Calimesa plans to move the Calimesa Boulevard intersection at Singleton Road approximately 400 feet east and widen both roads. Owners, sellers and buyers near the intersection should begin by checking whether the proposed easements reach the parcel they are reviewing.
The City’s reports identify property interests needed from five private parcels. For a property decision, start with the assessor’s parcel number and the proposed easement boundaries. The reports do not establish an effect on property values or give construction dates or a total project cost.
This is general information and not legal advice.
What is changing at Calimesa Boulevard and Singleton Road?
The project will realign approximately 0.6 mile of Calimesa Boulevard at Singleton Road. Its stated purpose is to improve traffic circulation and safety for vehicles, bicycles and pedestrians.
Both roads will remain classified as four to six lane major arterials, with widening to roughly 75 feet. The listed improvements include two vehicular lanes in each direction, a signalized intersection, new curbs and gutters, sidewalk improvements and modifications to the existing storm drain channel.
The October 5 agenda report describes approximately 3,300 linear feet of widening across both roads, while the October 19 report lists 3,300 feet on Calimesa Boulevard and 3,000 feet on Singleton Road.
Because those descriptions differ, use the project drawings and parcel exhibits to review the extent of work. Read the road improvements alongside the boundaries of each proposed property interest when considering a particular parcel.
Why is the intersection being moved?
The realignment will create additional horizontal clearance from the I-10/Singleton Road interchange for potential future interchange improvements. That clearance would provide the minimum intersection setback described in the report.
The report identifies the realignment as a component of future pending phase 1 improvements. That phase generally includes paving the missing westbound on-ramp and eastbound off-ramp, installing traffic signals and realigning Calimesa Boulevard.
It also records the Planning Commission’s July 10, 2023 finding that Caltrans and the Federal Highway Administration required the realignment as part of phase 1. Staff say additional improvements, including a full interchange rebuild, are being pursued, with the timing of that rebuild still unknown.
When reviewing a listing or discussing a purchase, keep the realignment, phase 1 and the potential full rebuild distinct. Ask which work a reference to “interchange improvements” means.
Calimesa has another recent land-use decision that a Calimesa buyer may also want to read about: Mesa Verde’s approval.
Which property interests does the project require?
The project requires permanent easements, permanent slope easements and temporary construction easements from five private parcels: four vacant parcels and one improved parcel.
The permanent easements cover street, sidewalk, drainage and public utility purposes. Temporary construction easements have an 18-month term on the four parcels addressed at the hearing and a 24-month term on the fifth parcel.
Review each interest separately because its boundary and duration matter to the parcel review. Ask for the exhibit showing the permanent easement, the slope easement where applicable, and the temporary construction area. Compare those documents with the parcel being offered for sale or considered for purchase.
For a vacant-land purchase, the title and lot-status questions in the land-buying guide provide a starting point for organizing that review.
Staff say the acquisitions are not anticipated to displace persons or businesses. The October 5 report also describes coordinating construction with one private owner to relocate a portable building and parking spaces within the remainder parcel. An owner or buyer reviewing that parcel should ask for the corresponding drawings and acquisition documents.
What happened at the eminent domain hearing?
Per the City’s draft action minutes, the Council adopted four Resolutions of Necessity at the October 5, 2026 public hearing.
The motion to adopt Resolutions 2026-61 through 2026-64 passed with four members voting in favor and one member absent. The draft action minutes in the November 2 packet were scheduled for approval on November 2.
The hearing concerned acquiring easements on four parcels by eminent domain. Each resolution required a four-fifths vote of the entire Council. The required findings addressed public necessity, the project’s location in relation to public good and private injury, the need for the property interests, and the required acquisition offer.
For the largest parcel, identified by two assessor’s parcel numbers at the northeast corner, the report lists about 95,185 square feet of permanent easement, 46,932 square feet of slope easement and 22,382 square feet of temporary construction easement.
Those figures describe three property interests. Keep their labels attached when reviewing the exhibits or discussing the parcel, so the permanent, slope and temporary areas remain clear.
Did the hearing decide what owners would receive?
The report reserves the amount of just compensation for eminent domain proceedings. It expressly says that amount was outside the issues before the Council at the hearing.
Read the resolutions as the Council’s action on the required acquisition findings. Questions about a particular owner’s payment belong with that parcel’s acquisition documents and the process described in the report.
The October 5 report states that the parties had yet to reach negotiated acquisitions as of September 28, 2026. It also says adopting the resolutions would allow continued good faith negotiations. The hearing action and the possibility of a negotiated agreement therefore remained separate matters.
For a seller, the practical step is to assemble the notices, offers, exhibits and any agreements relating to the parcel. A buyer can ask which documents are available and which acquisition matters remain unresolved. Review the dates on that correspondence alongside the dates of the Council reports.
How was the fifth parcel handled?
The fifth parcel, at 9950 Calimesa Boulevard, was addressed through a negotiated purchase agreement for easements.
The October 19 agenda report requested approval of a $396,000 Purchase and Sale Agreement. It covers approximately 16,937 square feet of permanent easement on APN 413-260-058, approximately 12,093 square feet on APN 413-260-059, and approximately 5,791 square feet of temporary construction easement with a 24-month term.
The report describes the price as fair market value based on an independent appraisal obtained by the City, using a March 4, 2026 date of value. Payment includes improvements, if any, within the property interests being acquired, and the agreement allows their demolition and removal. Closing costs were estimated to be no greater than $10,000.
Per the City’s draft action minutes, the October 19 consent calendar containing this item passed with five votes in favor. Read the negotiated amount together with this agreement’s easement areas, appraisal date and treatment of improvements.
What should you check before buying or listing nearby?
Begin with the parcel’s identity, then review its easement exhibits and available acquisition documents. Compare the assessor’s parcel number with the report exhibits and read permanent, slope and temporary construction areas separately.
For environmental status, the report identifies Addendum No. 1 to the 2013 General Plan EIR, adopted through Resolution 2023-46 on August 7, 2023. The stated finding was no new significant impact beyond the General Plan EIR. Use that document’s name and resolution number when reviewing the environmental record.
I spoke with a Calimesa owner who had heard that the boulevard would be realigned but did not know whether the project would touch his frontage. His concern was not only the future road location; he also wanted to know whether the city might need right of way or a temporary construction easement from his property. We reviewed the project materials before making assumptions based on the roadway shown on an ordinary map.
The short version
The realignment involves easement acquisitions affecting five private parcels. The City’s reports leave construction timing, total project cost and property-value effects unanswered, and they do not establish that eminent domain proceedings have been filed.
For an affected property, review the parcel exhibits, acquisition correspondence and any agreement. Confirm a nearby property’s parcel number before assuming it is affected. Per the City’s draft action minutes, the Council adopted the four resolutions; the fifth parcel’s negotiated price is specific to its agreement.
For a separate starting point on pricing your property, use the home value tool.
Common questions
Where would Calimesa Boulevard move at Singleton Road?
The project would realign approximately 0.6 mile of Calimesa Boulevard, moving the intersection approximately 400 feet east of its current location.
Did the Council adopt the Resolutions of Necessity?
Per the City's draft action minutes, the Council adopted Resolutions 2026-61 through 2026-64 on October 5, 2026, with four members voting in favor and one absent. Those minutes were scheduled for approval on November 2.
Did the hearing set compensation for the four parcels?
No. The report says the amount of just compensation was not an issue at the hearing and would be established in eminent domain proceedings.
When will construction begin?
The reports do not give a construction start date, completion date or total project cost.
