Residents, buyer clash over access to undeveloped Fourth Avenue strip; planning staff recommend easement negotiations

Jason Jeans, a property buyer, and neighbor Riley Johnson pressed the Fayetteville Board of Mayor and Aldermen on Oct. 2 over access to an undeveloped strip of city-owned land at the rear of parcels 32 and 33 on Fourth Avenue.

Jeans told the board he bought the adjoining lots with the understanding he could obtain the undeveloped parcel and combine it with his purchase; he said he paid for a survey and is now seeking a clear path to access and develop the property. "So I guess my question is how do we move forward, to access the property?" Jeans said. Riley Johnson, whose home borders the parcel, said any change would affect his lifelong primary residence and urged the board to consider the long-term impacts on neighbors.

Planning and codes Director Christy Gentry briefed the board on options staff and the city attorney examined. Attorney Hill and guidance from MTAS indicated the city is not required to extend pavement or develop the roadway; the city may grant a driveway easement without deeding the underlying land. Gentry said splitting the strip into two fee parcels likely would leave each purchaser with less than the 50 feet of required road frontage, which could prevent or complicate future building approvals. "You cannot address off of an alley. It has to be off of a city street," Gentry told the board when explaining frontage rules.

Staff recommended negotiating a solution and returning to committee with a formal recommendation. During discussion board members and staff suggested alternatives: retain city ownership and issue separate easements to each adjoining owner that specify shared-use terms and prohibit blocking, or pursue a negotiated deed transfer if legal and practical obstacles (including frontage requirements and topography) can be resolved. Members also noted the parcel’s steep contours make developing a driveway from Fourth Avenue expensive.

No formal sale or deed transfer occurred at the Oct. 2 work session. The board directed staff to continue negotiations with the interested parties, clarify the legal language for easements (including use and maintenance restrictions), and re-present a recommended solution to the committee next month.

If the board later decides to deed the parcel, the record will need to document whether the resulting parcels meet the city’s 50-foot road-frontage requirement or whether a different configuration (retention plus easements) is required. Planning staff said adjoining owners and other affected property owners have been notified as part of the review process.