TRPA Advisory Planning Commission recommends Homewood amendments to Governing Board
HOMEWOOD, Calif. – After an over seven-hour meeting, the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency Advisory Planning Commission approved two motions on its table regarding Homewood Mountain Resort’s Master Plan Amendments at their meeting on Wednesday, Dec. 11, but not without a handful of edits.
Homewood submitted the amendments in May 2024, which propose modifying the previously approved master plan project layout, architecture, and programming. The amendments also propose a reduction in unit density, and open up scenic corridors, as well as relocate the previously approved gondola location terminal down the mountain and add a protective gondola car barn mid-mountain.
The APC’s actions at the meeting recommend the master plan amendments to the TRPA Governing Board for approval in January with a few additions and adjustments from what staff presented at the APC meeting.
The resulting motions were a culmination of considerations from public comment and the APC’s discussions.
The question of public access
A heavily discussed topic among the public and commission involved Homewood’s Community Access Plan, which the resort developed after a September meeting that discussed public access issues.
The access plan begins on page 56 of the proposed Master Plan Appendix Homewood Mountain Resort Operations, Public Access, Management, and Emergency Plan, available among the meeting materials.
TRPA staff had requested the resort provide commitments to ensure the resort will not limit recreational opportunities exclusively to members of Homewood’s Homeowners Association, their guests, or lodging customers. The agency’s staff felt the access plan was necessary to ensure the resort’s operations plan remains consistent with the requirements of the Regional Plan, the 2011 approved Master Plan, the project’s Community Enhancement Project Program designation, and 2011 environmental reports.
While many members of the public supported the amendments presented at the meeting, including the access plan, expressing it adequately addressed their concerns for access, other community members said the access plan was vague, not clearly defined, loose, and suspected loopholes. Those in favor of the amendments feared any further delay could compromise Homewood’s future and the community members it employs.
Homewood’s access plan states that snow skiing products and packages will be available for purchase by anyone on a first-come, first-served basis when the skiing operations on the mountain are open. It also includes that mountain access, lifts, and other facilities will be available to anyone during operating hours on a first-come, first-served basis.
However, one topic raised for clarity by the commission was what exactly does “anyone” mean and where do the perceived private access HOA members, their guests, and lodging customers fit in?
“We have structured this as such that anyone includes everyone…,” Ryan Porter with JMA Ventures said for Homewood, and that includes HOA members, their guests, and lodging customers.
Their legal counsel, Chip Wilkins, added, “If you happen to be a homeowner and you buy it first, versus someone who’s not a homeowner, they are not giving access to someone first, so to speak.”
In order to make this clear, the commission added to their motions that staff will include additional language clarifications to the public access plan to broaden the meaning of everybody to include HOA members, owners, and their guests and customers of the lodge, so it’s clear the first-come, first-served basis applies to them.
What is local?
The Homewood Community Access Plan brought with it confusion surrounding the terms it uses.
Within the access plan is a list of ski access discount programs for locals, providing discounted season passes for full-time West Shore Residents, Lake Tahoe Basin first responders, teachers, military, honor roll students, children of primary full-time West Shore Residents, and other discount programs.
These programs introduce terms members of the public and commission argued need to be more clearly defined.
The question of “What is local?” came up more than once.
After discussion, the commission concluded that although every term didn’t need to be defined, key terms, such as local, used in the Community Access Plan need to be defined in a way that provides the clarity and transparency that all parties are trying to seek.
The motions resulted in language directing staff to define key terms.
Keeping Homewood accountable
The third and final parameter added to the commission’s motions requested staff develop a set of enforcement mechanisms.
Monitoring and enforcement were already drafted specifically into the Community Access Plan itself. The monitoring calls for an annual report to the TRPA on or before Sept. 30 of each year. The report must demonstrate the prior season’s compliance with the public access plan and address any changes going into the new season. The report must show how the changes provide equivalent public access and community benefit.
The Community Access plan also lays out that if the TRPA Governing Board finds Homewood in violation of the Master Plan, the resort will not be permitted to open the mountain for skiing until remedied. Violations may also trigger legal action, financial penalties of up to $5,000 per day, impact permits, and other relief measures. Homewood could also have to pay the TRPA’s attorney fees for legal action to enforce the master plan.
There were some community members still requesting enforceable specifics during public comment.
The League to Save Lake Tahoe’s Gavin Figer also requested a standard of enforcement. “If you make a recommendation today, please make sure that it includes direction to enshrine and create accountability for the goals, policies, project description and associated plans, community access, and parking management that are being presented today,” he said.
Commission members expressed the desire to be as protective of public access as they can be and make it as enforceable to the greatest extent practicable, but agreed to let staff determine where that line is.
Considerations that didn’t make the cut
The adjustments defined above weren’t the only considerations discussed or the concerns raised by the public. Other ideas didn’t quite make the cut to be included in a motion.
Commission members contemplated placing price restrictions on Homewood’s daily lift tickets. The access plan lays out that local discounted season passes are structured to be comparable with competing resort season passes, so commission members pondered whether the same should be true for daily lift tickets as well.
Homewood responded with a candid answer. “We had under 300 skiers on average last year,” Porter said. “We cannot compete with the quantity businesses. So if you tell us that we need to restrict and have price controls, we will not survive.”
Wilkins raised doubts about whether the TRPA even has the ability to place price controls on Homewood. “And I would suggest that you don’t for a lot of reasons. Number one, because I think everyone wants this resort to succeed.”
Another related consideration by the commission surrounded requiring an equal number of tickets be made available to the public and an equal amount to HOA members and guests. Wilkins explained this is almost impossible to implement on a daily basis as that may require turning visitors away when they’ve already sold 50% of visitor allotment while waiting for local homeowners to use the other half. “It just doesn’t work,” he said.
More than one community member requested assurance that public access would be provided in perpetuity. Staff addressed the reality of this request. “In perpetuity is a long time,” TRPA’s Special Projects Manager Paul Nielsen said. He explained it can tie the hands of future decision-makers who may be faced with deliberating a request to change what’s previously been approved.
“We are looking at this as Homewood promising to keep the mountain open until they say otherwise,” Nielsen said, “until they request otherwise and the board approves otherwise.”
Chair Ferry alluded to the lengthy process Homewood would have to go through if it decided to go private, including having to again amend the master plan and do additional environmental analysis. “For the lay folks out there, that’s a high bar,” he said. “That’s a lot of work to do, money, process, time, and time is money.”
The public also wanted answers on capacity. According to Nielsen, Homewood didn’t have those answers. “They don’t know because they’re not sure at what level they want to operate the mountain to achieve a level of service that meets their standard, quite frankly.” He explained further that they don’t want to commit to a number because they don’t want too many people on the hill since they’re hoping to offer a high-quality skiing experience.
The APC’s actions move the amendments along to the Governing Board’s meeting scheduled for Jan. 22 for final action, where the board will also consider approving the gondola permit.

Support Local Journalism

Support Local Journalism
Readers around the Lake Tahoe Basin and beyond make the Tahoe Tribune's work possible. Your financial contribution supports our efforts to deliver quality, locally relevant journalism.
Now more than ever, your support is critical to help us keep our community informed about the evolving coronavirus pandemic and the impact it is having locally. Every contribution, however large or small, will make a difference.
Your donation will help us continue to cover COVID-19 and our other vital local news.