Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Development Land Acquisition topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
City, developer and county press to finalize roundabout, salt-shed and access terms for 3 Bridges project
Summary
Developers of the 3 Bridges project and Woodland Hills city leaders discussed a potential package of concessions — including a roundabout access, mailboxes and infrastructure — tied to annexation, water-tank construction and a salt shed; the city asked for a written MOU and protections against de‑annexation.
City leaders and representatives of the 3 Bridges development spent a lengthy item discussing terms and timing for a multi-part agreement connecting a planned roundabout, access to the project, mailboxes, a salt-shed relocation and water infrastructure.
Developer representatives, including James Horsley and Nate Carson, told the council the county’s timetable for roundabout design has compressed the window for changes; county staff indicated they expect to move the roundabout design to its consultant and into design in roughly three to four weeks. City staff and the council said that timeline, together with a county practice that prohibits tie-ins to a newly completed road for up to five years in some cases, created urgency to settle access terms now if the project is to use the roundabout entrance.
City officials said they are willing to consider conveying the roundabout property or otherwise coordinating access but asked for firm commitments from the developer in return. Mayor and council members said any transfer or easement should be tied to assurances the developer will not annex the parcel into Salem or otherwise change the long-term jurisdiction without the city’s consent. The developer said several issues — water, salt-shed relocation and hotel‑revenue sharing that had been discussed earlier — need further detail; both parties agreed to pursue a single, comprehensive memorandum of understanding (MOU) to bundle the items rather than piecemeal concessions.
The council discussed possible interim steps to accommodate the county design schedule: (1) pursue a narrowly focused agreement covering only the roundabout access and mailboxes in the short term while continuing to negotiate the broader MOU, or (2) attempt to complete a comprehensive MOU quickly. City staff proposed a closed session to discuss land-acquisition strategy related to the parcel under the mailboxes.
Developer representatives also described a proposed water tank in the lower portion of their project that would, if constructed, relieve pressure on the Maple Canyon tank; the city emphasized any shared-water arrangement will require infrastructure upgrades and dual metering so water flows can be tracked and billed. The city also requested commitments that the developer will fund needed infrastructure upgrades and that any agreement not result in a loss of the city’s bargaining power on zoning or other long-term issues.
Both sides expressed willingness to continue negotiations on a compressed schedule and to schedule follow-up meetings and an MOU drafting session; the council indicated staff would seek to buy additional time from the county if possible while the parties finalize terms.
