Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Development Agreement 3bridges topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Public raises questions about water tank, mailboxes and runoff during hearing on 3 Bridges development agreement
Summary
A public hearing on a proposed development agreement between Woodland Hills and 3 Bridges Development prompted resident questions about a proposed 550,000-gallon water tank, mailbox relocation, stormwater detention and maintenance responsibilities; no commission vote was taken.
The Woodland Hills Planning Commission held a public hearing on a draft development agreement with 3 Bridges Development, which would govern development on a parcel partly inside Woodland Hills and largely in neighboring Salem.
Larry Mylar, present on behalf of 3 Bridges, told the commission the developer’s plans include infrastructure that could benefit Woodland Hills, notably a proposed 550,000-gallon water storage tank with an estimated cost of about $1.5 million. Mylar said 3 Bridges has the funds available and that the developer would pay for construction. He said the tank would be located on or near existing tank infrastructure and that the city would control the tank once built.
Public commenters raised several concerns and questions: where the mailboxes would be relocated, parking and access at the mailboxes as county road changes (including a roundabout) are planned, whether the developer would donate land for expanded mailbox capacity, the exact tank site and whether the agreement should specify its location with latitude/longitude coordinates, and who would hold warranty and maintenance responsibility for the tank and associated access roads.
Residents also pressed for clear, written commitments about stormwater mitigation and liability: commenters asked whether Salem City would sign off on runoff plans so Woodland Hills would not bear future liability if runoff control failed on the developer’s property. 3 Bridges’ representative said the developer is designing detention basins and that the golf-course portion of the project will include capacity to handle canyon flows; he said the developer would add capacity to accept Woodland Hills’ flow and that the design effort is under way. Commissioners and staff noted that Salem is the lead jurisdiction for the larger project and that detailed elements would be worked out in subsequent agreement revisions and in Salem’s public hearing process.
The public hearing was informational; the commission did not vote on the development agreement at this meeting but advised that revisions and additional details would continue to be negotiated between counsel and returned for public consideration.
