It took Park City Mountain three years — much of it spent in a courtroom — to get the Park City Planning Commission’s permission to modify two chairlifts out of the ski area’s Mountain Village base.

So what’s a couple more months?

This week, a group of Park City residents filed an appeal of the commission’s unanimous May 27 decision to allow upgrades to the Silverlode Express and Eagle lifts. The appeal is expected to pause any work on the lifts for at least a month.

The timeline is shorter than it may have been in previous years due to a new land-use appeals process the Park City Council adopted last year.

The new process goes through a single “administrative hearing officer.” Though it is mostly untested, it is expected to be more streamlined than the previous three-person appeal panel. Under the new ordinance, the officer is required to schedule a hearing within 45 days.

In a statement, Park City Mayor Ryan Dickey said timeliness is of the essence.

“I stand behind the thorough and diligent review of the lift upgrade application by both our planning commission and professional planning staff, and support the commission’s unanimous decision to approve,” Dickey said. “These upgrades are important investments in Park City’s future, and I am hopeful for a timely resolution that upholds the commission’s decision and allows these improvements to move forward.”

Frode Jensen was one of the few people who spoke in opposition to the permits at planning commission meetings. Jensen, who is one of the appellants, said in an email to The Salt Lake Tribune that they are not looking to revoke the permits.

“We’ll be appealing to the hearing officer to simply send the matter back to the Planning Commission to do the rigorous analysis the law requires and the community of skiers and Park City residents deserves,” Jensen wrote.

This group appealing — all of whom are Park City Mountain skiers — is not the same as the group of locals who pushed back against granting the lift permits in 2022, when the Vail Resorts-owned ski area first requested them. The argument, however, is similar.

This group asserts that the commission overlooked a provision in the joint development agreement between the resort and the city. They say that agreement requires that the uphill capacity of a lift be in balance with the downhill capacity of the connected runs to avoid overcrowding.

They also claim that the commission did not fulfill its duty to ensure the resort will negate any “detrimental impacts” from the changes. The commissioners couldn’t do that, the appellants say, because without knowing how the resort determines its Comfortable Carrying Capacity — or the number of skiers and snowboarders it can handle on its 10th-busiest day — no one can know what those impacts might be.

“Vail Resorts refused to supply the capacity data needed to verify,” Jensen wrote, “and the Planning Commission didn’t demand it.”

During the first attempt, a district court and the state court of appeals both upheld the commission’s right to request capacity information.

When Park City Mountain reapplied for the permits through a different process this spring, commissioner John Frontero requested the resort disclose its capacity calculations. However, a resort lawyer maintained that the new process does not require the disclosure of capacity information. City planners agreed with that assessment. The commissioners voted 6-0 to approve the request.

“The Park City Planning Commission’s unanimous approval of the Eagle and Silverlode lift upgrades followed a rigorous and transparent public process that clearly demonstrated that these projects comply with all permit requirements,” Deirdra Walsh, Park City Mountain’s chief operating officer, said in a statement.

“We believe that the City’s process for land use appeals will confirm that the Planning Commission reached the correct decision,” she added. “We remain committed to the Park City community and to continuing to invest in improving the experience for all Park City Mountain guests.”

Jensen said the appellants are opposed to taking shortcuts in the legal process but are not opposed to the lift upgrades themselves.

“Absolutely not,” he said. “Not one of us opposes upgrading infrastructure or resort improvements.”

If the appeal is upheld, the Planning Commission may have to consider the lift permits a third time. If it is denied, the appellants could take the matter to court.

Note to readers • This story was updated to include a comment from Park City Mayor Ryan Dickey.