Debate to vacate 300-foot stretch of rural road near Reasnor at impasse

A landowner’s petition to close and vacate approximately 300-feet of B- and C-Level road near the intersection of East 40th Street South and Ranch Avenue, southeast of Reasnor, is headed to a third public hearing.

That was the decision Tuesday by the Jasper County Board of Supervisors after landowners on opposing sides of the debate could not reach a consensus during the board’s weekly meeting.

Mike and Jodi Lanphier, represented by their attorney Erin Clanton, met at the table with neighbor and adjoining landowner Carl Lust and engineer Craig Johnstone providing expertise on his behalf, at a public hearing in front of the supervisors.

Lust owns farmland surrounding the Lanphier’s property and he argues the B-Level road is his main access point. He wants the county to deny his neighbor’s request and keep the road public. Mike and Jodi Lanphier argue that the road is sparingly used by non-local traffic and worry about safety and non-authorized people being able to access their property.

The board has proposed a compromise, downgrading the road to C-Level which would allow access to the Lanphier’s and surrounding property owners, as well as law enforcement and emergency vehicles.

Clanton, of Brick Gentry, P.C., said, even if the road is shifted to C-level, they’re still concerned about traffic, fear of theft, being disturbed by people knocking at their door and people parking at the gate, which they consider part of their backyard.

Clanton argues, to her clients, it’s not a property issue.

“I think the real issue here for them is safety,” Clanton said. “For the 26 years they’ve lived there, this has been their backyard, and ... it’s not the fear of ‘what if,’ it’s the fear of ‘how many people are going to be there.’ How many people are going to be accessing that property?

“They’re not trying to be difficult, they’re not trying to restrict access,” Clanton added. “Most of this roadway has already been vacated. Another portion of it is already a Level-C restricted access road, so it’s really access to nowhere at this point — access to a gate that only certain people are expected to go past.”

Mike and Joy Lanphier have offered a compromise through their attorney to grant an easement to Lust, who farms land accessible through the gate at the end of the road, the county and any other agency that has legitimate business on the adjoining property, as long as the county agrees to vacate the roadway.

Johnstone said, purely from an engineering perspective, it does not make sense for the county to vacate 300 feet of road heavily used for grain transport and farming equipment in and out of surrounding ag land. He also argues, the Lanphiers are treating the road as their own property.

“They have been on notice from Day One that (the road) is public access,” Johnstone said. “Whether they have encroached on the county’s rights is another issue but for them to say it’s their backyard, it doesn’t seem to be what we normally think respecting the county’s rights or right-of-way should be.”

Johnstone said the gate is a decent barrier from teens and others from accessing the property for “partying” and “mudding.” The private engineer called the request to vacate “a moot point,” and urged the board to reject the Lanphier’s petition.

According to Lust, the land accessible by the roadway is enrolled by the USDA’s Wetland Reserve Program through the Nature Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), and four agencies need to access the land via the road in question.

NRCS Board Member Kurt Donahue was in the audience Tuesday and did confirm his board has an easement on the gated property.

Supervisors vice-chair Doug Cupples said both parties seem to want to stay rooted in their personal take on the situation, which is why the board thinks a C-Level road would be a good compromise.

“My perspective on this, looking in from 10,000 feet, so-to-speak, when you both made your offers to each other, you both made the same offer just from your own perspective,” Cupples said. “You’re not trying to take access away from Mr. Lust, and (Lust) understood why they wouldn’t want a bunch of people driving past their house. You guys are in agreement in that area.”

Lust sees a roadblock in the debate. He’s concerned the Lanphiers will not budge on their position, just as he doesn’t want a C-Level road or to move his gate which would allow his neighbors access to his property. Lust claims the Lanphiers have violated the property boundaries before, while Clanton argued the only time that occurred was when Mike and Jody Lanphier’s children were older but did not know precisely where the property line was placed.

“We’ve had a very adversarial relationship for 20 years,” Lust said. “I don’t want them on my property. Do you understand that?”

The supervisors’ next scheduled meeting is 9:30 a.m. Jan. 22.

Contact Mike Mendenhall at 641-792-3121 or ext. 6530 or mmendenhall@newtondailynews.com