Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Right Of Way topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Board approves eminent‑domain resolutions for parcels supporting Airport Gateway, Magnolia Trail and Bannerman Road projects

Blueprint Board of Directors · March 13, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Directors authorized imminent‑domain resolutions to acquire parcels needed for the Munson Slough bridge and Airport Gateway corridor, the final Magnolia Trail easements, and 11 parcels for Bannerman Road improvements; votes included a small number of dissenting commissioners on some items.

The Blueprint Board of Directors approved a set of imminent‑domain resolutions on Wednesday to secure right‑of‑way needed for three separate infrastructure projects.

Staff explained the parcels for the Airport Gateway project are near the Munson Slough Bridge and are required for a stormwater management facility and roadway expansion; staff said ongoing negotiations had not produced a counteroffer and recommended the resolutions to preserve schedule momentum. The board approved the resolutions to begin acquisition proceedings; the chair recorded two dissenting votes for the Airport Gateway parcel approvals (Commissioners Porter and Caban).

For the Magnolia Drive Trail, staff requested approval for the last three parcels and said the needed easements are shallow (generally less than 15 feet) and would not require resident relocation. The board approved the resolution unanimously.

For the Bannerman Road project, staff requested resolutions to acquire 11 parcels from eight owners to keep the project on track for construction in 2027; they said the work involves frontage parcels and should not displace residents. The board approved the resolutions with one recorded dissent (Commissioner Porter).

In each case staff asserted they had attempted negotiation and would continue to seek settlement but recommended commencing eminent‑domain proceedings to avoid schedule delays. Commissioners asked questions about prior outreach, property status and whether closures would displace residents; staff replied no residents would be forced to relocate as a result of these specific acquisitions.

The approvals permit staff to proceed with the statutory process necessary to acquire parcels if negotiations fail; commissioners asked staff to continue outreach and report back on negotiation status.