The Homewood Master Plan has Madden getting upgraded to a Gondola 8 and Ellis getting upgraded either to a fixed or detachable chair. https://www.skihomewood.com/wp-content/uploads/Homewood-Mountain-Resort-Ski-Area-Master-Plan-Details-Updated-10-04-20112.pdf. Because of the mechanical issue that arose with Ellis 2019-2020 season, perhaps they will upgrade the chair now? That said, it would require TRPA approval due to the lift being located within the Tahoe Basin drain area. And, a new lift would have to be built and may not be ready until at least the 2021-2022 season. Therefore, a detachable may be out of the question for now, but a used fixed grip lift that utilizes the existing infrastructure (such as towers) or just an overhaul of the existing drive? All speculation on my part.
Homewood conducted some major maintenance on the lift this past summer, so it should be okay for the near future. It will be replaced soon, but they really should put in a detachable lift when it happens. It is longer than Old Homewood and serves as a vital link between north and south.
I was trying to understand Homewood’s lift history, but the resort unfortunately told me they do not “have detailed historical information on our lifts at this time”.
Also in 1982 and according to Yan’s list, Madden (Ridge) got a new return tension terminal. I guess this one is not correct as the return is fixed and it also got new towers, a new drive tension terminal, etc.
Ellis (Canyon) was first installed in 1977 as a triple by Thiokol. It first appears on a 1978 map: https://skimap.org/data/545/2200/1446141777.jpeg. I can’t find a hint that there was a Riblet double before that.
According to both skilifts.org and chairlift.org, Quail (Lake) most likely was a Brandle and not a Yan (installed between 1978 and 1987).
The third but questionable T-Bar was a 1967 Hall. Either this one or the Tiegel T-Bar was named Ski Bowl. One of the two does not show up on any map. Tailings was initially named Madden Creek (https://skimap.org/data/545/2200/1454283870.jpeg).
I hope I did get it all right as it is a bit confusing.
The footings for the Lake Louise lift were completed, but I don’t know if it ever was fully installed or even operated. There are still remains of of the top terminal footing. It is next to the top station of the current detachable quad. Skilift.org lists it as a Yan double.
There is a house near the Homewood resort between quail and madden bases which has a quad chair in front of it, this chair looks like a sli chair so it is possible it is from the old SLI quad chair.
Oakland Tribune, 12 Nov 1972: “Ski Lift International, designer of the new Quad lift, says the Madden Canyon Quad Chair will carry four passengers abreast 1,000 vertical feet in its 4,200-foot length. The firm says it is the largest chairlift structure yet to be designed and built.”
Has Homewood ever given serious consideration to putting a lift (or two) up in the snowcat area? The terrain is great and the higher elevation better holds snow.
Brandle always had contractors to build the lifts. So they were custom built (kind of). Would be interesting to know who the contractor was in this case? Not sure if they are the original chairs, but they do look like other chairs from Switzerland (both the hangers and the bail).
One of those lifts was a retrofit of a Habegger double. Brandle sold out to Habegger, so it wouldn’t be that crazy if Von Rotz were to retrofit a Brandle. The only Von Rotz retrofits (https://www.remontees-mecaniques.net/bdd/liste-6-25-von-rotz-wiedemar.html) were done from 2001-2004 and Quail was removed in 2004. That retrofit was most likely trying to get the lift to the latest standard in its last few years of operation before removal. Then of course, Homewood chose to not even run the newer lift that is pretty much up to standard.
One major thing that confuses me is, why when they replaced the quad they did not keep all of the parts like, drive, return, and chairs. They could have reused them to replace something like Ellis.
I’m sure a one of a kind SLI quad would be a matienence nightmare. Regular SLI towers can’t hold the weight of a quad, which means one of a kind towers. Also, SLI went under a year later, which makes it really hard to find parts.
Are you sure the quad was SLI? All the pictures I’ve found of the Yan quad, which used the previous lift’s towers, show the lift with a more Thiokol looking tower design. SLI towers have the tower head on top of the tower tube, but the towers on the Yan quad are similar to Thiokol and Hall where the tower head is installed on the side of the tower leaving some of the tower tube above the tower head.
Well it was mentioned in the newspaper back then. Maybe it was their first (and only?) quad chair and they had to experiment with a new design for the towers?
Or they got parts from another company? Their parent company in Austria, Wito, built a quad years later using parts/chairs from Doppelmayr.
I did a little research and found that SLI did make towers similar to the ones on The Quad. Shadow Mountain lift at Aspen has similar towers to pic you provided.
It would make sense that The Quad was SLI’s only quad because they went under that very next year. As for the towers, it would seem odd that SLI would go to Thiokol, who had never made a quad before (and never did make one) for quad gauge towers. At that time, Heron and Riblet (maybe Borvig) were the only American manufacturers who had built quads.
Those sheaves could have never have been reused with the sheaves themselves having problems with cracking during use along with the flanges not being made right either. Also, they need some parts to keep Madden alive with it being the only out of base lift that regularly operates.
The Yan Quad did not have Yan towers, which makes me thing that the towers were reused from the previous SLI quad.
I spoke to a former SLI employee the other day. He confirmed that The Quad was SLI’s first and only quad chair. He is trying to find pictures of the lift that I could share here.
it is super fun when google sheets decide to stop working as soon as you start trying to make a 3d model of a chairlift. Liftblog has the best reference images.
Utah Lost Ski Area ProjectOctober 20, 2021 / 7:17 pm
I believe the Brandle double is a 1963 installation listed as “Chamber Lodge” (see lift installation survey on skilifts.org). The length and vertical matches pretty well.
Interesting to read the news that Homewood is transitioning to a semi-private ski area. I wonder how this will turn out. It’s not like this is a brand-new place, I’m pretty sure there will be pushback. With some of the rationale being that day skiers can’t get here because of traffic headed to other resorts, that makes this story even more intriguing. With ski area demand pretty much at an all-time high across the country, I find it strange that a ski area in one of the most popular locales in the nation can’t make a go of it.
I think if they had replaced the 2 lifts mentioned earlier then 2023, they’d have more skiers heading their way. These older lifts with operating issues compared to the high speed lifts at areas around Homewood makes for an easier skier decision. Also was Homewood ever a part of any ski pass option? Freedom, Indy?
I will believe it when I see it, a new Gondola at Homewood in 2023.
They have had big expansion plans for 30 years all shut down by Tahoe environmentalists.
I doubt replacing the antiquated chairs would make much of a difference in gaining skier visits. Homewood’s location at Lake Tahoe is not convenient for skiers to visit unless one is residing nearby. When it snows, SR 89 is closed around Emerald Bay, closing off access from South Lake Tahoe. To get there from Truckee, one can take SR 89, but with heavy traffic it can take over an hour to get there. With so many ski resorts closer to Truckee with less time to travel, one would go to a closer resort. One could take SR 267 from Truckee to Kings Beach, SR 28 from Kings Beach to Tahoe City, and then take SR 89 to Homewood, but the time would still take over an hour. Driving from Reno would take over 90 minutes (on a good day with three different highway options) and one could get to Kirkwood in about the same amount of travel time and have better skiing options.
Going private with local HOA access seems interesting, but are there enough homeowners there in the winter to make it viable? Most of the homes at Tahoe are summer residences, so I am not sure there would be enough homeowner skier visits that would support it. I am sure JMA conducted a market analysis regarding viability, but there does not seem to be enough residences at build-out to create enough income generation to support the operation of the resort.
I agree with Kirk in that I will believe it when I see it.
As a life-long resident of the area, I have skied all but four resorts in the Tahoe area (Sierra-at-Tahoe is too far away and I have to deal with the traffic in South Lake when most other Tahoe resorts are closer; Tahoe Donner is too flat and I believe private; Soda Springs is well over Donner Pass and not worth it with Sugar Bowl next door; and Homewood).
I wish them luck, but if they do go through with the changed I bet it goes dormant in five years. :-(
With the traffic and money issues, I’m actually suprised these guys didn’t try harder with https://www.tahoebleuwave.com/homewood-ski-boat-package , and really lean in on an unique location advantage. I’m sure if they could fill a lot of boats from incline village in particular if they could find an appropriate boat hire and expand on the program, particularly aiming to win over a few diamond peak passholders a few days a seasons
Partnering with nearby resorts would be nice for a quick buck too. Could really make it beneficial for both resorts and offer to send homewood homeowners/guests over to diamond peak/heavenly/sierra for the day and run a boat off each dock for most busy weekends and make some money both ways.
I feel like this goes hand in hand with the issue of Tahoe city trying to make itself a year round vacation destination. All of these places around the lake are much more active in the summer as the bigger ski areas are either going to be closer or offer lodging. All of the houses and hotels around the lake that would supply Homewood with customers are mostly summer destinations and seem to be getting more focused to that. I remember Homewood used to get fairly busy in the past.
Lift Blog 
The Homewood Master Plan has Madden getting upgraded to a Gondola 8 and Ellis getting upgraded either to a fixed or detachable chair. https://www.skihomewood.com/wp-content/uploads/Homewood-Mountain-Resort-Ski-Area-Master-Plan-Details-Updated-10-04-20112.pdf. Because of the mechanical issue that arose with Ellis 2019-2020 season, perhaps they will upgrade the chair now? That said, it would require TRPA approval due to the lift being located within the Tahoe Basin drain area. And, a new lift would have to be built and may not be ready until at least the 2021-2022 season. Therefore, a detachable may be out of the question for now, but a used fixed grip lift that utilizes the existing infrastructure (such as towers) or just an overhaul of the existing drive? All speculation on my part.
LikeLike
Homewood conducted some major maintenance on the lift this past summer, so it should be okay for the near future. It will be replaced soon, but they really should put in a detachable lift when it happens. It is longer than Old Homewood and serves as a vital link between north and south.
LikeLike
I was trying to understand Homewood’s lift history, but the resort unfortunately told me they do not “have detailed historical information on our lifts at this time”.
First of all the two Yan double chairs Madden Ridge II and Lake Louise allegedly built in 1978 just show up once on a map as a proposal (https://skimap.org/data/545/2200/1454283870.jpeg) and might have never been completed (see the note on the bottom here: http://www.skilifts.org/old/install_na1978.htm).
The first chair missing in this list is Madden Ridge (https://skimap.org/data/545/244/1315459456.jpg). According to skilifts.org, that lift was a Thiokol built before 1970.
The Tiegel double built in 1968? (http://www.skilifts.org/old/images/resort_images/ca-homewood/double/double.htm) was named Spring (https://skimap.org/data/545/2200/1454283870.jpeg).
The Quad installed in 1972 was most likely made by SLI not Yan (http://www.skilifts.org/old/install_na1972.htm, http://www.skilifts.org/old/ca-homewood.htm). It was also named Madden Canyon Quad or Homewood Chairlift. According to Yan’s master list, it got a new return tension terminal in 1982 and new return and drive terminals in 1993.
Also in 1982 and according to Yan’s list, Madden (Ridge) got a new return tension terminal. I guess this one is not correct as the return is fixed and it also got new towers, a new drive tension terminal, etc.
Ellis (Canyon) was first installed in 1977 as a triple by Thiokol. It first appears on a 1978 map: https://skimap.org/data/545/2200/1446141777.jpeg. I can’t find a hint that there was a Riblet double before that.
According to both skilifts.org and chairlift.org, Quail (Lake) most likely was a Brandle and not a Yan (installed between 1978 and 1987).
The third but questionable T-Bar was a 1967 Hall. Either this one or the Tiegel T-Bar was named Ski Bowl. One of the two does not show up on any map. Tailings was initially named Madden Creek (https://skimap.org/data/545/2200/1454283870.jpeg).
I hope I did get it all right as it is a bit confusing.
LikeLike
The footings for the Lake Louise lift were completed, but I don’t know if it ever was fully installed or even operated. There are still remains of of the top terminal footing. It is next to the top station of the current detachable quad. Skilift.org lists it as a Yan double.
LikeLike
http://www.skilifts.org/old/images/resort_images/ca-homewood/removed/removed.htm
LikeLike
There is a house near the Homewood resort between quail and madden bases which has a quad chair in front of it, this chair looks like a sli chair so it is possible it is from the old SLI quad chair.
LikeLike
Could you tell us the exact location?
LikeLike
I cannot exactly but it is off to the side of the bike path and is very visible
LikeLike
This property looks like it has chairs in the backyard: https://goo.gl/maps/gh6j6Jj6kjHAAA5U7
LikeLike
LikeLike
Homewood has an actual picture of the original SLI quad on its history page. I will try to attach the pic here.
LikeLike
Here is the link (scroll to the bottom of the webpage to see the original SLI quad chair): https://www.skihomewood.com/homewood-history/
LikeLiked by 1 person
Oakland Tribune, 12 Nov 1972: “Ski Lift International, designer of the new Quad lift, says the Madden Canyon Quad Chair will carry four passengers abreast 1,000 vertical feet in its 4,200-foot length. The firm says it is the largest chairlift structure yet to be designed and built.”
LikeLike
Has Homewood ever given serious consideration to putting a lift (or two) up in the snowcat area? The terrain is great and the higher elevation better holds snow.
LikeLiked by 1 person
they probably would like to but trpa would never let them and money is still an issue.
LikeLike
I was looking on archive.org, and found a few old Homewood lift photos. https://web.archive.org/web/20040803115416/http://www.skihomewood.com/tahoe/SITE/indexlisting.cfm/activity/2657/0/direct
The one that stuck out to me was this photo of the old quail chair. https://web.archive.org/web/20040618220148if_/http://www.skihomewood.com:80/tahoe/graphics/clients/skihomewood/99/photos/quailchairlake1-14lg.JPG
LikeLike
This one here is even better as it also shows the towers:
LikeLike
Very interesting. What are those chairs though? Were they custom built?
LikeLike
Brandle always had contractors to build the lifts. So they were custom built (kind of). Would be interesting to know who the contractor was in this case? Not sure if they are the original chairs, but they do look like other chairs from Switzerland (both the hangers and the bail).
LikeLike
I think the original chairs would be center pole chairs, so I bet these are replacements.
LikeLike
Those chairs greatly resemble the Swiss manufacturer Von Rotz’s chair design.
https://www.remontees-mecaniques.net/bdd/reportage-tsf2-alpboden-haldigrat-von-rotz-wiedemar-1025.html
https://www.remontees-mecaniques.net/bdd/reportage-tsf2-eisfluh-habegger-von-rotz-wiedemar-3517.html
One of those lifts was a retrofit of a Habegger double. Brandle sold out to Habegger, so it wouldn’t be that crazy if Von Rotz were to retrofit a Brandle. The only Von Rotz retrofits (https://www.remontees-mecaniques.net/bdd/liste-6-25-von-rotz-wiedemar.html) were done from 2001-2004 and Quail was removed in 2004. That retrofit was most likely trying to get the lift to the latest standard in its last few years of operation before removal. Then of course, Homewood chose to not even run the newer lift that is pretty much up to standard.
LikeLike
One major thing that confuses me is, why when they replaced the quad they did not keep all of the parts like, drive, return, and chairs. They could have reused them to replace something like Ellis.
LikeLike
I’m sure a one of a kind SLI quad would be a matienence nightmare. Regular SLI towers can’t hold the weight of a quad, which means one of a kind towers. Also, SLI went under a year later, which makes it really hard to find parts.
LikeLike
Are you sure the quad was SLI? All the pictures I’ve found of the Yan quad, which used the previous lift’s towers, show the lift with a more Thiokol looking tower design. SLI towers have the tower head on top of the tower tube, but the towers on the Yan quad are similar to Thiokol and Hall where the tower head is installed on the side of the tower leaving some of the tower tube above the tower head.
LikeLike
Well it was mentioned in the newspaper back then. Maybe it was their first (and only?) quad chair and they had to experiment with a new design for the towers?
Or they got parts from another company? Their parent company in Austria, Wito, built a quad years later using parts/chairs from Doppelmayr.
LikeLike
I did a little research and found that SLI did make towers similar to the ones on The Quad. Shadow Mountain lift at Aspen has similar towers to pic you provided.
LikeLike
It would make sense that The Quad was SLI’s only quad because they went under that very next year. As for the towers, it would seem odd that SLI would go to Thiokol, who had never made a quad before (and never did make one) for quad gauge towers. At that time, Heron and Riblet (maybe Borvig) were the only American manufacturers who had built quads.
LikeLike
Those sheaves could have never have been reused with the sheaves themselves having problems with cracking during use along with the flanges not being made right either. Also, they need some parts to keep Madden alive with it being the only out of base lift that regularly operates.
The Yan Quad did not have Yan towers, which makes me thing that the towers were reused from the previous SLI quad.
LikeLike
I spoke to a former SLI employee the other day. He confirmed that The Quad was SLI’s first and only quad chair. He is trying to find pictures of the lift that I could share here.
LikeLike
Tell Gary I said ‘Hello’. I worked with him at Squaw on the Bailey’s Beach mod.
LikeLike
Looks like Yan Quad Chairs with Yan-3 grip. Can’t make out sheaves from picture, but asume Yan.
LikeLike
That’s because the picture shows the lift after Yan’s modifications. I haven’t found a picture from the 1970s yet.
LikeLike
I found a forum that has photos of remains of the brandle lift is anyone able to show the photos here’s the link http://www.skilifts.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=5938
LikeLike
LikeLike
I have found some brandle lifts in Europe https://www.remontees-mecaniques.net/bdd/recherche.php
LikeLike
Skuleberget, Sweden. That one had similar towers.
LikeLike
Are those Bartholet chairs?
LikeLike
those towers look identical other than the color.
LikeLike
another pic of the tiegel double
LikeLike
it is super fun when google sheets decide to stop working as soon as you start trying to make a 3d model of a chairlift. Liftblog has the best reference images.
LikeLike
I believe the Brandle double is a 1963 installation listed as “Chamber Lodge” (see lift installation survey on skilifts.org). The length and vertical matches pretty well.
LikeLike
Interesting to read the news that Homewood is transitioning to a semi-private ski area. I wonder how this will turn out. It’s not like this is a brand-new place, I’m pretty sure there will be pushback. With some of the rationale being that day skiers can’t get here because of traffic headed to other resorts, that makes this story even more intriguing. With ski area demand pretty much at an all-time high across the country, I find it strange that a ski area in one of the most popular locales in the nation can’t make a go of it.
LikeLiked by 3 people
I think if they had replaced the 2 lifts mentioned earlier then 2023, they’d have more skiers heading their way. These older lifts with operating issues compared to the high speed lifts at areas around Homewood makes for an easier skier decision. Also was Homewood ever a part of any ski pass option? Freedom, Indy?
LikeLiked by 1 person
I will believe it when I see it, a new Gondola at Homewood in 2023.
They have had big expansion plans for 30 years all shut down by Tahoe environmentalists.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I doubt replacing the antiquated chairs would make much of a difference in gaining skier visits. Homewood’s location at Lake Tahoe is not convenient for skiers to visit unless one is residing nearby. When it snows, SR 89 is closed around Emerald Bay, closing off access from South Lake Tahoe. To get there from Truckee, one can take SR 89, but with heavy traffic it can take over an hour to get there. With so many ski resorts closer to Truckee with less time to travel, one would go to a closer resort. One could take SR 267 from Truckee to Kings Beach, SR 28 from Kings Beach to Tahoe City, and then take SR 89 to Homewood, but the time would still take over an hour. Driving from Reno would take over 90 minutes (on a good day with three different highway options) and one could get to Kirkwood in about the same amount of travel time and have better skiing options.
Going private with local HOA access seems interesting, but are there enough homeowners there in the winter to make it viable? Most of the homes at Tahoe are summer residences, so I am not sure there would be enough homeowner skier visits that would support it. I am sure JMA conducted a market analysis regarding viability, but there does not seem to be enough residences at build-out to create enough income generation to support the operation of the resort.
I agree with Kirk in that I will believe it when I see it.
As a life-long resident of the area, I have skied all but four resorts in the Tahoe area (Sierra-at-Tahoe is too far away and I have to deal with the traffic in South Lake when most other Tahoe resorts are closer; Tahoe Donner is too flat and I believe private; Soda Springs is well over Donner Pass and not worth it with Sugar Bowl next door; and Homewood).
I wish them luck, but if they do go through with the changed I bet it goes dormant in five years. :-(
LikeLike
Not the first time someone comes up with that idea. They already tried it twice back in the 1980s.
LikeLike
With the traffic and money issues, I’m actually suprised these guys didn’t try harder with https://www.tahoebleuwave.com/homewood-ski-boat-package , and really lean in on an unique location advantage. I’m sure if they could fill a lot of boats from incline village in particular if they could find an appropriate boat hire and expand on the program, particularly aiming to win over a few diamond peak passholders a few days a seasons
Partnering with nearby resorts would be nice for a quick buck too. Could really make it beneficial for both resorts and offer to send homewood homeowners/guests over to diamond peak/heavenly/sierra for the day and run a boat off each dock for most busy weekends and make some money both ways.
LikeLike
I feel like this goes hand in hand with the issue of Tahoe city trying to make itself a year round vacation destination. All of these places around the lake are much more active in the summer as the bigger ski areas are either going to be closer or offer lodging. All of the houses and hotels around the lake that would supply Homewood with customers are mostly summer destinations and seem to be getting more focused to that. I remember Homewood used to get fairly busy in the past.
LikeLike