Hero’s Lane: Follow the Road. Follow the Money
A grant can pay for a road.
A grant does not create property ownership.
I started looking into Hero’s Lane for the same reason I started looking into the downtown alley: when public money, private property, and government projects all meet in the same place, the paperwork should tell a clear story.
With Hero’s Lane, the paperwork does tell a story.
It also leaves some important questions unanswered.
Start with the dirt.
On February 11, 1976, the City of Arab conveyed approximately 0.8471 acres to the Arab Water Works Board for $2,000. The deed was recorded July 14, 1976.
Hero’s Lane later crossed property associated with that Water Works tract and was paved and used for access to City facilities.
But there is an important distinction:
Using a road is not the same thing as owning the land underneath it.
Based on the records I have reviewed so far, I have not found a recorded easement establishing Hero’s Lane as a traditional public street across the Water Works property.
That becomes important when you follow what happened next.
View the deed
By 2023, Water Works was already concerned about access.
The June 27, 2023 Water Works Board minutes refer to Hero’s Lane as a “private drive.” The Board was also discussing what would happen to its Highway 69 water-tank property if Hero’s Lane were closed.
That matters because this was not simply a question of putting up a barricade at Highway 69.
Water Works had owned this property since 1976, and its own records show that access to that property was already being discussed years before the eventual closure. Alternative access was discussed. Water Works was told that access might be provided from another direction and that a driveway could potentially be constructed or paved.
In other words, the access issue was known. But the permanent solution was still being worked out.
Then came the publicly funded road project.
In FY2024, Appalachian Regional Commission records identify a City of Arab project titled “Heroes Lane Road Construction.” The ARC award was $200,000, with records describing an overall project cost of approximately $1.719 million. ALDOT records describe an approximately 0.230-mile industrial access road benefiting Frogg Toggs. This is where following the money also means following the land.
A grant can pay for a road. A grant does not create property ownership.
When public funding is connected to a road project, the accompanying documents should make clear what land is being used, what rights-of-way or easements are required, what construction is being funded, and what obligations come with that funding.
In 2026, the closure became very real.
This is where Melissa Cook’s statement fits into the timeline.
In 2026, while discussing the project and Hero’s Lane, Cook explained:
“The caveat is that we have to close Heroes Lane.”
That statement is important — but not because it proves the City had known years earlier that Hero’s Lane would close.
It doesn’t.
What makes it significant is what had already happened before that statement was made.
Water Works had been discussing its access problem since at least 2023.
Its minutes had already referred to Hero’s Lane as a private drive.
The Board had already been trying to determine how it would reach property it had owned since 1976 if that access disappeared.
So by the time the public was being told in 2026 that closing Hero’s Lane was a condition of the project, the access question was not new.
It had been sitting there for years.
On July 14, 2026, notice was given that the Highway 69 entrance to Hero’s Lane would permanently close effective August 1, 2026.
By July 29, pavement removal had begun.
And this is where I think another part of the story needs documentation.
I have repeatedly heard the closure described as something ALDOT required because of the planned traffic improvements near Highway 69 and Hulaco Road.
Maybe that is exactly what happened.
But if ALDOT required the City to close Hero’s Lane, there should be a written record of that requirement.
A letter.
An engineering condition.
A permit requirement.
A grant condition.
A traffic-safety determination.
Something that clearly says what ALDOT required, when it required it, and why.
So one of the questions I am now waiting on records to answer is simple:
Did ALDOT actually require Hero’s Lane to be closed, or was that simply the explanation that was given?
And if ALDOT did require it...
Did ALDOT require the road itself to be removed, or only require the Highway 69 access point to be closed or relocated?
Those are two very different things.
I have requested records from ALDOT because I do not want to assume either version is true without seeing the documentation.
The records should settle that question.
The access problem did not disappear with the road.
Closing an entrance does not make the underlying property-access issue go away. Water Works was directed toward alternate access through the Commerce Lane area. But that route appears to involve private property and private-drive areas that Water Works does not own.
That raises another basic question:
If Hero’s Lane was going to be closed, what permanent, legal access was
actually established for the Water Works property before the closure occurred?
The records show discussion about providing another driveway.
But discussion is not the same thing as completed access.
That distinction matters.
This is where taxpayer accountability comes in.
When public money is spent on a road project, the public should be able to follow that project from beginning to end.
The grant.
The application.
The property ownership.
The easements.
The right-of-way.
The engineering plans.
The conditions imposed by ALDOT or any other agency.
The promises made to affected property owners.
The construction.
The reimbursements.
And the final result.
If the City represented that it had the property rights necessary for a project, there should be documents supporting that representation.
If ALDOT required Hero’s Lane to close, there should be records showing exactly what ALDOT required and when.
If ALDOT did not require the closure in the way it was described publicly, that matters too.
If alternative access was part of the solution, the records should show where that access was supposed to be located, who owned the land underneath it, and who had the legal authority to provide it.
And if public money paid for work that later had to be altered, removed, or replaced, taxpayers deserve to know what happened and why.
That is basic public accountability.
This is why my alley suddenly matters to me differently.
My research did not begin with Hero’s Lane.
It began downtown, where business owners were being told that longtime HVAC units had to be moved from an alley because of another publicly funded project.
That sent me looking for the survey.
The right-of-way.
The grant requirements.
The deadline.
The actual documents behind what we were being told.
And eventually I found myself asking the same questions I am asking about Hero’s Lane:
Who owns the dirt?
Where is the recorded right-of-way?
What did the grant actually require?
What did the state actually require?
And does what happened on the ground match what the paperwork says was supposed to happen?
One project can be a misunderstanding. Two projects with similar characteristics should make everyone pay attention.
That does not mean there is wrongdoing.
It means there may be a pattern in how property rights, access, grant requirements, and public projects are handled, and that is worth understanding.
Especially when taxpayers are paying for it.
The Water Works property has been theirs since 1976.
Hero’s Lane is now closed at Highway 69.
According to the records I have reviewed, Water Works has still been waiting on alternative access that City representatives discussed providing.
In email correspondence between Ted Hyatt and Mayor Bob Joslin, the Mayor stated that he had turned the matter over to the City Attorney.
That leaves the central questions unresolved:
Why does the Water Works Board still appear to lack direct access to property it owns?
What exactly required Hero’s Lane to be closed?
Did ALDOT require it, and if so, where is that requirement documented?
Did ALDOT require pavement to be removed, or was that a separate City decision?
And when will the alternative access discussed with Water Works actually be completed?
Because when government spends public money on private dirt, the paperwork should make sense.
A very different experience with public records
One of the noticeable differences in this research has been the process of obtaining records from the two boards.
The Water Works Board was very responsive and willing to help me locate and understand the information I was requesting.
My experience with the Sewer Board was different.
My initial request was estimated at approximately $2,000, and after I narrowed the scope significantly, the revised estimate was still around $400.
I understand that producing records can involve staff time and administrative costs, but for an individual citizen trying to understand public projects and public spending, those amounts can make access difficult.
That difference ultimately affected how I approached the research: with the Water Works Board, I was able to follow the records directly. With the Sewer Board, I had to look for other public sources to piece together the same history.
I am currently waiting for additional records from ALDOT, ADECA, and ADEM.
And if this project has taught me anything, it is this:
Pay attention to the promise. Then pay even closer attention to the result. Because the result is where accountability lives.
February 11, 1976
City of Arab conveys ~0.8471 acres to Arab Water Works Board for $2,000. Deed recorded.
July 14, 1976
Hero’s Lane later crosses this tract and is paved/used for City facility access. No recorded easement found establishing it as a traditional public street across the Water Works property.
By June 27, 2023
Water Works Board minutes refer to Hero’s Lane as a “private drive.” Board discusses impact on its Highway 69 water-tank property if the lane closes and explores alternative access (possible driveway from another direction). Access issue is already known; permanent solution still pending.
2024
Appalachian Regional Commission records list City of Arab “Heroes Lane Road Construction” project: $200,000 ARC award; overall project cost ~$1.719 million. ALDOT describes ~0.230-mile industrial access road benefiting Frogg Toggs. Public funding does not create property ownership; right-of-way/easement documentation remains a key open question.
2025
Temporary closure of Heroes Lane announced (July 2025) until further notice; recycling drop-off affected.
July 14 2026
Notice given that Highway 69 entrance to Hero’s Lane will permanently close effective August 1.
July 29 2026
Pavement removal begins.
August 1 2026
Permanent closure takes effect; traffic rerouted to newly constructed Commerce Lane. (Public explanation often attributes this to ALDOT requirements related to Highway 69 / Hulaco Road improvements; written ALDOT documentation of any such requirement is still being sought.)
Comments