Earlier this month, Vail Resorts’ struggles to add two new lifts at Park City Mountain Resort continued. Back in 2022, Vail Resorts planned to replace three chairlifts at Park City Mountain Resort. Four locals decided to appeal the city planning director’s approval of the lifts due to the belief that the Utah ski resort was consistently above its Comfortable Carrying Capacity (CCC).
An appeal by four locals was granted by the Park City Planning Commission after pointing out that PCMR’s new parking plan was insufficient, and that the new Eagle chairlift proposal was improperly aligned compared to the 1998 development agreement with Park City Municipal, among other crowding concerns.
This month, Utah Third District Court Judge Richard Mrazik upheld the local’s appeal, stating that a permitting authority like the Planning Commission has the right to verify planning metrics such as Comfortable Carrying Capacity. Vail Resorts, which has claimed that its CCC numbers are proprietary, can appeal to a Utah state appellate court, which seems likely.
According to a master development plan produced by Waterville Valley Resort, Comfortable Carrying Capacity is “the optimum number of skiers and riders that can utilize a ski area in a day while providing a pleasant recreational experience and at the same time preserving the quality of the environment.” In this document, Waterville Valley described an accurate depiction of CCC as a “complex issue” due to various factors. What the appellants are aiming for with this case is to determine how Park City determined its comfortable carrying capacity and prove that it has been past this limit.
According to a master development plan from Revelstoke, here’s how CCC is determined:
Last week, Jason Blevins of the Colorado Sun dove into this issue and detailed the potential implications if this ruling stands. He spoke with Angela Moschetta, one of the four locals who helped lead the appeal against Vail Resorts. She described to the Colorado Sun why she’s they’re undergoing this costly legal battle against Vail:
“This is really about ski towns everywhere uniting to raise awareness about capacity. This is about getting resorts to show a bit more respect for their communities. We have to earn that respect and maybe this is how we can send the message that, ‘Hey, you guys have got to be better partners.’”
This legal battle comes at an inflection point for the North American ski industry. Skier visits are at an all-time high at ski resorts, yet many companies in the industry don’t report their visitation numbers at each mountain. Conglomerate passes have made getting to the mountain cheaper and easier for passionate skiers and riders, increasing demand during peak periods. This Utah court decision, if it isn’t overturned in a higher court, could pave the way for local government leaders to request more information regarding traffic and capacity numbers from the ski resort. This could ultimately give a better understanding of the calculations that go into CCC.
“Add in the proliferation of mega passes and … all these things come together and confirm that we absolutely have a capacity problem and what we need to do is hold our resort operators accountable to master development plan agreements. Maybe we need to negotiate new CCCs? Let’s do that and hold operators accountable to daily capacity numbers,” said Angela Moschetta. “This is not about chairlifts and it’s not about some NIMBY assholes. It’s about having all the information we can gather to better manage impacts in mountain towns.”
For more information about this topic, click here to read the Colorado Sun’s full piece, which includes CCC numbers for various Colorado ski resorts.
Image Credits: Park City Mountain Resort, Ian Wood, Revelstoke Mountain Resort
