrigation on the property. Premier then filed a subdivision application with Weber County, which noted the irrigation company shares. Ultimately, Premier determined that each subdivision lot would have its own well that would provide water to be used for culinary purposes in the home as well as for irrigation of a small lawn/garden around the home. Water use from each well was authorized through (1) a water contract with Weber Basin Water Conservancy District ("Weber Basin") for one acre-foot of water and (2) an exchange application approved by the Utah Division of Water Rights. Some lot owners also acquired irrigation company shares, if they requested such shares under their Real Estate Purchase Contract.
Several years later, several lot owners became dissatisfied with the limited amount of irrigation water that they had. For example, a 3-acre lot might have enough well water to irrigate only 0.18 acres of the land. These lot owners sued Premier and asserted that Premier was obligated by Weber County ordinance to install a secondary water system and provide more irrigation water to the subdivision lots. The district court ultimately ruled in favor of the lot owners, and Premier appealed the decision to the Utah Court of Appeals.
The Court focused its decision on the plain language of the relevant Weber County ordinance, which provided as follows: "Where a subdivision is proposed within an existing culinary water district[,]...the planning commission shall, as part of the approval of the subdivision, require the applicant to furnish adequate secondary water and install a secondary water delivery system to the lots in the subdivision sufficient to conform to the public works standards, if such water district or company files or has filed a written statement with the Weber County Planning Division which specifies that the policy of such water district or company is to the effect that its water is not to be used for other than culinary purposes and will not permit culinary water connections unless secondary water is provided by the applicant."
The Court determined that the ordinance was unambiguous in its application to the Premier subdivision. The Court noted that Weber Basin had not adopted a policy that its water could not be used for irrigation purposes. To the contrary, Weber Basin's water contracts, as well as the exchange applications based on the water contracts, specifically allowed for the water to be used for both culinary and irrigation purposes. The lot owners argued that the limited amount of irrigation allowed for each lot was a "de facto policy" that met the requirements of the ordinance. The Court, however, held that the ordinance explicitly required a written policy adopted by the water district, and not an inferred policy. In the end, the Court held that "[b]y it's plain language, the Weber County Code does not require Premier to provide secondary water" to the subdivision lots, thereby reversing the decision of the district court.
To read the full opinion, click here.
Posts
