Council hears 3 Bridges development proposal; water storage swap, roundabout access and drainage dominate discussion

Woodland Hills city staff and residents spent the largest portion of the meeting reviewing a proposed development agreement with 3 Bridges developers that would affect water storage, traffic access at the county roundabout, drainage responsibilities and several civic amenities.

Public works director Ted explained the central water proposal: Woodland Hills currently holds a 40 percent interest in a Maple Canyon well and tank—approximately 300,000 gallons of storage—and the city shares pumping capacity from that well. Under the draft agreement, 3 Bridges would build a new, larger tank on Woodland Hills property (proposed combined capacity referenced at about 550,000 gallons), replace the city’s existing 300,000 gallons of offsite storage with onsite storage, and the developer would pay to construct that new tank and associated infrastructure. Ted said the swap would not transfer the city’s water rights or its share of well pumping capacity; the city would retain about 40 percent of the water pumped from the Maple Canyon well and the ability to use 500 gallons per minute via its booster station.

Ted and other staff told the council the transaction would likely reduce long‑term city costs: by replacing the offsite storage with newer on‑site storage, the city could avoid roughly $500,000 in future costs to rebuild storage and reduce pumping expenses. The developer would also take on drainage improvements tied to the new access, which staff estimated could otherwise cost the city on the order of $1 million to address.

Access and traffic: 3 Bridges is seeking access across Woodland Hills property to the county roundabout. Staff said county engineers are redesigning the roundabout and asked for early commitments because the roundabout’s geometry depends on whether the developer’s access will be included. Two access options were discussed: a roundabout tie‑in (preferred by staff and traffic consultants for overall flow) or a signalized intersection on Woodland Hills Drive (which staff said would worsen traffic flow compared with a roundabout). Staff and consultants indicated that, even if roundabout access is provided, only a portion of 3 Bridges’ traffic would use that route; initial phases of the development are expected to route most traffic to 1280/Highway 6. Council and residents requested additional traffic studies; staff said the county and Salem are looking for the same materials and that final traffic modeling is still being collected.

Other agreement elements discussed: 3 Bridges has proposed to move and double the mailbox cluster (the developer would deed a small sliver of land to the city for that purpose), to provide parking at the mailbox site, to covenant against annexation into Salem (developer would not de‑annex Woodland Hills into Salem), and to include agreed zoning changes in the development plan. The developer offered to address stormwater that currently flows into Salem, which staff said relieves a city liability risk.

Residents’ concerns: Speakers raised questions about maintenance vehicles, service vehicle routing, the long‑term benefits to Woodland Hills versus the developer, bonding or performance security in the agreement, and the timing of traffic signals as the larger county corridor is planned. Diana Sackett and other residents asked whether the city would be giving up too much and whether commitments such as mailbox relocation and drainage improvements should be bonded or phased so the city has leverage if the developer does not complete work.

Timing and next steps: Staff said the proposed agreement has been sent to city attorneys for review and that a public hearing would be scheduled as part of an upcoming council meeting (staff mentioned intent to hold a public hearing at the “meet the candidates” night on September 23). Staff also noted the county intends to rebuild the roundabout next year and has asked for commitments to inform its engineering. The council did not take a final vote on any element of the 3 Bridges draft at this meeting.

Selected quotes (attributed to meeting speakers): • "This agreement gives away our 40% of the storage after they have built a new tank... We are far ahead... We are not removing or giving up any of our ownership of the well," — Ted, Public Works Director, Woodland Hills City. • "If we do just stonewall him, we lose everything. I mean, he'll go to Salem... and we would still have all the same issues, but we would have none of the benefit," — meeting participant (city staff comment on developer negotiations). • "There are two options... a signalized access or a roundabout access; all traffic modeling suggests the roundabout is a better traffic flow for everyone," — Ted, Public Works Director.

Context and caveats: Staff emphasized legal review and the use of zoning as contract leverage. Several numbers discussed (tank sizes, storage amounts, cost estimates) are approximate and based on staff and developer presentations pending attorney review and more complete traffic modeling. The council reserved judgment and requested refined traffic analysis and contract protections, including timing and sequencing language that would phase city obligations only after developer performance milestones (for example, installing replacement mailboxes only after new boxes are in place).

Ending: Council members and residents asked that staff return with contract revisions and traffic modeling; attorneys will continue review before staff schedules the public hearing.