Group seeks easements for 2‑mile trail between Green Canyon and Dry Canyon; state to fund construction

County staff described a multi‑phase trail proposal that would connect Green Canyon to Dry Canyon (near Smithfield) and requested committee support for easement acquisition and coordination.

Landis (county staff/project manager) said phase 1a is two miles long and currently has construction funding committed by the state via the Outdoor Recreation Initiative; the county’s role is to secure easements and preliminary design so construction can proceed. Staff stated the state has provided just over a half million dollars for construction of phase 1a and that the local partners were seeking landowner easements to meet the match requirements. Landis said an easement estimate of roughly $26,000 per affected property was used for budgeting on five parcels for the initial phase.

Staff explained the project packaging: phase 1a (2 miles) is the immediate focus; phase 1b (approximately 1.7 miles) is a likely next step if additional landowner coordination and funding are secured. Landowners for phase 1a are “excited” and staff characterized that all five landowners for 1a are cooperative; one landowner further along the corridor remains a holdout, and that gap may be addressed by future annexation or alternate routing.

Committee members raised easement design questions. Staff said the proposed construction easement is typically 15–20 feet; committee members urged staff to seek a 20‑foot easement where feasible to ensure construction durability and user safety. Landis confirmed that 20 feet would be the maximum needed for construction in this corridor and recommended striving for 20 feet throughout where landowners will allow it.

Staff noted jurisdictional and funding complexities: some portions fall within North Logan and Hyde Park, where local ordinances or development dedications could reduce the county’s acquisition burden. Staff reported pursuing additional state grant rounds that reopened funding previously allocated but later returned to the pool, and said the state favors projects that are “shovel ready.” The state is prioritizing Cache Valley applications because staff believes the valley can put the funding to work quickly.

Next steps: staff said they will prepare a staff report for the committee’s next meeting (proposed March 3) to present a formal application or request. Committee members encouraged prompt coordination with landowners to avoid losing willing participants, and to coordinate municipal contributions where jurisdictions can require trail dedications via ordinance. No formal committee vote was recorded on Feb. 3; the presentation was a request for guidance and to notify the committee of imminent applications.