Logan council approves Willow Lakes Phase 5 overlay with trail requirement and $600,000 city cap

The Logan Municipal Council voted to approve a modified planned development overlay for Willow Lakes Phase 5 on Oct. 7, 2025, requiring construction of a new public multi‑use trail and spelling out a cost‑share arrangement between the city and the developer.

Council members adopted ordinance 25‑16 after staff and the applicant negotiated language specifying that a 10‑foot concrete multi‑use trail be built from the new Trapper Park pedestrian bridge east about 790 linear feet and west about 3,010 linear feet — a minimum total of 3,800 linear feet — and that the trail include at least one tieback into Willow Lakes Drive. The city’s maximum obligation is capped at $600,000; the ordinance records the applicant’s share at 45.45 percent and the city share at 54.55 percent of the trail cost, with the city’s payment not to exceed $600,000.

Why it matters: the trail is a central public‑access feature linked to a high‑visibility development along the Logan River corridor. Council members said the final language balances public access goals, wetland mitigation constraints and the developer’s financing limits while preserving the option to extend the trail later.

Details and debate: the Willow Lakes Phase 5 overlay covers roughly 12 acres and includes a proposed boat club/fitness/event center, short‑term rental homes, additional single‑family lots, fourplex “mansion homes” and a conceptual 60‑bed assisted‑living facility. City staff described the overlay and the trail alignment and said most of the larger Willow Lakes project had already been permitted and built; the Phase 5 area was the remaining segment under review.

Developer Brett Nelson of Little Lakes Development described prior mitigation, river restoration work and outlays the company has already funded. Nelson said the developer has paid for wetland mitigation and a large portion of river restoration and that the project had previously budgeted roughly $600,000 toward roadway and trail work. Nelson said the cost to build the full trail corridor was estimated at about $1.25 million and that the developer could commit $500,000; he asked the council either to identify the remaining roughly $150,000 from another city source or accept a modest reduction or temporary aggregate trail for a short section. "We were asking for $500,000 for trails — that's all we can do," Nelson said.

Council members and Parks staff pressed for clarity about priorities: which trail sections to build first, whether key connections (specifically the Trapper Park connection) would be completed, and whether any portion could be installed using less‑expensive temporary surfacing to achieve connectivity sooner. Parks staff said their preference was to build the trail as concrete where possible and to prioritize the connection from Trapper Park to the northwest subdivision access because that segment ties into future river‑corridor connections.

After an initial pause to let staff and applicants finalize ordinance wording, the council reconvened and approved language that (a) sets a minimum trail length of 3,800 linear feet running east and west from the new bridge, (b) requires at least one tieback to Willow Lakes Drive and (c) establishes a cost‑sharing formula that caps the city payment at $600,000. The ordinance also requires a development agreement specifying construction schedules and materials and ties completion of specified trail sections to the certificate of occupancy for the Phase 5 fitness center.

Public comments reflected a mix of support and concern. Supporters said the project will deliver new trails, road improvements and additional housing. Linda Johnson called the applicant’s public‑access and funding commitments "a good faith plan" and said the project will deliver infrastructure the city would otherwise have to fund. Other commenters pressed the council over specific social and environmental issues: residents questioned whether the proposed assisted‑living center would accept Medicaid or other public payments and whether residents with limited mobility would be able to access the lakes and amenities. Patrick Belmont, who identified himself as a Logan resident and hydrologist, flagged long‑term maintenance questions for the man‑made lakes, asking who would pay for ongoing water quality management; staff and the developer said the lakes are supported by the development’s water rights and by HOA maintenance.

The council’s action: ordinance 25‑16 passed after a motion to approve the amended overlay and development requirements; the ordinance formalizes the trail target, the 50/50‑style cost split adjusted to the 54.55/45.45 percent shares described above and the city cap of $600,000. The adopted language replaced an earlier draft and reflected the compromise reached during the meeting’s earlier continuation and closed‑door drafting.

What remains: the development agreement must be completed before construction and will spell out construction schedules, final materials, the sequence of trail work and how grant or RAPS funding (if used) will be documented. Staff said some wetland mitigation and boardwalk sections will be more expensive to construct, which drove the gap between the parties' initial budgets and the cost estimate for the full corridor.

Voices from the meeting: Brett Nelson (developer) said the project has already funded substantial river work and that additional trail costs pushed the budget beyond what his team had planned. Several nearby residents, including Josh Smaller and Mary Silva, objected to the assisted‑living location, asking whether it would be private‑pay only and whether residents there would have meaningful access to amenities. Parks staff and council members repeatedly emphasized that the priority for the city was public access to Trapper Park and a durable, connected trail alignment.

Ending: Council members said they would monitor project implementation and the development agreement. The ordinance approval obligates the city to its capped contribution but leaves the final construction sequencing and the development‑level details to the forthcoming development agreement and construction contracts.