Developer outlines 3 Bridges project timeline, addresses dirt pile, water and access concerns

A representative for the 3 Bridges development told the Woodland Hills City Council on Tuesday that large temporary stockpiles on site are construction materials that will be processed and reused, and he described a series of coordination issues his team is pursuing with Woodland Hills and neighboring Salem.

Larry (developer representative) said the “dirt pile” near Woodland Hills Drive is actually about 220,000 cubic yards of gravel removed from an on‑site pond. He told the council the project will run a crushing and washing operation and use the material for backfill on long runs of sewer, water and pressurized‑irrigation line the developer plans to construct; the schedule calls for the pile to be drawn down beginning in roughly three months, pause for winter, and resume in spring.

Larry gave several updates and raised intergovernmental matters to be resolved with Woodland Hills and Salem: access and a proposed upgrade to the roundabout that may let the development take primary access off the roundabout rather than the current north entrance; replacement or reconfiguration of neighborhood mailboxes; a possible relocation or upgrade of the city’s salt shed and land‑use for staging equipment; and whether an 11‑acre parcel adjacent to the project should remain inside Woodland Hills or be annexed into Salem. On annexation and density, the developer said the city and developer are still discussing whether additional residential density would stay in Woodland Hills or be annexed into Salem; if the parcel remains in Woodland Hills, the developer proposed sharing a portion of transient‑lodging tax revenue from a small hotel component to compensate the city for density.

On stormwater, the developer said much of the existing runoff is historic and that the 3 Bridges team has designs to manage and detain flows on the site, and offered to include mitigation of some existing downstream problems as part of the project’s stormwater plan. On water, the developer acknowledged concerns about capacity: Salem’s Maple Canyon well had a casing failure earlier this year and staff are testing a recently replaced pump; the developer said part of 3 Bridges’ long‑term plan is to construct a tank on the north end of the property and pump water from another source to relieve pressure on existing supply, but that timing and interim arrangements remain unresolved and must not jeopardize Woodland Hills’ supply.

Council members and planning staff raised process issues: the rezone proposal presented for a 9.1‑acre parcel at 410 South Woodland Hills Drive was a referral to planning staff (not a final rezoning), and planning staff reminded the council it was unusual to process rezoning requests for buyers who have not completed acquisition; staff suggested adding a contingency or confirmation from the current owner that they do not object to a pending rezoning referral. The applicant said the contract was not contingent on rezoning but that owners’ concurrence could be obtained during due‑diligence.

The council and the developer agreed to continue negotiations on specific mitigation measures and proposed compensation, and the developer said he would return in a few weeks with more detailed written proposals.

No formal council action or vote was taken at the update; the item functioned as a public briefing and a request to move the draft rezone to the planning commission for review.