Agenda — Escalon City Council, August 10, 2026 (part 7 of 10)

82108.00238\43970055.1
NRBI-60157\3148020.1 F-15
Affordable Unit to a Non-Qualified Purchaser as permitted by Section 5.3.1 or Section 5.3.2, the City and Owner shall record, at Owner’s cost, a notice of termination, releasing such Affordable Unit from the terms of this Regulatory Agreement.

5.4 Sale to a Qualified Purchaser. Each Subsequent Qualified Purchaser shall be required to purchase the Affordable Unit at Affordable Purchase Price with a mortgage secured by a first deed of trust on the Affordable Unit and enter into and record against the Property a new Regulatory Agreement and Deed of Trust in favor of the City. Required down payments for Subsequent Qualified Purchasers shall be no more than five percent (5%) of the sales price.

5.5 Maintenance Condition of the Affordable Unit. The Qualified Purchaser for itself, its heirs, its successors and assigns hereby covenants and agrees that:

5.5.1 The exterior areas of the Affordable Unit which are subject to public view (e.g., all improvements, paving, walkways, landscaping and ornamentation) shall be maintained in good repair and a neat, clean and orderly condition, ordinary wear and tear excepted. In the event that at any time during the term of the Qualified Residence Period, there is an occurrence of an adverse condition on any area of the Affordable Unit which is subject to public view in contravention of the general maintenance standard described above (“Maintenance Deficiency”), then City shall notify the Qualified Purchaser in writing of the Maintenance Deficiency and give the Qualified Purchaser thirty (30) calendar days from the date of such notice to cure the Maintenance Deficiency as identified in the notice. A “Maintenance Deficiency” shall include without limitation the following inadequate or nonconforming property maintenance conditions and/or breaches of single family dwelling residential property use restrictions:
(a) Failure to properly maintain the windows, structural elements and painted exterior surface areas of the Affordable Unit in a clean and presentable manner;
(b) Failure to keep the front and side yard areas of the Property free of accumulated debris, appliances, inoperable motor vehicles or motor vehicle parts, or free of storage of lumber, building materials or equipment not regularly in use on the Property;
(c) Failure to maintain landscaping in a neat and orderly fashion, including failure to regularly mow lawn areas or failure to otherwise maintain the landscaping in a reasonable condition free of weeds and debris; or
(d) The use of the garage area of the Affordable Unit for purposes other than the parking of motor vehicles and the storage of personal possessions and mechanical equipment of persons residing in the Affordable Unit.

5.5.2 The City and the Qualified Purchaser hereto further mutually understand and agree that the rights conferred upon City under Section 5.5 expressly include the power to establish and enforce a lien or other encumbrance against the Affordable Unit in

Page 997 of 1575 ends

82108.00238\43970055.1
NRBI-60157\3148020.1 F-16
the manner provided under California Civil Code sections 2924, 2924b and 2924c in the amount as reasonably necessary to restore the Affordable Unit to the maintenance standard required under Section 5.5.1, including attorneys’ fees and costs of City associated with the abatement of the Maintenance Deficiency. In any legal proceeding for enforcing such a lien against the Affordable Unit, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover its attorneys’ fees and costs of suit.

5.5.3 The provisions of Section 5.5 shall be a covenant running with the land for the Qualified Residence Period and shall be enforceable by City in its discretion, cumulative with any other rights or powers granted by City under applicable law.

5.5.4 Nothing in Section 5.5 shall be deemed to preclude the Qualified Purchaser from making any alterations, additions or other changes to any structure or improvement or landscaping on the Affordable Unit, provided that such changes comply with the zoning and development regulations of the City and other applicable law.

5.6 Limitation on Financing and Refinancing; Subordination. In order to ensure that the integrity of the affordability provisions under this Regulatory Agreement are maintained, the City must ensure that this Agreement has priority over all liens on the Affordable Unit, other than purchase money liens securing the purchase of the Affordable Unit. Any loans, equity lines of credit, or advance on loans secured by the Affordable Unit, other than the purchase loans, shall be deemed subordinate in all respects to the City’s Regulatory Agreement and Deed of Trust.

5.7 Payment to City of Excess Sales Proceeds. If the Owner transfers the Affordable Unit to a Non-Qualified Purchaser pursuant to Section 5.3.1 or 5.3.2 above, or if the Owner makes a Transfer in violation of this Agreement, the Owner shall pay the Excess Sales Proceeds to the City. For purposes of this Agreement, "Excess Sales Proceeds" shall mean ninety percent (90%) of the amount by which the sales price for the Affordable Unit exceeds the Affordable Purchase Price for the Affordable Unit. The sales price for the Affordable Unit to a Non-Qualified Purchaser must be supported by an MAI or other qualified appraisal. The Excess Sales Proceeds shall be a debt of the Owner to the City, secured by the Deed of Trust. The Owner acknowledges that the City shall have no obligation to cause reconveyance of this Agreement or of the Deed of Trust until the Excess Sales Proceeds are paid to the City. The City shall utilize the Excess Sales Proceeds for City affordable housing programs. The Owner and the City acknowledge that the formula for calculation of the amount of Excess Sales Proceeds due from the Owner to the City is intended to cause the Owner to receive the same net sales proceeds (following payment by Owner of a standard broker's commission) from sale of the Affordable Unit at an unrestricted price to an Non-Qualified Purchaser as the Owner would receive from sale of the Affordable Unit to a Qualified Purchaser at the Affordable Purchase Price.

5.8 Excluded Transfers. The following transfers (“Excluded Transfers”) shall not be deemed sales of the Affordable Unit under this Regulatory Agreement:

5.8.1 A transfer from Owner to Owner and his or her spouse as joint tenants;

5.8.2 A transfer from Owner to a revocable inter vivos trust in which Owner is the sole life beneficiary; or

Page 998 of 1575 ends

82108.00238\43970055.1
NRBI-60157\3148020.1 F-17

5.8.3 A transfer resulting from a decree of dissolution of marriage or legal separation or from a property settlement agreement incident to such decree.

Owner shall notify the Community Development Director in writing no less than thirty (30) days prior to any Excluded Transfer. Following the Excluded Transfer, and as a condition to such transfer, the new legal Owner (“New Owner”) of the Affordable Unit shall execute a written modification to the Regulatory Agreement, which modification shall be prepared by City and shall substitute New Owner for the former Owner.

6. DURATION OF QUALIFIED RESIDENCE PERIOD. The Qualified Residence Period, including all covenants contained in this Agreement, shall be deemed to run with the land and shall remain in effect for fifty (50) years from the Delivery Date unless terminated earlier in accordance with the Agreement. Upon expiration of the Qualified Residence Period, the resale restrictions set forth in this Agreement shall be of no further force and effect and the Owner may sell the Unit to any person, whether or not the person is a Qualified Purchaser. Pursuant to Section 4.4 of this Agreement, the City shall monitor all Affordable Units to ensure that the Owners are complying with the owner-occupancy requirement.

7. SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS. The covenants contained in this Agreement shall be binding for the benefit of the City and its respective successors and assigns and any successor-ininterest to the Affordable Unit or any part thereof, and such covenants shall run in favor of the City and such aforementioned parties for the entire period during which such covenants shall be in force and effect, without regard to whether the City was, is or remains an owner of any land or interest therein to which such covenants relate. The City, and such aforementioned parties, in the event of any breach of any such covenants, shall have the right to exercise all of the rights and remedies and to maintain any actions at law or suits in equity or other proper proceedings to enforce the curing of such breach. The covenants contained in this Agreement shall be for the benefit of and shall be enforceable by the City, and its respective successors and such aforementioned parties.

8. SUBORDINATION TO SENIOR SECURED LENDER UNDER DEFAULT. The provisions of this Agreement shall be subordinate to the lien of a first deed of trust against the Property, and shall not impair the rights of any institutional lender which is the maker of a loan secured by such first deed of trust, or such lender’s assignee or successor-in-interest, to exercise its remedies under the deed of trust in the event of default by Owner. These remedies include the right to accept a deed or assignment in lieu of foreclosure. After such foreclosure, sale or acceptance of deed in lieu of foreclosure, this Agreement shall be forever terminated and shall have no further effect as to the Property or any transferee thereafter; provided, however, if the holder of such deed of trust acquires title to the Property pursuant to a deed or assignment in lieu of foreclosure, this Agreement shall automatically terminate upon such acquisition of title only if: i) the first deed of trust secures repayment of a promissory note, the proceeds of which were used to acquire fee title to the Property; ii) the City has been given thirty (30) days written notice of default under such first deed of trust; and iii) the City shall not have cured the default under such first deed of trust within the thirty (30) day period provided in such notice sent to the City.

9. DEFAULT. Upon a breach of any of the provisions of this Regulatory Agreement by Owner, the City may give written notice of such breach to Owner by registered or certified mail.

Page 999 of 1575 ends

82108.00238\43970055.1
NRBI-60157\3148020.1 F-18
To the extent reasonable under the circumstances, in the event of any breach, the City and Owner shall reasonably endeavor to identify a remedy for such breach by conference and conciliation.

If such violation is not corrected to the reasonable satisfaction of City within sixty (60) days after the date such notice is mailed or within such further time as the City may reasonably determine is necessary to correct the breach, and without further notice to Owner, the City, in its sole and absolute discretion, may declare a default under the Agreement, effective on the date of such declaration of default, and upon such default the City may apply to any court for any and all legal and equitable remedies available to the City including, without limitation, specific performance of this Regulatory Agreement, for an injunction against any violation of the Agreement, for the appointment of a receiver to take over and operate the Affordable Unit in accordance with the terms of this Regulatory Agreement, for money damages or for such other relief as may be appropriate. The injury to the City arising from a default under any of the terms in this Regulatory Agreement would be irreparable, and the amount of damage would be difficult to ascertain.

9.1 Prior to a default or breach of any of the provisions of this Regulatory Agreement by Owner, Owner shall make every reasonable effort to notify the City of such pending default or breach.

9.2 The City may institute or prosecute in its own name, any suit the City may consider advisable in order to compel performance of any obligation of any Owner to maintain the Affordable Unit in conformity with this Regulatory Agreement and to remedy any default of this Regulatory Agreement. The City may also seek a decree requiring removal of any improvements constructed at the Affordable Unit which improvements are designed for uses not permitted under this Regulatory Agreement.

9.3 The remedies of the City under this Regulatory Agreement are cumulative. The exercise of one or more of such remedies, including, without limitation, remedies under Chapter

17.50 of the Escalon Municipal Code, shall not be deemed an election of remedies and shall not preclude the exercise by the City of any one or more of its other remedies.

10. BINDING SUCCESSORS IN INTEREST. This Regulatory Agreement shall bind and the benefits shall inure to the Owner, its successors-in-interest and assigns during their respective periods of ownership of an interest in the Affordable Unit, and inure to the City and its successors for the term of this Regulatory Agreement.

11. CONTRADICTORY AGREEMENTS. Owner warrants that Owner has not, and will not, execute any other agreement with provisions in contradiction or opposition to the provisions of this Regulatory Agreement, and that, in any event, the requirements of this Regulatory Agreement are paramount and controlling as to the rights and obligations stated and supersede any other requirements in conflict with this Regulatory Agreement.

12. ATTORNEYS’ FEES. If the services of any attorney are required by any party to secure the performance of this Regulatory Agreement or otherwise upon the breach of default of another party, or if any judicial remedy or mediation is necessary to enforce or interpret any provision of this Regulatory Agreement or the rights and duties of any person in relation to this Regulatory Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to reasonable attorneys’ fees, costs

Page 1000 of 1575 ends

82108.00238\43970055.1
NRBI-60157\3148020.1 F-19
and other expenses, in addition to any other relief to which such party may be entitled. Any award of damages following judicial remedy or arbitration as a result of this Regulatory Agreement or any of its provisions shall include an award of prejudgment interest from the date of the breach at the maximum amount of interest allowed by law. The prevailing party shall mean the party receiving an award in arbitration or a judgment in its favor, unless the award or judgment is less favorable than the best settlement offered in writing in a reasonable manner by the other party, in which case the prevailing party is the party making such settlement offer.

13. SEVERABILITY. If any term or provision of this Regulatory Agreement shall, to any extent, be held invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of this Regulatory Agreement shall not be affected; provided that the intent of the Regulatory Agreement may then be reasonably fulfilled.

In any event, the term or provisions shall be deemed to be invalid only as to the entity and circumstance for which it was held to be invalid.

14. NO WAIVER. No waiver by the City of any breach of or default under this Regulatory Agreement shall be deemed to be a waiver of any other or subsequent breach or default.

15. NOTICE. Notices to the City under this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be dispatched by mail, postage prepaid, facsimile, or delivered personally, to the following addresses or to such other address as the City may from time to time designate in writing: 2060 McHenry Avenue, Escalon, California, 95320-9484, Attn: Community Development Director.

Page 1001 of 1575 ends

82108.00238\43970055.1
NRBI-60157\3148020.1 F-20
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City and Owner have caused this instrument to be executed on their behalf by their respective officers thereunto duly authorized, this day of , 20__.

CITY OF ESCALON: OWNER:

By: By:

Its: City Manager Name:

Address:

ATTEST:

By:

Its: Deputy City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

By:

Its: City Attorney

Page 1002 of 1575 ends

82108.00238\43970055.1
NRBI-60157\3148020.1 F-21
EXHIBIT 1

LEGAL DESCRIPTION
[TO BE INSERTED]

Page 1003 of 1575 ends

82108.00238\43970055.1
NRBI-60157\3148020.1 F-22
EXHIBIT 2
EXHIBIT 2

DEED OF TRUST
[TO BE INSERTED]

Page 1004 of 1575 ends

82108.00238\43970055.1
NRBI-60157\3148020.1 F-23
EXHIBIT 5

SUBSEQUENT QUALIFIED PURCHASER

DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
NAME OF POTENTIAL PURCHASER:
_______________________________________
MAILING ADDRESS:
_______________________________________
_______________________________________
_______________________________________
I. AFFORDABLE HOUSING COST ELIGIBILITY.
a. Identity of all persons in the household proposing to occupy the Property. ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ b. Please list the Annual Income of all persons proposing to occupy the Property. Please attach copies of State and federal income tax returns for the preceding calendar year for each person that earned an income listed above.
______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ II. DISCLOSURES.

A. Restrictions on the Use of the Property.

If you purchase the Property, the Property may only be used and occupied you and your immediate family solely as your principal residence. You shall be subject to the terms of the Regulatory Agreement.

These restrictions will be in effect until , 20 fifty (50) years from date of recordation of the Inclusionary Housing Agreement). This is also known as the Qualified Residence Period. Any sale in violation of the restrictions set forth in the Regulatory Agreement constitute a default that could result in

Page 1005 of 1575 ends

82108.00238\43970055.1
NRBI-60157\3148020.1 F-24
foreclosure of the Property under the City’s deed of trust. Additionally, if you sell the Property to a buyer other than a Qualified Purchaser, as defined in the Regulatory Agreement, the City will receive all Excess Proceeds from that sale, above the Affordable Purchase Price for the Property.

B. Acknowledgment of Receipt of Essential Documents
By signing this document below you represent that you have read and understood the following documents related to the Property located at [_________________]: (1) the Regulatory Agreement dated [________________] and recorded against the Property in the San Joaquin County Clerk’s office as Document No. [___________], (2) the Deed of Trust recorded against the Property in the San Joaquin County Clerk’s office as Document No. [___________], and (5) Chapter 17.50, entitled “Affordable Housing,” of the Escalon Municipal Code.

C. Affordable Purchase Price, Limitation on Excess Sales Proceeds.

You are purchasing the Property at an Affordable Housing Price. For more information regarding the Affordable Purchase Price, refer to Section 3.3 of the Regulatory Agreement. By purchasing the Property, you will assume the Deed of Trust recorded against the Property, which secures your obligations under the Regulatory Agreement. These obligation include the requirement that you will not receive more than the Affordable Purchase Price, as calculated at the time of your sale, for the sale of the Property. By signing this document, you represent that you understand that under the terms of the Regulatory Agreement, the City will be entitled to receive all Excess Proceeds from in the sale of your Property to a subsequent homebuyer if that homebuyer is not a qualified moderate income household.

ANY FUTURE SALES PRICE FOR YOUR PROPERTY, IS LIMITED TO THE AFFORDABLE

PURCHASE PRICE FOR A MODERATE INCOME HOUSEHOLD PLUS REASONABLE CLOSING COSTS, WITH ANY EXCESS PROCEEDS TO BE PAID TO THE CITY.

Please carefully review the Regulatory Agreement and Deed of Trust for any additional information about obligations connected with the Property, default and any required repayment of excess proceeds of sale.

All dates and numerical disclosures, except the late payment disclosures, are estimates.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT
By signing below, you certify under the penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing information is true and correct.
___________________________________ _____________________ Subsequent Qualified Purchaser Date
__________________________________ _____________________ Subsequent Qualified Purchaser Date

Page 1006 of 1575 ends

82108.00238\43970055.1
NRBI-60157\3148020.1 F-25
EXHIBIT 6

SAMPLE CALCULATIONS OF AFFORDABLE PURCHASE COST
[TO BE INSERTED]

Page 1007 of 1575 ends

Attachment 9

Page 1008 of 1575 ends

Page 1009 of 1575 ends

Page 1010 of 1575 ends

Page 1011 of 1575 ends

Page 1012 of 1575 ends

Page 1013 of 1575 ends

Page 1014 of 1575 ends

Page 1015 of 1575 ends

VICINITY MAP
Attachment 10

Page 1016 of 1575 ends

ORANGE COUNTY . LOS ANGELES . BAY AREA . SACRAMENTO
MURPHY RANCH SS-1

ESCALON, CA
0 4 8 16

DESIGN SUBMITTAL
© 2024 WILLIAM HEZMALHALCH ARCHITECTS, INC. DBA WHA. | 2023310 | 08-11-25

CONCEPTUAL STREET SCENES
Note: Floorplans and elevations are conceptual and subject to updates per code & market
PLAN 3XC | Boutique PLAN AB | Ranch PLAN 4A | Vineyard PLAN 1XA | Vineyard Attachment 11

Page 1017 of 1575 ends

DRAWN BY:

DATE:SCALE:DWG:CHECKED:

SHEET
OF

REVISION DATE DESCRIPTION BY
JOB #:

Page 1018 of 1575 ends

ORANGE COUNTY . LOS ANGELES . BAY AREA . SACRAMENTO
MURPHY RANCH A1.1

ESCALON, CA
0 4 8 16

DESIGN SUBMITTAL
© 2024 WILLIAM HEZMALHALCH ARCHITECTS, INC. DBA WHA. | 2023310 | 08-11-25 Note: Floorplans and elevations are conceptual and subject to updates per code & market
PLAN A
(Single Story)
3 Bedroom | 2 Bath
Opt. California Room
2 Car Garage
1,562 SF
Opt. CA
15x 76.5
B2
110 x 100
B3/Opt. DN
111.5 x 104
LV
175.5 x 153
DR
112 x 80
PB
128 x 14.5
G2
200 x 200
K
E
P
PBA
BA2
LA
PN C
W
W
D
W/H
L

PLAN A FLOOR PLAN
Architectural Detail Area.

Visible from street on corner lot conditions.

Page 1019 of 1575 ends

ORANGE COUNTY . LOS ANGELES . BAY AREA . SACRAMENTO
MURPHY RANCH A1.2

ESCALON, CA
0 4 8 16

DESIGN SUBMITTAL
© 2024 WILLIAM HEZMALHALCH ARCHITECTS, INC. DBA WHA. | 2023310 | 08-11-25 Note: Floorplans and elevations are conceptual and subject to updates per code & market

PLAN A FRONT ELEVATIONS
B | Ranch C | Boutique
A | Vineyard

Page 1020 of 1575 ends

ORANGE COUNTY . LOS ANGELES . BAY AREA . SACRAMENTO
MURPHY RANCH A1.3

ESCALON, CA
0 4 8 16

DESIGN SUBMITTAL
© 2024 WILLIAM HEZMALHALCH ARCHITECTS, INC. DBA WHA. | 2023310 | 08-11-25 Note: Floorplans and elevations are conceptual and subject to updates per code & market

PLAN A ENHANCED RIGHT ELEVATIONS
B | Ranch C | Boutique
A | Vineyard
Architectural Detail Area. Furred Wall & Horizontal Siding Visible from street on corner lot conditions.

Architectural Detail Area. Furred Wall.

Visible from street on corner lot conditions.

Architectural Detail Area. Vertical Siding
Visible from street on corner lot conditions.

Page 1021 of 1575 ends

ORANGE COUNTY . LOS ANGELES . BAY AREA . SACRAMENTO
MURPHY RANCH A1.3

ESCALON, CA
0 4 8 16

DESIGN SUBMITTAL
© 2024 WILLIAM HEZMALHALCH ARCHITECTS, INC. DBA WHA. | 2023310 | 08-11-25 Note: Floorplans and elevations are conceptual and subject to updates per code & market
PLAN 1
(Single Story)
3 Bedroom | 2 Bath
Opt California Room
2 Car Garage
1,760 SF
LV
160 x 16 DR 0
110 x 160
Opt. CA
126 x 100
B2
126 x 100
B3
126 x 110
G2
206 x 210
K
E
P
BA2
PBA
LA
DZ PN
W
L
W D
L
W
W/H
L
PB
166 x 146
PLAN 1 FLOOR PLAN
PLAN 1X
(Single Story)
3 Bedroom | 2 Bath
Opt California Room
3 Car Garage
1,760 SF
LV
160 x 16 DR 0
110 x 160
Opt. CA
126 x 100
B2
126 x 100
B3
126 x 110
G2
286 x 210
K
E
P
BA2
PBA
LA
DZ PN
W
L
W D
L
W
W/H
L
PB
166 x 146
Architectural Detail Area.

Visible from street on corner
lot conditions.

Architectural Detail Area.

Visible from street on corner
lot conditions.

Page 1022 of 1575 ends

ORANGE COUNTY . LOS ANGELES . BAY AREA . SACRAMENTO
MURPHY RANCH A1.4

ESCALON, CA
0 4 8 16

Page 1023 of 1575 ends

ORANGE COUNTY . LOS ANGELES . BAY AREA . SACRAMENTO
MURPHY RANCH A1.5

ESCALON, CA
0 4 8 16

Visible from street on corner lot conditions.

Architectural Detail Area. Furred Wall.

Visible from street on corner lot conditions.

Architectural Detail Area. Furred Wall & Vertical Siding.

Visible from street on corner lot conditions.

Page 1024 of 1575 ends

ORANGE COUNTY . LOS ANGELES . BAY AREA . SACRAMENTO
MURPHY RANCH A1.6

ESCALON, CA
0 4 8 16

Page 1025 of 1575 ends

ORANGE COUNTY . LOS ANGELES . BAY AREA . SACRAMENTO
MURPHY RANCH A1.7

ESCALON, CA
0 4 8 16

DESIGN SUBMITTAL
© 2024 WILLIAM HEZMALHALCH ARCHITECTS, INC. DBA WHA. | 2023310 | 08-11-25 Note: Floorplans and elevations are conceptual and subject to updates per code & market
PLAN 1X ENHANCED LEFT ELEVATIONS
B | Ranch C | Boutique
A | Vineyard
Architectural Detail Area. Furred Wall & Horizontal Siding Visible from street on corner lot conditions.

Architectural Detail Area. Furred Wall.

Visible from street on corner lot conditions.

Architectural Detail Area. Furred Wall & Vertical Siding Visible from street on corner lot conditions.

Page 1026 of 1575 ends

ORANGE COUNTY . LOS ANGELES . BAY AREA . SACRAMENTO
MURPHY RANCH A1.8

ESCALON, CA
0 4 8 16

DESIGN SUBMITTAL
© 2024 WILLIAM HEZMALHALCH ARCHITECTS, INC. DBA WHA. | 2023310 | 08-11-25 Note: Floorplans and elevations are conceptual and subject to updates per code & market
PLAN 2X
(Single Story)
3 Bedroom | 2.5 Bath
Bonus | Tech | Den/Teen/
Opt Bedroom 4 | Calif. Room
3 Car Garage
2,455 SF
PLAN 2
(Single Story)
3 Bedroom | 2.5 Bath
Den/Teen/Opt Bdrm 4 | Tech
California Room
2 Car Garage
2,074 SF
LV
180 x 150
LV
180
x 15 DR 0
110 x 154
DR
110 x 150
Opt. CA
130 x 100
BN
140 x 14 CA 6
150 x 100
B2
100 x 100
B2
100 x 100
B3
130 x 100
P
(60 depth)
P
(60
depth)
B3
130
x 100
DN/Teen/
Opt B4
130 x 96
DN/Teen/
Opt. B4
100
x 100
G2
240 x 200
G2
280 x 200
K K
E
E
BA2
BA2

PDR PDR
LA LA

TECH TECH
PBA
PBA
PN PN
W
W
L
L

W D W D
W
W

W/H W/H
blue indicates "X" revision (expandable)
"X" revision expanded tech/hobbies
"X" revision alcove kitchen expansion
"X" revision (expandable)
"X" revision (expandable)
Retreat
L
L
PB
176 x 136
PB
176 x 186
PLAN 2/2X FLOOR PLANS
Architectural Detail Area.

Visible from street on corner
lot conditions.

Architectural Detail Area.

Visible from street on corner
lot conditions.

Page 1027 of 1575 ends

ORANGE COUNTY . LOS ANGELES . BAY AREA . SACRAMENTO
MURPHY RANCH A1.9

ESCALON, CA
0 4 8 16

Page 1028 of 1575 ends

ORANGE COUNTY . LOS ANGELES . BAY AREA . SACRAMENTO
MURPHY RANCH A1.10

ESCALON, CA
0 4 8 16

Visible from street on corner lot conditions.

Architectural Detail Area. Furred Wall.

Visible from street on corner lot conditions.

Architectural Detail Area. Stone & Vertical Siding.

Visible from street on corner lot conditions.

Page 1029 of 1575 ends

ORANGE COUNTY . LOS ANGELES . BAY AREA . SACRAMENTO
MURPHY RANCH A1.11

ESCALON, CA
0 4 8 16

Page 1030 of 1575 ends

ORANGE COUNTY . LOS ANGELES . BAY AREA . SACRAMENTO
MURPHY RANCH A1.12

ESCALON, CA
0 4 8 16

Visible from street on corner lot conditions.

Architectural Detail Area. Furred Wall.

Visible from street on corner lot conditions.

Architectural Detail Area. Stone & Vertical Siding.

Visible from street on corner lot conditions.

Page 1031 of 1575 ends

ORANGE COUNTY . LOS ANGELES . BAY AREA . SACRAMENTO
MURPHY RANCH A1.13

ESCALON, CA
0 4 8 16

DESIGN SUBMITTAL
© 2024 WILLIAM HEZMALHALCH ARCHITECTS, INC. DBA WHA. | 2023310 | 08-11-25 Note: Floorplans and elevations are conceptual and subject to updates per code & market
PLAN 3X
Lower 2,194 SF
& Upper 475 SF
(Two-Story)
4 Bedroom | 4 Bath
Loft | Den/Teen/Opt Bdrm 5
California Room
3 Car Garage
2,669 SF
PLAN 3
Lower 2,194 SF
(Single Story)
3 Bedroom | 3 Bath
Den/Teen/Opt Bdrm 4
2 Car Garage
2,194 SF
G2
286 x 200
G2
286 x 200
DR
128 x 120
DR
128
x 120
LV
220 x 190
LV
220 x 190
CA
156 x 100
CA
156 x 100
B3
116 x 114
B3
116 x 114
B2
116 x 100
B2
116 x 100
PB
154 x 136
PB
154 x 136
DN/Teen/
Opt B4
126 x 100
DN/Teen/
Opt B5
126 x 100
LF
166 x 118
B4
110 x 110 BA4
BA3 BA3
BA2 BA2

PBA PBA
116
LA
E
LA
E
K K
PN PN

DESK DESK
W
W
D
D
W W
W W
L UP
DN
L L
L L
L
Upper Level 475 SF Lower Level 2,194 SF
P
(50 depth)
P
(50 depth)
PLAN 3/3X FLOOR PLANS
Architectural Detail Area.

Visible on lots backing to
Brennan Ave.

Architectural Detail Area.

Visible from street on corner lot conditions.

Architectural Detail Area.

Visible from street on corner
lot conditions.

Page 1032 of 1575 ends

ORANGE COUNTY . LOS ANGELES . BAY AREA . SACRAMENTO
MURPHY RANCH A1.14

ESCALON, CA
0 4 8 16

Page 1033 of 1575 ends

ORANGE COUNTY . LOS ANGELES . BAY AREA . SACRAMENTO
MURPHY RANCH A1.15

ESCALON, CA
0 4 8 16

Visible from street on corner lot conditions.

Architectural Detail Area. Furred Wall.

Visible from street on corner lot conditions.

Architectural Detail Area. Stone & Vertical Siding.

Visible from street on corner lot conditions.

Page 1034 of 1575 ends

ORANGE COUNTY . LOS ANGELES . BAY AREA . SACRAMENTO
MURPHY RANCH A1.16

ESCALON, CA
0 4 8 16

Page 1035 of 1575 ends

ORANGE COUNTY . LOS ANGELES . BAY AREA . SACRAMENTO
MURPHY RANCH A1.17

ESCALON, CA
0 4 8 16

Visible from street on corner lot conditions.

Architectural Detail Area. Furred Wall.

Visible from street on corner lot conditions.

Architectural Detail Area. Stone & Vertical Siding.

Visible from street on corner lot conditions.

Page 1036 of 1575 ends

ORANGE COUNTY . LOS ANGELES . BAY AREA . SACRAMENTO
MURPHY RANCH A1.18

ESCALON, CA
0 4 8 16

Visible on lots backing to Brennan Ave.

Architectural Detail Area. Furred Wall.

Visible on lots backing to Brennan Ave.

Architectural Detail Area. Furred Wall & Vertical Siding.

Visible on lots backing to Brennan Ave.

Page 1037 of 1575 ends

ORANGE COUNTY . LOS ANGELES . BAY AREA . SACRAMENTO
MURPHY RANCH A1.19

ESCALON, CA
0 4 8 16

DESIGN SUBMITTAL
© 2024 WILLIAM HEZMALHALCH ARCHITECTS, INC. DBA WHA. | 2023310 | 08-11-25 Note: Floorplans and elevations are conceptual and subject to updates per code & market
PLAN 4 & 4X
(Two-Story)
5 Bedroom | 3 Bath | Suite
Loft | Studio (ex) | CA Room
2 Car Garage + 1 Tandem
P4: 2,776 SF
P4X: 3,068 SF
G2
210 x 220
G1
110 x 170
CA
160 x 100
DR
120 x 130
S
156 x 140
LV
260 x 174
P
166 x 66
ST
116 x 126
PB
166 x 170
B2
106 x 108
B3
114 x 116
B4
106 x 108
LF
146 x 110
PBA
BA2 BA3
PBA
K
LA
W D
W
W
W
W
W
UP
DN
L
L
C
L
L
PN
Upper Level
Upper Level P4X
Lower Level P4
Upper Level P4X
1436 SF
+60 SF
1,348 SF
+ 232 SF
Bev
Desk
"X" expansion
"X" Revision
Dual walk-in closets expansion
PLAN 4/4X FLOOR PLANS
Architectural Detail Area.

Visible on lots backing to Brennan Ave.

Architectural Detail Area.

Visible on lots backing to Brennan Ave.

Architectural Detail Area.

Visible from street on corner lot conditions.

Page 1038 of 1575 ends

ORANGE COUNTY . LOS ANGELES . BAY AREA . SACRAMENTO
MURPHY RANCH A1.13

ESCALON, CA
0 4 8 16

Page 1039 of 1575 ends

ORANGE COUNTY . LOS ANGELES . BAY AREA . SACRAMENTO
MURPHY RANCH A1.14

ESCALON, CA
0 4 8 16

Visible from street on corner lot conditions.

Architectural Detail Area. Furred Wall & Trim.

Visible from street on corner lot conditions.

Architectural Detail Area. Vertical Siding with Trim.

Visible from street on corner lot conditions.

Architectural Detail Wrap Area. Vertical Siding & Trim.

Occurs when rear elevation is enhanced. See rear Elevations.

Visible on lots backing to Brennan Ave.

Architectural Detail Wrap Area. Horizontal Siding & Trim.

Occurs when rear elevation is enhanced. See rear Elevations.

Visible on lots backing to Brennan Ave. Architectural Detail Wrap Area. Furred Wall & Trim.

Occurs when rear elevation is enhanced. See rear Elevations.

Visible on lots backing to Brennan Ave.

Page 1040 of 1575 ends

ORANGE COUNTY . LOS ANGELES . BAY AREA . SACRAMENTO
MURPHY RANCH A1.15

ESCALON, CA
0 4 8 16

Visible on lots backing to Brennan Ave.

Architectural Detail Area. Horizontal Siding & Trim.

Visible on lots backing to Brennan Ave.

Architectural Detail Area. Furred Wall & Trim.

Visible on lots backing to Brennan Ave.

Architectural Detail Area. Vertical Siding & Trim.

Visible on lots backing to Brennan Ave.

Architectural Detail Area. Horizontal Siding & Trim.

Visible on lots backing to Brennan Ave.

Architectural Detail Area. Furred Wall & Trim.

Visible on lots backing to Brennan Ave.

Page 1041 of 1575 ends

DRAWN BY:

DATE:SCALE:DWG:CHECKED:

SHEET
OF

REVISION DATE DESCRIPTION BY
JOB #:

Page 1042 of 1575 ends

10 1
of 1165 Scenic Drive, Suite A
Modesto, CA 95350

MISCELLANEOUS

PLANT LEGEND
Attachment 12

Page 1043 of 1575 ends

odellengineering.com
1165 Scenic Drive, Suite A
Modesto, CA 95350
1 DECORATIVE FENCING2 LOT FENCING
10 2of

Page 1044 of 1575 ends

10 3 odellengineering.com of 1165 Scenic Drive, Suite A Modesto, CA 95350

Page 1045 of 1575 ends

10 4 odellengineering.com of 1165 Scenic Drive, Suite A Modesto, CA 95350

Page 1046 of 1575 ends

10 5 odellengineering.com of 1165 Scenic Drive, Suite A Modesto, CA 95350

Page 1047 of 1575 ends

10 6 odellengineering.com of 1165 Scenic Drive, Suite A Modesto, CA 95350

Page 1048 of 1575 ends

107
of 1165 Scenic Drive, Suite A
Modesto, CA 95350

Page 1049 of 1575 ends

108
of 1165 Scenic Drive, Suite A
Modesto, CA 95350

Page 1050 of 1575 ends

109
of 1165 Scenic Drive, Suite A
Modesto, CA 95350

Page 1051 of 1575 ends

10 10
of 1165 Scenic Drive, Suite A
Modesto, CA 95350

Page 1052 of 1575 ends

Attachment 13

Page 1053 of 1575 ends

Page 1054 of 1575 ends

Page 1055 of 1575 ends

Page 1056 of 1575 ends

Attachment 14

Page 1057 of 1575 ends

Page 1058 of 1575 ends

Caltrans Website Update July 2026

Page 1059 of 1575 ends

From: Dylan Casares
To: Diana Trejo
Subject: Requesting Json files for Murphy Ranch Specific Plan Date: Wednesday, May 15, 2024 5:26:04 PM
Attachments: image001.png
Good afternoon,
I am currently reviewing the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for the Murphy Ranch Specific Plan. To assist with the District’s review, can you please provide the CalEEMod .json files for construction emissions/operational emissions?
Please feel free to reach out should you have any questions in regards to my request. Thank you in advance for your help.

Best,
Dylan Casares
Air Quality Specialist
San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District
1990 E. Gettysburg Avenue | Fresno, CA 93726
P. 559.230.6574
Attachment 15

Page 1060 of 1575 ends

October 9, 2025
Diana Trejo
City of Escalon
Planning Department
2060 McHenry Avenue
Escalon, CA 95320
Project: Murphy Ranch Specific Plan – Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
District CEQA Reference No: 20251110
Dear Ms. Trejo:

The San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (District) has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) from the City of Escalon (City) for the proposed project. Per the MND, the project consists of 72 single-family homes (Project). The Project is located at the southeast intersection of State Route 120 and Brennan Avenue west of Escalon, CA.

The District offers the following comments at this time regarding the Project:

Health Risk Screening/Assessment
The ISMND states “Project construction and operational emissions would be below SJVAPCD significance thresholds for criteria pollutants. Implementation of applicable SJVAPCD rules and regulations… would further reduce emissions, making them less likely to reach these sensitive land uses.” Although the Project criteria pollutant emissions from construction and operation will not exceed the District’s significance thresholds, the Project may have the potential to result in health impacts to nearby receptors. Assessing potential health risk impact from a project is different from assessing a project’s potential impact from construction criteria pollutant emissions.

To determine potential health impacts on surrounding receptors (residences, businesses, hospitals, day-care facilities, health care facilities, etc.) a Prioritization and/or a Health Risk Assessment (HRA) should be performed for the Project. These

Page 1061 of 1575 ends

San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District Page 2 of 7 District Reference No: 20251110
October 9, 2025
health risk determinations should quantify and characterize potential Toxic Air Contaminants (TACs) identified by the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment/California Air Resources Board (OEHHA/CARB) that pose a present or potential hazard to human health.

Health risk analyses should include all potential air emissions from the project, which include emissions from construction of the project, including multi-year construction, as well as ongoing operational activities of the project. Note, two common sources of TACs can be attributed to diesel exhaust emitted from heavy-duty off-road earth moving equipment during construction, and from ongoing operation of heavy-duty on-road trucks.

Prioritization (Screening Health Risk Assessment):

A “Prioritization” is the recommended method for a conservative screening-level health risk assessment. The Prioritization should be performed using the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association’s (CAPCOA) methodology. Please contact the District for assistance with performing a Prioritization analysis.

The District recommends that a more refined analysis, in the form of an HRA, be performed for any project resulting in a Prioritization score of 10 or greater. This is because the prioritization results are a conservative health risk representation, while the detailed HRA provides a more accurate health risk evaluation.

Health Risk Assessment:

Prior to performing an HRA, it is strongly recommended that land use agencies/ project proponents develop and submit for District review a health risk modeling protocol that outlines the sources and methodologies that will be used to perform the HRA.

A development project would be considered to have a potentially significant health risk if the HRA demonstrates that the health impacts would exceed the District’s established risk thresholds, which can be found here:
https://ww2.valleyair.org/permitting/ceqa/.

A project with a significant health risk would trigger all feasible mitigation measures.

The District strongly recommends that development projects that result in a significant health risk not be approved by the land use agency.

Page 1062 of 1575 ends

San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District Page 3 of 7 District Reference No: 20251110
October 9, 2025
The District is available to review HRA protocols and analyses. For HRA submittals please provide the following information electronically to the District for review:
• HRA (AERMOD) modeling files
• HARP2 files
• Summary of emissions source locations, emissions rates, and emission factor calculations and methodologies.

For assistance, please contact the District’s Technical Services Department by:
• E-Mailing inquiries to: [email protected]
• Calling (559) 230-5900
Vegetative Barriers and Urban Greening
There are residential units located south of the Project. The District suggests the City consider the feasibility of incorporating vegetative barriers and urban greening as a measure to further reduce air pollution exposure on sensitive receptors (e.g., residential units).

While various emission control techniques and programs exist to reduce air quality emissions from mobile and stationary sources, vegetative barriers have been shown to be an additional measure to potentially reduce a population’s exposure to air pollution through the interception of airborne particles and the update of gaseous pollutants. Examples of vegetative barriers include, but are not limited to the following: trees, bushes, shrubs, or a mix of these. Generally, a higher and thicker vegetative barrier with full coverage will result in greater reductions in downwind pollutant concentrations. In the same manner, urban greening is also a way to help improve air quality and public health in addition to enhancing the overall beautification of a community with drought tolerant, low-maintenance greenery.

Clean Lawn and Garden Equipment in the Community
Since the Project consists of residential development, gas-powered residential and commercial lawn and garden equipment have the potential to result in an increase of NOx and PM2.5 emissions. Utilizing electric lawn care equipment can provide residents with immediate economic, environmental, and health benefits. The District recommends the Project proponent consider the District’s Clean Green Yard Machines (CGYM) program which provides incentive funding for replacement of existing gas powered lawn and garden equipment. More information on the District CGYM program and funding can be found at: https://ww2.valleyair.org/grants/cleangreen-yard-machines-residential/ and https://ww2.valleyair.org/grants/zero-emission-landscaping-equipment-voucherprogram/.

Page 1063 of 1575 ends

San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District Page 4 of 7 District Reference No: 20251110
October 9, 2025
On-Site Solar Deployment
It is the policy of the State of California that renewable energy resources and zerocarbon resources supply 100% of retail sales of electricity to California end-use customers by December 31, 2045. While various emission control techniques and programs exist to reduce air quality emissions from mobile and stationary sources, the production of solar energy is contributing to improving air quality and public health. The District suggests that the City consider incorporating solar power systems as an emission reduction strategy for the Project District Rules and Regulations
The District issues permits for many types of air pollution sources, and regulates some activities that do not require permits. A project subject to District rules and regulations would reduce its impacts on air quality through compliance with the District’s regulatory framework. In general, a regulation is a collection of individual rules, each of which deals with a specific topic. As an example, Regulation II (Permits) includes District Rule 2010 (Permits Required), Rule 2201 (New and Modified Stationary Source Review), Rule 2520 (Federally Mandated Operating Permits), and several other rules pertaining to District permitting requirements and processes.

The list of rules below is neither exhaustive nor exclusive. Current District rules can be found online at: https://ww2.valleyair.org/rules-and-planning/current-district-rulesand-regulations. To identify other District rules or regulations that apply to future projects, or to obtain information about District permit requirements, the project proponents are strongly encouraged to contact the District’s Small Business Assistance (SBA) Office at (209) 557-6446.

District Rule 9510 - Indirect Source Review (ISR)
The Project is subject to District Rule 9510 because it will receive a projectlevel discretionary approval from a public agency and will equal or exceed 50 dwelling units residential development.

The purpose of District Rule 9510 is to reduce the growth in both NOx and PM emissions associated with development and transportation projects from mobile and area sources; specifically, the emissions associated with the construction and subsequent operation of development projects. The ISR Rule requires developers to mitigate their NOx and PM emissions by incorporating clean air design elements into their projects. Should the proposed development project clean air design elements be insufficient to meet the required emission reductions, developers must pay a fee that ultimately funds incentive projects to achieve off-site emissions reductions.

Page 1064 of 1575 ends

San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District Page 5 of 7 District Reference No: 20251110
October 9, 2025
Per Section 5.0 of the ISR Rule, an Air Impact Assessment (AIA) application is required to be submitted no later than applying for project-level approval from a public agency. As of the date of this letter, the District has not received an AIA application for this Project. Please inform the project proponent to immediately submit an AIA application to the District to comply with District Rule 9510 so that proper mitigation and clean air design under ISR can be incorporated into the Project’s design. One AIA application should be submitted for the entire Project.

Information about how to comply with District Rule 9510 can be found online at:
https://ww2.valleyair.org/permitting/indirect-source-review-rule-overview The AIA application form can be found online at:
https://ww2.valleyair.org/permitting/indirect-source-review-rule-overview/formsand-applications/ District staff is available to provide assistance, and can be reached by phone at (559) 230-5900 or by email at [email protected].

District Rule 4002 (National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants)
The Project will be subject to District Rule 4002 since the Project will include demolition and removal of existing structures. To protect the public from uncontrolled emissions of asbestos, this rule requires a thorough inspection for asbestos to be conducted before any regulated facility is demolished or renovated. Any asbestos present must be handled in accordance with established work practice standards and disposal requirements.

Information on how to comply with District Rule 4002 can be found online at:
https://ww2.valleyair.org/compliance/demolition-renovation/.

District Rule 4601 (Architectural Coatings)
The Project will be subject to District Rule 4601 since it is expected to utilize architectural coatings. Architectural coatings are paints, varnishes, sealers, or stains that are applied to structures, portable buildings, pavements or curbs.

The purpose of this rule is to limit VOC emissions from architectural coatings.

In addition, this rule specifies architectural coatings storage, cleanup and labeling requirements. Additional information on how to comply with District Rule 4601 requirements can be found online at:
https://ww2.valleyair.org/media/tkgjeusd/rule-4601.pdf

Page 1065 of 1575 ends

San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District Page 6 of 7 District Reference No: 20251110
October 9, 2025
District Regulation VIII (Fugitive PM10 Prohibitions)
The project proponent may be required to submit a Construction Notification Form or submit and receive approval of a Dust Control Plan prior to commencing any earthmoving activities as described in Regulation VIII, specifically Rule 8021 – Construction, Demolition, Excavation, Extraction, and Other Earthmoving Activities.

Should the project result in at least 1-acre in size, the project proponent shall provide written notification to the District at least 48 hours prior to the project proponents intent to commence any earthmoving activities pursuant to District Rule 8021 (Construction, Demolition, Excavation, Extraction, and Other Earthmoving Activities). Also, should the project result in the disturbance of 5- acres or more, or will include moving, depositing, or relocating more than 2,500 cubic yards per day of bulk materials, the project proponent shall submit to the District a Dust Control Plan pursuant to District Rule 8021 (Construction, Demolition, Excavation, Extraction, and Other Earthmoving Activities). For additional information regarding the written notification or Dust Control Plan requirements, please contact District Compliance staff at (559) 230-5950.

The application for both the Construction Notification and Dust Control Plan can be found online at: https://ww2.valleyair.org/media/fm3jrbsq/dcp-form.docx Information about District Regulation VIII can be found online at:
https://ww2.valleyair.org/dustcontrol
District Rule 4901 - Wood Burning Fireplaces and Heaters The purpose of this rule is to limit emissions of carbon monoxide and particulate matter from wood burning fireplaces, wood burning heaters, and outdoor wood burning devices. This rule establishes limitations on the installation of new wood burning fireplaces and wood burning heaters.

Specifically, at elevations below 3,000 feet in areas with natural gas service, no person shall install a wood burning fireplace, low mass fireplace, masonry heater, or wood burning heater.

Information about District Rule 4901 can be found online at:
https://ww2.valleyair.org/compliance/residential-wood-smoke-reductionprogram/

Page 1066 of 1575 ends

San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District Page 7 of 7 District Reference No: 20251110
October 9, 2025
Other District Rules and Regulations
The Project may also be subject to the following District rules: Rule 4641 (Cutback, Slow Cure, and Emulsified Asphalt, Paving and Maintenance Operations).

District Comment Letter
The District recommends that a copy of the District’s comments be provided to the Project proponent.

If you have any questions or require further information, please contact Jacob Torrez by e-mail at [email protected] or by phone at (559) 230-6558.

Sincerely,
Mark Montelongo
Director of Policy and Government Affairs
For: Daniel Martinez
Program Manager

Page 1067 of 1575 ends

“Provide a safe and reliable transportation network that serves all people and respects the environment” OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT 10 DIRECTOR
P.O. BOX 2048 | STOCKTON, CA 95201
(209) 948-7943 | FAX (209) 948-7179 TTY 711
www.dot.ca.gov
June 19, 2025
10-SJ-120-PM 15.976
Project #24-797
Murphy Ranch Specific Plan
Diana Trejo
City of Escalon
2060 McHenry Avenue
Escalon, CA 95320
Dear Ms. Trejo:

The California Department of Transportation appreciates the opportunity to review the revised TIS for the proposed 73 single-family homes at the southeast corner of State Route 120 (Yosemite Avenue) and Brennan Road. The Department has the following comments:

1. This project will create additional impacts on the highway that was not considered during the recent safety project at the intersection of Brennan and SR 120. To mitigate these impacts the developer should install additional flashing beacons with oversized advanced intersection warning signs and supplemental street names on SR 120 as mentioned in the Technical Memorandum.

2. Caltrans agrees with the improvements on north bound Brennan proposed on Page 19 of 24 from the Technical Memorandum:
a. Doubled-up oversized advanced “Stop Ahead” intersection warning signs with (with or without flashing beacons) and retroreflective sheeting on sign posts b. Restriping the stop bar and marked “STOP” north of the railroad tracks. c. Restripe stop bar south of the railroad tracks with “DO NOT STOP ON TRACKS” signage.”
Once the City of Escalon approves these recommendations, the developer should install these improvements as part of the safety countermeasure improvements for this residential project before it is open to traffic.

3. An Encroachment Permit will be required for work done within the Department’s right of way. This work is subject to the California Environmental Quality Act. Therefore, environmental studies may be required as part of the encroachment permits application.

A qualified professional must conduct any such studies undertaken to satisfy the Department’s environmental review responsibilities. Ground disturbing activities to the site prior to completion and/or approval of required environmental documents may

Page 1068 of 1575 ends

Ms. Trejo
June 19, 2025

Page 2 ends

“Provide a safe and reliable transportation network that serves all people and respects the environment” affect the Department’s ability to issue a permit for the project. Furthermore, if engineering plans or drawings will be part of your permit application, they should be prepared in standard units.

If you have any questions, please contact me at (209) 483-2582 or Nicholas Fung at (209) 986-1552.

Sincerely,
Tom Dumas
Chief, Office of Metropolitan Planning

Page 1069 of 1575 ends

SAN JOAQUIN
COUNTY
Environmental Health Department
Jasjit Kang, REHS, Director
Greatness grows here. Muniappa Naidu, REHS, Assistant Director

PROGRAM COORDINATORS
Jeff Carruesco, REHS, RDI
Willy Ng, REHS
Steven Shih, REHS
Elena Manzo, REHS
Natalia Subbotnikova, REHS
May 16, 2024
To: City of Escalon Development Services
Attention: Planning Division
From: Rena' LeRoy; (209) 616-3021 491>
Environmental Health Specialist
RE: Project Application 24-797 - Annexation, Tentative Subdivision Map, Specific Plan, Planned Development ;Referral, SU0016266
18112 and 18092 Brennan Ave, Escalon; APN 225-040-28, -29 The following requirements have been identified as pertinent to this project. Other requirements may also apply. These requirements cannot be modified:

Written Confirmation is required from the Public Works Department that improvements have been constructed or financial arrangements have been made for any improvements for public sewer required by the agency. In addition, written confirmation from the Public Works Department that the agency has or will have the sewer capacity to serve the development is also required (San Joaquin County Development Title, Section 9-600.020).

The applicant shall provide written confirmation from the water providers that improvements have been constructed or financial arrangements have been made for any improvements required by the agency and that the agency has or will have the capacity to serve the proposed development. Said written confirmation shall be submitted prior to the issuance of a building permit (San Joaquin County Development Title, Section 9-602.010).

Any existing wells or septic systems to be abandoned shall be destroyed under permit and inspection by the EHD (San Joaquin County Development Title, Section 9-605.010 & 9- 601.020).

Any geotechnical drilling shall be conducted under permit and inspection by The Environmental Health Department (San Joaquin County Development Title, Section 9- 1115.3 and 9-1115.6).
1868 E. Hazelton Avenue I Stockton, California 95205 I T 209 468-3420 I F 209 464-0138 I www.sjgov.org/ehd

Page 1070 of 1575 ends

1520 Yosemite Ave. Escalon, CA 95320 | 209-838-3591 | 209-838-6703 | www.escalonusd.org June 25, 2024
Diana Trejo, Assistant Planner
City of Escalon
2060 McHenry Ave.

Escalon, CA 95320
Dear Ms. Trejo:

In response to the City’s email dated June 17, 2024, the addition of 73 single family homes located off of Highway 120 and Brennan in the Van Allen zoned attendance area, will have an impact on the Escalon Unified School District. The projected impacts by grade level are the following:

Grade Level Projected Units Student Generation
Rate*
Projected Students
K-6 73 .4 29
7-8 73 .1 7
9-12 73 .2 15
Total .7 51
*Office of Public School Construction Student Generation Rates.

Thank you for the opportunity to provide input regarding the impact of this project on our School District.

Best Regards,
Ricardo Chavez
Superintendent

Page 1071 of 1575 ends

S J C O G, Inc.
555 East Weber Avenue ● Stockton, CA 95202 ● (209) 235-0574 ● Email: [email protected] San Joaquin County Multi-Species Habitat Conservation & Open Space Plan (SJMSCP)

SJMSCP RESPONSE TO LOCAL JURISDICTION (RTLJ)
ADVISORY AGENCY NOTICE TO SJCOG, Inc.

To: Planning Department, City of Escalon, Development Services Planning Division From: Laurel Boyd, SJCOG, Inc. Phone: (209) 235-0574 Email: [email protected] Date: April 30, 2024
Local Jurisdiction Project Title: Project Application 24-797 – Annexation, Tentative Subdivision Map, Specific Plan, Planned Development
Assessor Parcel Number(s): 225-040-28, -29
Local Jurisdiction Project Number: 24-797
Total Acres to be converted from Open Space Use: Unknown Habitat Types to be Disturbed: Agricultural Habitat Land Species Impact Findings: Findings to be determined by SJMSCP biologist.

Dear City of Escalon, Planning Department:

SJCOG, Inc. has reviewed the project referral for 24-797. This project consists of an Annexation, Tentative Subdivision Map, Specific Plan, and Planned Development to develop approximately 18.0 acres into a 73 lot single-family housing subdivision with underground utilities, street improvements, and expansion of an adjacent existing park. The project site is located at the southeast corner of Brennan Avenue and State Route 120, Escalon (APN: 225-040-28, -29).

The City of Escalon is a signatory to San Joaquin County Multi-Species Habitat Conservation and Open Space Plan (SJMSCP). Participation in the SJMSCP satisfies requirements of both the state and federal endangered species acts, and ensures that the impacts are mitigated below a level of significance in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The LOCAL JURISDICTION retains responsibility for ensuring that the appropriate Incidental Take Minimization Measure are properly implemented and monitored and that appropriate fees are paid in compliance with the SJMSCP. Although participation in the SJMSCP is voluntary, Local Jurisdiction/Lead Agencies should be aware that if project applicants choose against participating in the SJMSCP, they will be required to provide alternative mitigation in an amount and kind equal to that provided in the SJMSCP.

This Project is subject to the SJMSCP. This can be up to a 30 day process and it is recommended that the project applicant contact SJMSCP staff as early as possible. It is also recommended that the project applicant obtain an information package. http://www.sjcog.org
Please contact SJMSCP staff regarding completing the following steps to satisfy SJMSCP requirements:
 Schedule a SJMSCP Biologist to perform a pre-construction survey prior to any ground disturbance  SJMSCP Incidental take Minimization Measures and mitigation requirement:

1. Incidental Take Minimization Measures (ITMMs) will be issued to the project and must be signed by the project applicant prior to any ground disturbance but no later than six (6) months from receipt of the ITMMs. If ITMMs are not signed within six months, the applicant must reapply for SJMSCP Coverage. Upon receipt of signed ITMMs from project applicant, SJCOG, Inc. staff will sign the ITMMs. This is the effective date of the ITMMs.

2. Under no circumstance shall ground disturbance occur without compliance and satisfaction of the ITMMs.

3. Upon issuance of fully executed ITMMs and prior to any ground disturbance, the project applicant must:
a. Post a bond for payment of the applicable SJMSCP fee covering the entirety of the project acreage being covered (the bond should be valid for no longer than a 6 month period); or b. Pay the appropriate SJMSCP fee for the entirety of the project acreage being covered; or c. Dedicate land in-lieu of fees, either as conservation easements or fee title; or d. Purchase approved mitigation bank credits.

4. Within 6 months from the effective date of the ITMMs or issuance of a building permit, whichever occurs first, the project applicant must:
a. Pay the appropriate SJMSCP for the entirety of the project acreage being covered; or b. Dedicate land in-lieu of fees, either as conservation easements or fee title; or

Page 1072 of 1575 ends

2 | SJCOG, Inc.
c. Purchase approved mitigation bank credits.

Failure to satisfy the obligations of the mitigation fee shall subject the bond to be called.  Receive your Certificate of Payment and release the required permit It should be noted that if this project has any potential impacts to waters of the United States [pursuant to Section 404 Clean Water Act], it would require the project to seek voluntary coverage through the unmapped process under the SJMSCP which could take up to 90 days. It may be prudent to obtain a preliminary wetlands map from a qualified consultant. If waters of the United States are confirmed on the project site, the Corps and the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) would have regulatory authority over those mapped areas [pursuant to Section 404 and 401 of the Clean Water Act respectively] and permits would be required from each of these resource agencies prior to grading the project site.

If you have any questions, please call (209) 235-0574.

Page 1073 of 1575 ends

3 | SJCOG, Inc.

S J C O G, Inc.

San Joaquin County Multi-Species Habitat Conservation & Open Space Plan 555 East Weber Avenue ● Stockton, CA 95202 ● (209) 235-0600 ● FAX (209) 235-0438

SJMSCP HOLD
TO: Local Jurisdiction: Community Development Department, Planning Department, Building Department, Engineering Department, Survey Department, Transportation Department, Other: ___________
FROM: Laurel Boyd, SJCOG, Inc.

DO NOT AUTHORIZE SITE DISTURBANCE

DO NOT ISSUE A BUILDING PERMIT
DO NOT ISSUE __________ FOR THIS PROJECT
The landowner/developer for this site has requested coverage pursuant to the San Joaquin County MultiSpecies Habitat Conservation and Open Space Plan (SJMSCP). In accordance with that agreement, the Applicant has agreed to:
1) SJMSCP Incidental Take Minimization Measures and mitigation requirement:

If ITMMs are not signed within six months, the applicant must reapply for SJMSCP Coverage. Upon receipt of signed ITMMs from project applicant, SJCOG, Inc. staff will sign the ITMMs. This is the effective date of the ITMMs.

2. Under no circumstance shall ground disturbance occur without compliance and satisfaction of the ITMMs.

Failure to satisfy the obligations of the mitigation fee shall subject the bond to be called.

Project Title: Project Application 24-797
Landowner: Carr Escalon Property, LLC Applicant: NRB Investments, LLC Assessor Parcel #s: 225-040-28, -29
T _______, R______, Section(s): _____
Local Jurisdiction Contact: City of Escalon, Planning Department The LOCAL JURISDICTION retains responsibility for ensuring that the appropriate Incidental Take Minimization Measures are properly implemented and monitored and that appropriate fees are paid in compliance with the SJMSCP.

Page 1074 of 1575 ends

From: Hightower, Jeffrey [LAFCO]
To: Diana Trejo
Subject: RE: Proposed Project #24-797 - Murphy Ranch
Date: Friday, May 31, 2024 3:15:20 PM
Attachments: image005.png
image001.png
image003.png
Hi Diana,
Thank you for your email follow-up. In general LAFCo is very supportive of this annexation as it has been within the City’s SOI since at least 1997. A few factors need to be included that I didn’t note in the application. The Cortese Knox Hertzberg Act of 2000 (CKH), Section 56375(7) requires that the City pre-zone the property. For Murphy Ranch the pre-zoning to the site seems to be to SP(Murphy Ranch)? The pre-zoning to the correct designation needs to be clarified.

The discussion of agricultural resources needs to discuss the factors that determine if the property meets the definition of Prime Agricultural Land pursuant to CKH Section 56064, please see below:
"Prime agricultural land" means an area of land, whether a single parcel or contiguous parcels, that has not been developed for a use other than an agricultural use and that meets any of the following qualifications:
(a) Land that qualifies, if irrigated, for rating as class I or class II in the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service land use capability classification, whether or not land is actually irrigated, provided that irrigation is feasible.
(b) Land that qualifies for rating 80 through 100 Storie Index Rating. (c) Land that supports livestock used for the production of food and fiber and that has an annual carrying capacity equivalent to at least one animal unit per acre as defined by the United States Department of Agriculture in the National Range and Pasture Handbook, Revision 1, December 2003. (d) Land planted with fruit or nut-bearing trees, vines, bushes, or crops that have a nonbearing period of less than five years and that will return during the commercial bearing period on an annual basis from the production of unprocessed agricultural plant production not less than four hundred dollars ($400) per acre. (e) Land that has returned from the production of unprocessed agricultural plant products an annual gross value of not less than four hundred dollars ($400) per acre for three of the previous five calendar years.

In the discussion of air resources of the MND if the applicant has voluntarily entered into an agreement with the San Joaquin Air Pollution Control District to reduce air emissions from the project (Voluntary Emission Reduction Agreement, aka, VERA) pursuant to CKH Section 56668.5.

Please discuss how the project will assist the City in achieving Regional House Needs Allocation goals in the Housing and Population discussion in the MND pursuant to CKH Section 56668(m).

From: Diana Trejo <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, May 31, 2024 1:50 PM
To: [email protected]; Hightower, Jeffrey [LAFCO] <[email protected]>; '[email protected]' Cc: Jaylen French <[email protected]>
Subject: Proposed Project #24-797 - Murphy Ranch
Hello,
Please see links below for proposed Project #24-797 Annexation, Tentative Subdivision Map, Specific Plan, Planned Development Application, and Initial Study/ MND for Murphy Ranch on Brennan Road, Escalon. We were anticipating comments from your agency. Please let us know if your department will or will not have comments on the project. · https://cdnsm5-
hosted.civiclive.com/UserFiles/Servers/Server_10745808/File/Government/Departments/Development%20Services/Planning/Upcoming%20Projects/Murphy%20Ranch%20Transmittal%20Package.pdf · https://www.cityofescalon.org/UserFiles/Servers/Server_10745808/File/Government/Departments/Development%20Services/Planning/Upcoming%20Projects/ADMIN%20DRAFT%20ISMND%204- 29-24.pdf
Thank you.

Diana Trejo
Assistant Planner
City of Escalon
2060 McHenry Ave, Escalon, CA 95320
(: 209-691-7422 4: 209-691-7409
*: [email protected]
For immediate assistance, please contact the Community Development General Line at 209-691-7430.

City Hall office hours are Monday through Thursday 8am-12pm and 1pm-5pm. The office is closed on Fridays.

This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received.

Page 1075 of 1575 ends

1231 Eleventh St.

P.O. Box 4060
Modesto, CA 95352
(209) 526-7373
May 2, 2024
City of Escalon
2060 McHenry Ave.

Escalon, CA 95320
RE: Utility Verification – 24-797 Murphy Ranch
APN: 225-040-280 and 225-040-290 (Brennan Ave. and SR120) Thank you for allowing the District to comment on this referral. The following are the recommendations from our Electrical, Irrigation and Domestic Water Divisions.

Irrigation
• The subject project referral lies outside of MID’s irrigation service boundary and there are no irrigation or domestic water facilities in the subject project area. Therefore, no comments from Water Ops.

Domestic Water
• No comment at this time.

Electrical
• The attached drawing shows the approximate location of the District’s existing electrical facilities within or adjacent to the project area.
• High voltage is present within and adjacent to the project area. This includes 17,200 volts underground primary and underground secondary facilities. Use extreme caution when operating heavy equipment, using a crane, ladders, scaffolding, handheld tools or any other type of equipment near the existing MID electric lines and cables. Workers and equipment should always maintain a distance no less than 10 feet from overhead facilities. Assume all overhead and underground electric facilities are energized.
• The contractor shall verify actual depth and location of all underground utilities prior to start of construction. Notify "Underground Service Alert" (USA) (Toll Free 800-227-2600) before trenching, grading, excavating, drilling, pipe pushing, tree planting, post-hole digging, etc. USA will notify all utilities to mark the location of their underground facilities. • MID requires that any trenching maintain a 1:1 horizontal distance from any existing pole, determined by the depth of the trench. If trenching encroaches on this requirement, the Contractor needs to contact the MID Electric Engineering Department to brace any affected

Page 1076 of 1575 ends

City of Escalon
RE: Brennan Ave. and SR120
May 2, 2024

Page 2 ends

poles during the trenching process. The cost of any required pole bracing will be assumed by the requesting party. Estimates for bracing any existing poles will be supplied upon request. • Existing MID easements for protection of underground electrical facilities are to remain.

Underground secondary cable shall be protected by a minimum 5 foot. wide easement centered on the underground cable. Underground primary cable shall be protected by a minimum 10 foot. wide easement centered on the underground cable.
• MID easements for protection of overhead and underground electrical facilities are required.

MID overhead secondary cable shall be protected by a minimum 20’ wide easement centered on the overhead cable. Overhead primary cable shall be protected by a minimum 30’ wide easement centered on the overhead cable. MID underground secondary cable shall be protected by a minimum 5 foot. wide easement centered on the underground cable. MID underground primary cable shall be protected by a minimum 10 foot. wide easement centered on the underground cable. When underground cable is not located in the Road Right of Way or within the PUE along the street frontage a MID easement is required to protect the existing underground electrical facilities and maintain necessary safety clearances. • Existing electric service may not be adequate for the proposed project development. Prior to any construction a full set of construction plans must be submitted to Electrical Engineering Design Group. Please contact Modesto Irrigation District at (209) 526-7337 or (888) 335-1643 and ask for the Electrical Engineering Design Group to coordinate project/cost requirements. • Due to supply chain disruptions beyond MID’s control, please contact the Engineering Design Group to ensure adequate materials are available for timely completion of the project.

The Modesto Irrigation District reserves its future rights to utilize its property, including its canal and electrical easements and rights-of-way, in a manner it deems necessary for the installation and maintenance of electric, irrigation, agricultural and urban drainage, domestic water and telecommunication facilities. These needs, which have not yet been determined, may consist of poles, crossarms, wires, cables, braces, insulators, transformers, service lines, open channels, pipelines, control structures and any necessary appurtenances, as may, in District’s opinion, be necessary or desirable.

If you have any questions, please contact me (209) 526-7447.

Sincerely,
Lien Campbell
Risk & Property Analyst
Copy: File

Page 1077 of 1575 ends

CITY OF ESCALON APP. BY:

TAG NO: DATE: 04/29/2024
APP. BY:MAP: 1 OF 1
NO. REVISION DATE NO. REVISION DATE
B
R
E
N
N
A
N
AV
120
120

NORTHWOOD ST
B
R
A
I
R
W
O
O
D
AV
E
D
G
E
W
O
O
D
AV

CHABLIS DR
C
H
A
R
DON
N
AY
C
T
C
R
O
C
E
D
R

FARINELLI

CHELESTINA LN

ALBERTO LN

NONI AV
MOS
S
WOOD
AV

CALIFORNIA ST
DWG BY: juancarlos0623
W.O. NO: PROJECT:

BRENNAN AVE & SR 120 (OVERVIEW)

MID - ELECTRIC
MAP 1 MAP 2

Page 1078 of 1575 ends

DWG BY: juancarlos0623
APP. BY:

DATE: 04/29/2024
APP. BY:

MAP 1

CITY OF ESCALON
NO. REVISION DATE
MAP: 1 OF 1
W.O. NO:

PROJECT:

TAG NO:

B
R
E
N
N
A
N
AV
120

CHELESTINA LN
RTO LN

MAN-HOLE
(TYPICAL)

SECONDARY BOX
(TYPICAL)

MOD BOX
(TYPICAL)

SERVICE CONDUCTOR

UNDERGROUND
17,200 VOLTS

PRIMARY UNDERGROUND

MID TRANSFORMER

UNDERGROUND (TYPICAL)

SECONDARY CONDUCTOR

UNDERGROUND
17,200 VOLTS

PRIMARY UNDERGROUND
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T

MOD BOX
(TYPICAL) SECONDARY BOX
(TYPICAL)
T
T
T

MID TRANSFORMER

UNDERGROUND (TYPICAL)
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T

T RTO LN

CHELESTINA LN
T
T
T
T
T
B
R
E
N
N
A
N
AV
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
17,200 VOLTS

PRIMARY UNDERGROUND
17,200 VOLTS

PRIMARY UNDERGROUND
T

MAN-HOLE
(TYPICAL)

SERVICE CONDUCTOR

UNDERGROUND

SECONDARY CONDUCTOR

UNDERGROUND
120
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
No associated viewport

ELECTRIC

Page 1079 of 1575 ends

DWG BY: juancarlos0623
APP. BY:

DATE: 04/29/2024
APP. BY:

MAP 2

CITY OF ESCALON
NO. REVISION DATE
MAP: 1 OF 1
W.O. NO:

PROJECT:

TAG NO:

CROCE DR

FARINELLI

SECONDARY BOX
(TYPICAL)

SECONDARY CONDUCTOR

UNDERGROUND

MAN-HOLE
(TYPICAL) SERVICE CONDUCTOR

UNDERGROUND

MID TRANSFORMER

UNDERGROUND (TYPICAL)

MOD BOX
(TYPICAL)
17,200 VOLTS

PRIMARY UNDERGROUND

MAN-HOLE
(TYPICAL)
T
T
T
T

SECONDARY BOX
(TYPICAL)

SECONDARY CONDUCTOR

UNDERGROUND

SERVICE CONDUCTOR

UNDERGROUND
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T T
T
T
T

MID TRANSFORMER

UNDERGROUND (TYPICAL)
T
T
T

FARINELLI

CROCE DR
T
T
T
T

MOD BOX
(TYPICAL)
T
No associated viewport

ELECTRIC

Page 1080 of 1575 ends

Plan Review Team
Land Management
[email protected]
PG&E Gas and Electric Facilities Page 1
May 23, 2024
Diana Trejo
City of Escalon
2060 McHenry Ave
Escalon, CA 95320
Re: Project Referral #24-797
Dear City of Fresno:

Thank you for giving us the opportunity to review the Project Referral #24-797. The proposed plan is within the same vicinity of PG&E’s existing electric distribution facilities that serve this property.

The Project Referral #24-797 existing PG&E electric service facilities. The applicant must contact the below resources to apply for the removal of any existing PG&E electric services that exist on the subject parcels.

In accordance with Subdivision of Premises provision of Rule 16 when PG&E's electric service facilities are located on private property that is subsequently subdivided into separate premises with ownership divested to someone other than the applicant, the subdivider is required to provide PG&E with easement rights that are satisfactory to PG&E for its existing facilities.

Additionally, if the subdivider requires future easement needs to provide power to the proposed Parcels, this will be sorted out in the New Business process once the new services are designed and engineered. If the Public Utility Easements (PUE’s) on the Tentative Parcel Map are intended to have PG&E facilities occupy them in the future, the language in the offer of dedication must be sufficient to PG&E and we recommend the following language to be included in the dedication.
• "I/We the undersigned, as Owner(s) of the land shown hereon, do hereby state that I/we am/are the only person(s) whose consent is necessary to pass clear title to said land and do hereby consent to the preparation and recordation of this map and offer for dedication and do hereby dedicate for public uses the Public Utility Easements (PUEs) shown on this map for public utility purposes including electric, gas, communication facilities and all other public utility purposes; together with any and all appurtenances thereto, including the right from time to time to trim and to cut down and clear away or otherwise control any trees or brush. The PUEs hereby offered for dedication are to be kept open and free of buildings, structures and wells of any kind.”

In the event that adequate rights-of-way are not granted as a result of the property subdivision, PG&E does have the right, upon written notice to the applicant, to discontinue service without obligation or liability. The existing owner, applicant, or customer would then have to pay to PG&E the total estimated cost of any required relocation or removal of PG&E's facilities.

Page 1081 of 1575 ends

PG&E Gas and Electric Facilities Page 2
Please contact the Building and Renovation Center (BRSC) for facility map requests by calling 1-877-743-7782 and PG&E’s Service Planning department at www.pge.com/cco for any future modification or relocation requests, or for any additional services you may require.

As a reminder, before any digging or excavation occurs, please contact Underground Service Alert (USA) by dialing 811 a minimum of 2 working days prior to commencing any work. This free and independent service will ensure that all existing underground utilities are identified and marked on-site.

If you have any questions regarding our response, please contact me at paul.takemoto@pge.

Sincerely,
Paul Takemoto
Land Management

Page 1082 of 1575 ends

P.O. Box 747, Ripon, CA 95366-0747 (Mailing)
11011 E. Highway 120, Manteca, CA 95336-9750
(209) 249-4600
May 21, 2024
Diana Trejo
City of Escalon
Development Services Planning Division
2060 McHenry Avenue
Escalon, CA 95320
Re: Murphy Ranch Development
Brennan Ave/Highway 120
APN: 225-040-28 & 29
Dear Ms. Trejo:

The South San Joaquin Irrigation District has reviewed the submitted Site Plan for the above for the above referenced development. The District requests that the following be made conditions of approval for the development:

1. Any proposed disposal of storm water that will ultimately discharge into District facilities shall conform to the District's current policy relative to storm drainage. Hydraulic calculations and plans for proposed storm system shall be provided to the District for review and approval and shall conform to the approved Storm Drainage Master Plan and Storm Drainage Agreement between the District and the City.

2. All District irrigation and drainage facilities which are determined by the District to be affected by the proposed development, shall be replaced with rubber gasket reinforced concrete pipe (RGRCP) or box culverts and shall be relocated, if necessary, to District approved locations. Facilities assumed to be affected by this development include Lateral Bd. The developer shall coordinate with SSJID staff to identify solutions to replace and/or realign the District facilities with pipe/culverts. The ultimate solution shall consider public safety, shall minimize public access to District facilities, and shall not impede or restrict District access or maintenance/operational requirements.

Page 1083 of 1575 ends

P.O. Box 747, Ripon, CA 95366-0747 (Mailing)
11011 E. Highway 120, Manteca, CA 95336-9750
(209) 249-4600
Additionally, the following specific design criteria should be incorporated as part of the project:
a. At minimum, pipeline replacement will be required within the boundary of the subject property and shall extend as far as any proposed surface level improvements. Based on the site plan provided, it appears that Brennan Road crossing will require replacement with Class IV RGRCP.
b. The concrete control structure along the east side of Brennan Road will require inspection by the District to determine if modifications or replacement is necessary. At minimum, the private irrigation facility providing service to the subject parcel shall be removed and adequately plugged at the box. The Developer shall coordinate with the District to identify a design acceptable to the District.
c. The back yard of residential lots shall not overlap the District’s easement as shown on the provided site plan. The underlying land within the District’s easement shall be dedicated to the City and be included as part of the Brennan Road right of way.
d. In no case shall a building, building canopy, structure, explosive, well, guy wire, or any tree, vine, or other deep-rooted crop or shrub be allowed within the easement. Utilities constructed parallel to a District facility must be located a minimum of 15’ from the edge of the District’s facility. e. The District reserves the right to apply additional design requirements as the project design and review process is conducted and additional information becomes available.

3. Improvement plans requiring approval include plans sets that are specific to irrigation improvements and plan sets that are specific to subdivision improvements that propose encroachments within District easements or connections to District facilities.

4. Continuous vehicular access shall be provided within the District’s easement, or immediately adjacent to the District’s easement when adjoining or overlapping a public right of way. Said condition shall be incorporated into the design of the improvements.

No fences, barriers, or masonry walls shall be installed across District easements/facilities.

5. Hydraulic calculations to determine pipe or culvert size will be required for any design changes or relocations that are proposed on District facilities. In accordance with District standards, construction on District facilities is not allowed between February 15th and October 15th of any given year. As such, plans for pipeline improvements need to be received no later than mid-July (3 months before the end of water season), so that all construction work can be completed during the provided window period.

Page 1084 of 1575 ends

P.O. Box 747, Ripon, CA 95366-0747 (Mailing)
11011 E. Highway 120, Manteca, CA 95336-9750
(209) 249-4600

6. All improvements to the District facilities shall comply with the District's current standards, drawings, and policies. The developer shall enter into the necessary agreements, permits, etc., required by the District for construction of District facilities.

7. The property owner and/or developer shall execute Irrigation Service Abandonment Agreements and provide for the removal of irrigation and drainage facilities and structures on property no longer requiring irrigation service. The method of abandonment and extent of such removal shall be determined by District. Private irrigation facilities and easements shall be provided for private use to accommodate property that will still be using District water to irrigate adjacent to the development. The proposed connection of any such private facility to District facilities shall be approved in advance by the District.

8. Easements for all District facilities shall be dedicated on current District forms.

Additional easements shall be dedicated for access to all manholes and control structures.

All District easements shall be shown on the final map together with the District's standard acknowledgment. Easement widths for pipelines or culverts shall be determined by District based upon size of facility, but in no case less than 30 ft. in width. A title report shall be provided to District for its use in preparation of all required documents and to ascertain if the District has a fee interest in the proposed development. Fee interest issues shall be dealt with in accordance with the District’s standard policy.

9. Improvement plans for both off-site and on-site improvements shall be submitted for review and approval by the District's Board of Directors. Prior to plan submittal, the developer shall submit a retainer for plan check and inspections required for the project in accordance with the current established fee schedule.

10. Upon completion of the project, the developer shall provide one complete set of "AsBuilt" drawings to the District for its future use.

11. The following statement shall be affixed or otherwise included within the approved development plans: "SSJID has adopted time limits limiting the period of its approval should the landowner/developer fail to substantially complete the development project in a timely manner per the approved development plans.” These time limits adopted by SSJID are in most cases equal to those utilized by the governmental agency or institution responsible for development approvals. Should the time limit be exceeded, SSJID reserves the right to then apply any of its current development standards and requirements."
Additionally, the District requests that it be notified by the Planning Department when approval has been given with the above stated conditions.

Page 1085 of 1575 ends

P.O. Box 747, Ripon, CA 95366-0747 (Mailing)
11011 E. Highway 120, Manteca, CA 95336-9750
(209) 249-4600
If you have any questions, please contact me in the Engineering Department at (209) 249-4620.

Sincerely,

Forrest Killingsworth
Engineering Dept. Manager

Page 1086 of 1575 ends

From: John Andoh
To: Diana Trejo
Subject: Re: Project Referral #24-797 Murphy Ranch, Brennan Road, Escalon Date: Wednesday, May 22, 2024 6:43:04 AM
Attachments: image003.png
image004.png
Hi Diana,
Please make note that with the potential for increased transit demand, if sidewalks and a bus stop be constructed on SR 120 @ Brannan Road with a bus shelter, bench, solar light, pole, trash can and map case.

John Andoh, CCTM
Transit Manager
City of Escalon
2060 McHenry Avenue
Escalon, CA 95320
209.691.7465 (Office)
209.321.1334 (Cell)
209.691.7439 (fax)
[email protected] (email)
www.cityofescalon.org
eTrans Transit Information 209.541.6645
From: Diana Trejo <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2024 10:43 AM
Subject: Project Referral #24-797 Murphy Ranch, Brennan Road, Escalon Good morning,
Attached is the Draft Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project referral sent last Friday. https://www.cityofescalon.org/UserFiles/Servers/Server_10745808/File/Government/Departments/Development%20Services/Planning/Upcoming%20Projects/ADMIN%20DRAFT%20ISMND%204-29-24.pdf Please let me know if you have any comments or concerns by May 24, 2024 to be included in the staff report.

City Hall office hours are Monday through Thursday 8am-12pm and 1pm-5pm. The office is closed on Fridays.

From: Diana Trejo
Sent: Friday, April 26, 2024 1:03 PM
Subject: Project Referral #24-797 Murphy Ranch, Brennan Road, Escalon Hello,
Please see link below for Project #24-797 Annexation, Tentative Subdivision Map, Specific Plan, and Planned Development Application for Murphy Ranch on Brennan Road, Escalon. Please let me know if you have any comments or concerns by May 24, 2024 to be included in the staff report. The Initial Study/ MND is forthcoming and will be shared in a subsequent email. https://cdnsm5-
hosted.civiclive.com/UserFiles/Servers/Server_10745808/File/Government/Departments/Development%20Services/Planning/Upcoming%20Projects/Murphy%20Ranch%20Transmittal%20Package.pdf Diana Trejo
Assistant Planner
City of Escalon
2060 McHenry Ave, Escalon, CA 95320
(: 209-691-7422 4: 209-691-7409
*: [email protected]
For immediate assistance, please contact the Community Development General Line at 209-691-7430.

City Hall office hours are Monday through Thursday 8am-12pm and 1pm-5pm. The office is closed on Fridays.

Page 1087 of 1575 ends

From: Cessna, Clifford
To: Diana Trejo
Cc: Jacobs, Andrew
Subject: RE: Escalon Annexation next to UP (Inquiry 9526) Date: Friday, June 21, 2024 3:46:06 PM
Attachments: image002.png
image004.png
image006.png
artboard1_5f88a85d-37ef-491a-a094-b0d1dccaf78a.png
Benesch_Logo_2014_145x30_9d11ff27-09fc-45a1-a392-8b0ff9d45c1d.png Good afternoon, Diana –
Your inquiry regarding the development adjacent to UPRR property has been assigned to me for handling. I have reviewed the inquiry and briefly skimmed the PDF documents provided via the links below. Thank you for bringing this potential project to our attention! Per the California MUTCD, Section 8A.01, changes in the vicinity of a grade crossing that could affect the safety of the grade crossing require an on-site diagnostic meeting to be held. Attendees to the meeting should include the road authority, railroad, CPUC, and any other relevant stakeholders (i.e. developer). As development of this parcel will introduce additional traffic to Brennan Road and potentially California Street grade crossings, there should be a Condition of Approval for the developer to conduct a diagnostic meeting at these crossings (and any other affected crossings).

Please note that the Diagnostic Team may make recommendations such as a traffic signal warrant analysis, grade crossing safety improvements, etc. as applicable. While specific safety recommendations are not known until the meeting is held, the City should consider ensuring the developer(s) responsible for creating impacts to the City’s crossings are also responsible for the costs to mitigate the impacts. UPRR will only enter into agreements with the road authority – not with the developer directly – when public grade crossings are impacted. As such, Preliminary Engineering reimbursement agreements and Construction & Maintenance agreements that include costs for improvements will be executed with the City.

I noticed the deadline for submitting Conditions of Approval has passed, but if the City can include the condition to hold a diagnostic, that is the recommendation of Union Pacific Railroad. In the future, please make sure to submit inquiries about development near UPRR property/grade crossings as soon as possible to the Contact Center.

If you have any questions, please let me know.

Cliff Cessna
Public Project Manager | Associate
[email protected]
direct: 916-245-2511mobile: 209-429-7279office: 916-245-1845 For new public project requests: Union Pacific Public Project Request For new utility crossing/permit: Union Pacific Utility Crossing/Permit

Page 1088 of 1575 ends

From: david armstrong
To: [email protected]
Subject: development on Brennan Ave at State Route 120
Date: Sunday, October 5, 2025 3:15:49 PM
Some people who received this message don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important
To the Escalon Planning Commission,
I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed housing development at the intersection of Brennan Road and State Route 120.

We all know this location is already one of the most dangerous in our area, having been the site of multiple serious and fatal traffic accidents. The intersection remains uncontrolled and unsafe, and introducing additional housing in this immediate vicinity will inevitably increase traffic volume, congestion, and the likelihood of further tragedies. I am a retired CHP officer and I know full well the dangers and history of this ridiculously notorious intersection. As it stands, this stretch of road is not remotely equipped to safely handle the existing flow, much less the influx that would come with a new development.

In addition, Brennan Avenue has increasingly become an arterial route for the city— functioning more like a high-speed bypass than a neighborhood street. Those of us who live and raise families along this road already face daily safety concerns from fast-moving traffic and heavy use. Adding more homes, vehicles, and residents will only amplify these risks, eroding the livability and safety of what was once a quiet residential area.

Finally, Escalon does not need additional housing, particularly in such a problematic and hazardous location. One of the defining benefits of our city is its modest size and small-town atmosphere. Rather than pushing for expansion that could harm residents and strain infrastructure, I urge the city to consider a more community-oriented use for this land—such as a park, greenbelt, or nature area that would enhance the quality of life for current residents and reflect the values of those who already invest in and care for this community.

Sincerely,
David Armstrong
1736 Brennan Ave.

Escalon, CA
(209) 985-6924
[email protected]
Attachment 16

Page 1089 of 1575 ends

1 Diana Trejo
From: Addie Creamer <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 6, 2025 11:57 AM
To: Diana Trejo
Subject: Re: Murphy Ranch Project
October 3, 2025
City of Escalon
Escalon planning department
2060 McHenry Avenue
Escalon, CA 95320
Kevin and Adelicia Creamer
1373 Edgewood Ave.

Escalon, CA 95320
Parcel number 225–280–040–000
Proximity to the project boundary is right behind the Murphy Ranch Project plan Our concern is that the proposed sound wall does not extend far enough to provide adequate noise attenuation for our specific residence, which will result in a significant noise impact that has not been adequately mitigated.

We would also like to point out that there are eight full grown queen palm trees, approximately 30 feet tall that have been established for over 20 years. Our other concern is while the project is being developed and their is digging and construction, it would weaken the foundation of the tall queen, palm trees, and they may possibly collapse.

Our requested solution is that the sound wall must be extended to the point past our home to the property line of the parcel behind ours, to ensure effective noise mitigation, and a more sturdy foundation to provide the necessary protection.

Sincerely,
Kevin and Adelicia Creamer
209-324-6979
On Mon, Oct 6, 2025 at 8:07 AM Diana Trejo <[email protected]> wrote:

Good morning Addie,
I’m sorry we are unable to open the attached file which comes through as a .pages file. Could you resend the communication in the body of the email, a pdf, or Word document? Thank you! You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important

Page 1090 of 1575 ends

City of Escalon
Planning Commission Meeting October 14, 2025
I am protesting and oppose the annexation of and Development of the Murphy Ranch housing project prior to the completion of signalization or roundabout at the intersection of Brennan/120. Loud and clear concerns and objections were voiced by Escalon residents at two Town Hall meetings (November 2024 and March 2025). How many more people must injured or killed before we say enough is enough and actually fix this nightmare.

Caltrans, in a request for comment on this development from AP Diane Trejo, responded on June 19, 2025. Their response was for the City to require road stripping and larger stop signs on North and South Brennan before the City approves the plans. I contacted the author of the response, Mr. Nicholas Fung on 10/10/2025. I asked him for written evidence that Caltrans has any plans or timeline for the necessary safety improvements to Brennan/120. He has not responded as there are no such plans and never have been.

The City manager states that Caltrans has committed to fund the “improvements” to this intersection, is lacking in sincerity as there is no proof that what he says is documented, on file and clearly states timelines needed for plans to complete this project. Caltrans has balked for decades now to improve and make safe this intersection, we should balk on this project until safety is more of a concern than profit.

It is the obligation of all our elected and appointed officials tasked with review of this project to put the health and safety of the citizens of Escalon and the public at large before the Developer’s need and greed. Should this development move forward prior to the intersection being signalized or constructing a roundabout, all accidents and fatalities will be on your consciences even after your terms are up.

Page 1091 of 1575 ends

In regards to the vehicle circulation within the proposed development, staff did not address alternatives that I put forth at both town hall meetings. I proposed to eliminate Celivo as an ingress/egress point, and make Riesling a throughway from California St. to 120. This would reduce/slow impact on California St. and the existing neighborhood, while reducing the overburden currently of Brennan/120.

There are six over railroad track roads currently in Escalon.

My next issue is Shadowwood Park/Storm Basin. The BelleTerra LLMD property owners pay for the landscape maintenance, water, electricity to run sprinklers, playground equipment, as well as, the amortization of all included amenities, masonry walls, chain link fence etc. This project fails to address any fiscal impact on our LLMD or reduction of our fees to be levied on Murphy Ranch as they impact our costs to maintain the park/storm basin. This matter again was brought up by me at both town halls, and again not addressed by staff as promised. Any additional costs due to improvements proposed at Murphy Ranch that are levied on the BelleTerra LLMD must be voted on through the Prop 218 process. Any use by Murphy Ranch of our park/storm basin, should obligate them to share in the cost thus reducing our LLMD levies.

The recently rejected application of a mixed use development at Elizabeth and 120 garnered much opposition from the surrounding citizens. The developers were denied their application by both Planning Commission and City Council as they were deemed to have failed to address the concerns and alternatives proposed by the nearby residents. This project/application is so much more concerning than that and should tabled. This area of land is outside the city limits and should not be annexed at this time as there is no need for expediency before all concerns and alternatives are adopted and completed.

Kurt Danziger
389 Noni Avenue

Page 1092 of 1575 ends

Natalie Gallegos
396 California St.

Escalon, CA 95320
October 10, 2025
City of Escalon
2060 McHenry Avenue
Escalon CA, 95320
Attn: Planning Commission, City Manager, City Council
RE: October 14th, 2025 Agenda Item, Project 24-797 Murphy Ranch I am in receipt of the letter dated 9/23/2025, regarding the Planning Meeting on October 14th, 2025 regarding the Murphy Ranch proposed subdivision. I am opposed to this plan.

The community has had two meetings regarding this proposed project since the application was first submitted to the city in April 2024. Both meetings were FULL of community members, and the one in council chambers in March 2025 was standing room only. The room was so full people were standing in the foyer. The attendance number noted by the city is apparently from a "sign in sheet" and not an actual head count. In fact we were limited to an hour meeting and not everyone got the opportunity to speak.

This morning I saw that the agenda packet for this upcoming meeting was uploaded. I was SHOCKED to see that it was 1083 pages!! So my very first question is did all of you thoroughly and honestly read all 1083 pages of this packet in approximately 72 hours? According to chat GPT a ream of paper is 500 pages...so this agenda is approximately two full reams of paper. Chat GPT also says the average novel length is 250-400 pages. This agenda packet is almost the length of 3 long novels!

Page 1093 of 1575 ends

I am also disappointed that the questions asked at the community meetings in November 2024 and March 2025 have not been answered until this agenda packet was posted....two business days before a decision making meeting. I also found that in this agenda package there is a "Public review draft Initial Study/Mitigated negative declaration" Dated September 2025, that the public is now seeing for the first time today.

I have "reviewed" the 1083 agenda package. I located the items that specifically are points of concern for myself and the community as voiced during both prior meetings. This objection to the project will be long as 1083 pages is a lot to respond to.

As you may recall the major bones of contention with the community were the massive traffic issues, the number of homes, the size of the homes and the potential shared or not shared cost of a Community Facilities District, especially pertaining to Shadowood Park.

At our two prior meetings, the issue of Brennan and Hwy 120 was a major concern. We had just had the second fatality in two years at that intersection and several injury accidents all within a few weeks of the Florsheim meeting. The intersection has had the community up in arms so much that even city council member Jeremy Engel started a petition titled "Mandate Installation of a Traffic Signal at Brennan and Hwy 120 in Escalon" To date Mr. Engel has collected 818 signatures. You can find his petition as of tonight on change.org by searching the title. What some of us in the community have learned via public records from Cal Trans, is that Mr. Engel never actually submitted that petition to CalTrans. Per public records provided by CalTrans, someone in our community who works for the county, saw it on social media and emailed a friend of his at Cal Trans and let him know.

I also noted in the current agenda packet that there was no correspondence with CalTrans prior to December 2024 regarding the Murphy Ranch project. It is also noted in the packet that Caltrans didn't issue a formal response until June 2025.

In their response they recommend new striping and updated signage on Brennan.

Nothing else.

Page 1094 of 1575 ends

There are several of us who have contacted CalTrans and requested updates on the "intersection" not Murphy Ranch specifically. CalTrans has very recently admitted "conversations" with the City of Escalon regarding intersection improvements, but everything is very preliminary "discussion" about a signal light or a roundabout. No Inventory Control Studies have even been scheduled let alone started. On April 25, 2025; An internal Cal Trans memo cc'd to the city "asks" for a "Project Initiation Document" to be filled out. Nothing since. And this has been confirmed as of this week via email correspondence to several community members from Cal Trans Public Information Officer; Skip Allum.

Since the initial application submitted was by the Murphy's in early 2024, the city of Escalon approved Western Erectors/Weldway to develop on the North side of Hwy 120 in Liberty Park. This heavy industrial business will bring many employees and commercial truck traffic to the area very soon.

This brings me to the nuts and bolts of this application for the community. The traffic study performed by Florsheim Homes/Fehr & Peers.

The initial application presented to the public April 2024, provided the traffic study which amplified the community objection to this project. The study was done April 18, 2023 through June 1st 2023, Tuesdays thru Thursdays only. Page 9-13 of the Fehr & Peers report dated November 23, 2023 & July 23,2024 ; state the intersection at Hwy 120 & Brennan avenue CURRENTLY rates an LOS F! With 95% queuing. It goes on to say verbatim on page 13 that "During the PM peak hour, delay and queuing on the northbound approach at the intersection without and with the project would be so high, Synchro is incapable of accurately reporting delay or 95th percentile queue. This same traffic study done in 2023 FALSLY claimed that CalTrans was actively doing an ICE (Inventory Control Evaluation) of the intersection at Brennan & 120.

Fast forward to today. Florsheim has "amended" their traffic study as of April 15, 2025. We were just provided this "update" today. I highly encourage you to read thoroughly this traffic study. It can be found in the agenda packet pages 838-949.

The "new" study was done December 3rd 2024- December 5th 2024(TuesdayThursday)see page 845 of your packet. It essentially says the same thing the study did in 2023. There were a few differences; however. They cite that there was ONE fatality in the last 5 years, however; we as a community know there was

Page 1095 of 1575 ends

TWO. The employee at VanAllen school, succumb to her injuries several days after her accident. The updated 2025 study again says there is an ICE study being done by Cal Trans and that is FALSE. In fact this study goes on to say that CalTrans can only confirm that improvements to the intersection will occur prior to 2045!!!! That's 20 years from now!
The second MAJOR ISSUE is the volume of "trips" through the adjacent neighborhood! Using their VMT method of "trip" calculations; the number of "trips" down California street will be "approximately" 1100 daily (the 2023 study said 722 trips). This DOUBLES the amount of traffic currently (590) down California Street ! This development plan limits ALL of the ingress and egress completely funneled to California street. This is beyond overwhelming and disruptive to the residents on California street and the adjacent neighborhood.

There will be 5 outlets dumping on to California street in just the short quarter mile section of California street between Brennan and Riesling. The city labels California Street a MINOR collector street. However 5 bottleneck outlets from hundreds of surrounding homes in such a short span is not MINOR(Riesling North & South, Chelstina, Celvio & Brennan). In addition, the section of California Street between Riesling and Brennan is NARROW. If cars are parked along the street on either side, two small vehicles cannot safely pass side by side. It's virtually impossible for two larger vehicles such as a large pickup trucks or RV to pass side by side. Once you pass Shadowood Park roundabout going EAST bound on California the street significantly increases in width, 10-20 feet wider! The third issue is Shadowood Park and a Community Facilities District. Since 2003 the residents of Farinelli Subdivision have a Lamp Light District (Bella Terra) that we fund out of our individual property taxes to maintain our neighborhood and Shadowood Park. We recently had several meetings regarding the fees and usage and management of these LLD monies. The Murphy Ranch plan "extends" Shadowood Park into the Murphy property and adds a bathroom and other amenities. Who will pay to maintain that? That question has not been answered either. It is the position of Bella Terra LLD that we should not be financially responsible for maintenance of any park "expansions" and "add on amenities" brought in by this development. How is the city going to divide that "responsibility" if it's one continuous park?

Page 1096 of 1575 ends

Fourth issue is, the size of the homes, the number of homes and the type of development in general. I can tell you that EVERYONE on this side of town has been patiently waiting 22+ years for this mess of property to be cleaned up and developed. We were told in 2003-2004, by The Carr Family and the City of Escalon as well as Lakemont Homes that a gated, deed restricted 55 and older, single story....mini Del Webb type of development was going to be put on this property. Per the City of Escalon Archives, confirmed by an email from Jaylen on March 5, 2025...there were two such subdivision proposals submitted to the city.

In 2004 a pre-application was submitted and named Benjamin Estates. Then again in 2007 another Senior deed restricted proposal was submitted to the city, but again likely due to the economy at the time, it never came to fruition. We continue to want exactly that originally planned type of development to go in.

Deed restricted 55 and older single story homes. It would cut the traffic problems in half if not more. Seniors have less vehicles and limit "trips" in and out. It would bring just as much revenue to the city, and seniors are more likely to shop local. Less strain on the existing infrastructure, water, sewer, ect.

I also have some questions regarding the "Conditions of Development" section of this agenda packet. Page 161 of the packet.
#12 of the Conditions, talks about the developer contributing 6.5% current development impact money toward the 120/Brennan Intersection improvements not to exceed $143,724 per building permit. I understand that the city has been "told" by Caltrans that they will "eventually" fully fund any improvements to the intersection....but what if they don't? There have been zero formal studies initiated to date. IS the city going to "collect" this 6.5% up front from the developer and then refund them if Caltrans ever follows through? Caltrans gave a likely completion timeline of 2045!!! That's 20 years from now!!! #19 of the Conditions says that at the 37th building permit the developer is to do another traffic study to evaluate the speed and conditions on 120? What is this? Yes, finally in closing, I would like to summarize my objections to this project.

Page 1097 of 1575 ends

1. Intersection at Hwy 120 & Brennan is not going to be fixed any time soon. 2045 is the projection by CalTrans at this point! The intersection is too dangerous to impose any further development in the area until CalTrans follows through with their promises and makes the improvements at their expense. Building residential on top of one of the most dangerous intersections in the county is reckless. Recall, the city REJECTED Gurmant Lions Inc. and their apartment project by Orlando's for MUCH MUCH less traffic issues!!! The traffic studies done have been done at the LEAST busy traffic times of year, and during the middle of the week. Why were they not done Friday through Monday or holiday weekends when bay area travelers are heading up the hill for the weekend!
120 is the main supply highway to Sonora. It is heavily traveled by Lowes, Walmart, Safeway, Fuel, ect., supplies to the rapidly growing communities east of Escalon. The city of Oakdale has annexed 300 acres and are building 900+ homes. The city of Manteca is extending its city limits east of Austin Road to JackTone, north to French Camp Rd.

They are putting a travel center in at the north east corner of Jack Tone and 120 with gas stations and 5 restaurants. (See Manteca Bulliten article September 9, 2025). City of Riverbank votes on the Riverwalk in 2026! All of these "destinations" are going to bring traffic 10 fold down 120 right through Escalon!!! It's going to get CRAZY fast!!! Fix the highway!!! CalTrans lack of urgency is hindering the city from safely growing. Cal Trans signed sealed and formally approved a traffic light at 120 & French Camp Rd. almost 5 years ago. Shovels were supposed to be in the ground on that project Spring of 2025. NOTHING has been started to date!

Page 1098 of 1575 ends

2. The amount of traffic this type of housing and the restricted ingress and egress and the doubled traffic flow on to California Street is disruptive to the existing neighborhood and will greatly reduce the quality of the existing neighborhood. This proposal is a market rate housing development with proposed extensive CFD's. These homes are going to be expensive not only to purchase but maintain financially.

Just like the bigger homes in Manteca and Tracy. People are becoming house poor and needing to move in multiple generations of family members just to help pay the expenses of homeownership. (grandma & grandpa, aunts & uncles, adult children and grandchildren, 6-10 adults in one home). This generates more "trips", more cars, more strain on the infrastructure such as sewer and water usage.

3. Please carefully read Pages 838-949 in the agenda packet. It is the Fehr-Peers Technical Memorandum revised 4/18/2025. Also please request a copy of the November 2023 & July 2024 for your review and comparison. Also consider the industrial business going in to the North and the traffic that will generate once complete. Employees, Large 18 Wheel Trucks, ect.

4. Please go back and review the town hall meeting March 3, 2025.

The community spoke loud and clear.

Page 1099 of 1575 ends

5. Please find and review the Petition on Change.org created by councilmen Jeremy Engel "Mandate Installation of a Traffic Signal at Brennan and Hwy 120 in Escalon". Please ask Councilman Engel to print you the actual list of verified signatures as he is the creator of the petition. The public can only see how many have signed it. As of 10/10/2025 it says 818. https://c.org/kh2dmkQktm

6. Please consider the issues of how to divide the costs of maintenance/city expenses of Shadowood park.

7. City code currently restricts new two story homes behind existing homes. Per the mitigated Sept 2025 plans, it shows there are still two story homes going in behind existing homes.

8. There are so many issues with this project and its not even city limits! There is an entire annexation process still to be done. We don't HAVE to do this right now!!!!!

8. Please reject this proposal. It's not the right fit for Escalon, not this type of housing, not at this location, definitely not with the current traffic plan.

Sincerely,
Natalie Gallegos

Page 1100 of 1575 ends

From: Susan Judson
To: [email protected]
Subject: Murphy Ranch
Date: Sunday, October 12, 2025 3:45:07 PM
Some people who received this message don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important
The increased traffic on California Street due to the proposed planned development of Murphy Ranch is a concern.. It will impact the residences in the area by causing excessive delays at Brennan Road and Highway 120 and contributes to an already unsafe intersection.

The development is poorly designed by utilizing only California Street for access to the proposed housing. There must be a way to address these issues moving forward.

Sincerely,
Susan Judson

Page 1101 of 1575 ends

From: Kelly Robinson
To: cityclerk
Subject: Murphy Ranch
Date: Monday, October 13, 2025 3:00:35 PM
Some people who received this message don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important
Hello,
We are unable to attend the planning commission meeting tomorrow, however we would like to express our support for the purposed Murphy Ranch housing development.

While we understand the issue of Brennan Rd being a traffic concern, we don't see it being more of a risk than many other streets that require entering Hwy 120. We do believe however that with our city currently being strapped financially and the lack of housing available to families here, the development would be a positive addition to our community.

Thank you
Mark and Kelly Robinson
1742 Carignane Way, Escalon

Page 1102 of 1575 ends

From: Sarah Myers
To: cityclerk
Subject: Murphy Ranch Planning Commission letter
Date: Monday, October 13, 2025 3:08:08 PM
Some people who received this message don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important
Hi Diana!
I am unable to attend the planning commission meeting tomorrow night. I would love to have my comment sent to the commissioners. Thank you
Murphy Ranch Project
I wanted to personally reach out to the planning commission as I will be unable to attend Tuesdays meeting to express my support for the Murphy Ranch Project.

I have personally attended all prior town halls related to Murphy Ranch, heard the concerns of the citizens, and completed my own research to decide to support Murphy Ranch and Florsheim Homes.

I was born and raised in Escalon and spent 30 years of my life here. 10 years ago, I relocated to Modesto because of less expensive housing. After starting a family, we are trying to relocate back to Escalon. Our oldest child attends EUSD and we commute daily for her to attend school in the community we love and are active in. We are and have been actively trying to buy in Escalon, but inventory for housing that meets our family’s needs is extremely low. I believe adding additional housing would be in the best interests of Escalon for people like myself, the city/school district in additional property taxes, and to help comply with state housing requirements.

There are a few community concerns I want to address:
1-Traffic and the Brennan 120 intersection.

While adding homes will, of course, cause additional traffic. The city plan has accounted for this. I think the street plans, as they are, work with all the other neighborhoods and will result in sufficient flow of traffic for a small housing addition. California street has been designed in the city plan to withstand this small additional development.

When it comes to the Brennan/120 intersection. I agree it needs improvement. I know the city is working on that with Caltrans. There have been accidents and fatalities there over the years and the railroad tracks make for poor visibility. I also know, as a long time resident in the same neighborhood south of first street, that a couple blocks away is a very safe intersection onto 120 at Walnut. While we can’t control driver decisions and error. I believe many residents (like myself) would make a responsible driving decision and drive two blocks in the opposite direction instead of turning onto Brennan in order to utilize the safer intersection at Walnut and 120 during peak traffic times where drivers needed to turn onto highway 120.

I don’t believe the intersection, on its own, should prevent a small housing development. Just as it didn’t prevent the building of Bella Terra 20 years ago (a development more than double

Page 1103 of 1575 ends

the size of Murphy ranch) I would propose the commission come up with safe guards to encourage traffic entering 120 utilize other avenues until improvement takes place on the Caltrans timeline.
2- Overwhelming EUSD
One concern that has also been raised repeatedly by the community is stress on our schools. I personally reached out to the district and spoke with assistant superintendent to address enrollment. He mentioned our schools are currently operating below capacity at most school sites. They have a lot of research on amount of students per households in Escalon and are confident they could accommodate and support additional students in EUSD. 3-Housing in Escalon is a NEED
As I mentioned before, housing is needed in Escalon. I believe in the city’s plan for slow growth and limiting building permits—but I believe this project aligns with the city’s plan, adding a small amount of housing, and the project improves city parks for all residents.

The city has not added new construction in many years. The addition of new homes will allow for some upsizing and downsizing desperately needed by some Escalon residents. 4- Florsheim homes.

I also have looked into this builder and visited their two new projects in Turlock, as well as a housing development in Stockton. These developments are beautiful additions to the communities they are in. The homes appear to be well made and the communities are well landscaped. The product they are producing is high quality and aligns with Escalon’s standards. The plans, as shown, will complement surrounding neighborhoods.

The plans Florsheim has presented for Escalon look beautiful—I am particularly excited about proposed improvements to the park. Bathroom facilities are desperately needed at parks in Escalon for recreational sports. The additions Florsheim is proposing will turn a mediocre and not highly used park into a place the city residents can enjoy and utilize in ways our other parks are limited
To sum up my comment, I am respectfully asking the planning commission find a way to move the Murphy Ranch project forward in the best interests of Escalon.

Thank you all for taking the time to read this comment, Sarah Myers

Page 1104 of 1575 ends

Page 1105 of 1575 ends

From: Lindsey Youngberg
To: Diana Trejo
Subject: Re: Murphy Ranch Petition
Date: Monday, August 3, 2026 5:33:45 PM
Attachments: image001.png
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important Hello Diana,
Thank you. Please note, I received 2 additional signatures: Gloria Belfiore & Ross Belfiore. I did also have 1 person request to have her name removed from the petition: Irene Laguero. With these changes, it brings our total to 1,075 signatures.

Thank You,
Lindsey Youngberg
On Monday, August 3, 2026 at 11:22:45 AM PDT, Diana Trejo <[email protected]> wrote:

Good morning Lindsey,
Confirming your comments and attachments have been received and will be provided to Council and the audience at tonight’s meeting.

Have a great day!
Sincerely,
Diana Trejo
Associate Planner
City of Escalon
2060 McHenry Ave, Escalon, CA 95320
(: 209-691-7422 4: 209-691-7409
*: [email protected]
For immediate assistance, please contact the Community Development General Line at 209-691- 7430.

City Hall office hours are Monday through Thursday 8am-12pm and 1pm-5pm. The office is closed on Fridays.

Page 1106 of 1575 ends

From: Lindsey Youngberg
To: Jaylen French; cityclerk; Andrew Hagan; Malinda Walker; Jeremy Engle; Shawn Strohman; Jeff Kay Subject: Fw: Murphy Ranch Petition
Date: Monday, August 3, 2026 10:25:03 AM
Attachments: Scan20260803.pdf
Petition Comments.pdf
Some people who received this message don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important
Good morning,
Attached is a petition opposing The Murphy Ranch Development, to be considered at tonight’s meeting & vote. We colllected 1,074 signatures in opposition of the project.

You will see signatures from both Escalon Residents & Non-Escalon Residents. Many of the non-Escalon Escalon residents on this petition either drive through this area frequently, have friends or family in Escalon, or have lost a loved one to an accident at the intersection of Brennan/120. For example, Zac Boccia’s family lives out of town, and they all signed and shared this petition. (Many of whom physically come to the intersection regularly to visit Zac’s memorial.) One attachment has the list of signatures, and the second attachment is a full list of comments from the petition.

Please let me know if you have any questions.

Thank you,
Lindsey Youngberg
209-605-9313

Page 1107 of 1575 ends

Page 1108 of 1575 ends

Page 1109 of 1575 ends

Page 1110 of 1575 ends

Page 1111 of 1575 ends

Page 1112 of 1575 ends

Page 1113 of 1575 ends

Page 1114 of 1575 ends

Page 1115 of 1575 ends

Page 1116 of 1575 ends

Page 1117 of 1575 ends

Page 1118 of 1575 ends

Page 1119 of 1575 ends

Page 1120 of 1575 ends

Page 1121 of 1575 ends

Page 1122 of 1575 ends

Page 1123 of 1575 ends

Page 1124 of 1575 ends

Page 1125 of 1575 ends

Page 1126 of 1575 ends

Page 1127 of 1575 ends

Page 1128 of 1575 ends

Page 1129 of 1575 ends

Page 1130 of 1575 ends

Page 1131 of 1575 ends

Page 1132 of 1575 ends

Page 1133 of 1575 ends

Page 1134 of 1575 ends

Attachment 17

Page 1135 of 1575 ends

Page 1136 of 1575 ends

Page 1137 of 1575 ends

Page 1138 of 1575 ends

Page 1139 of 1575 ends

Page 1140 of 1575 ends

Page 1141 of 1575 ends

MINUTES

ESCALON PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING OF OCTOBER 14, 2025
City Council Chambers, 2060 McHenry Avenue - 6:30 P.M.

Beginning Resolution No. 2025-01
Beginning Minute Order No. 2025-10
CALL TO ORDER Chair Dunbar
A. Flag Salute
B. Roll Call
PRESENT: Chair Dunbar, Vice Chair Thompson, Commissioners Willis, Castellanos and Gonzales
STAFF PRESENT: Jaylen French - City Manager (CM), Diana Trejo – Assistant Planner, Police Chief Hardgraves, City Attorney – Andreas Booher, City Engineer - Bill Kull and Development and Community Services Manager – Trevin Barber Prior to the start of the meeting, City Manager French introduced Trevin Barber as the new Development and Community Services Manager.

CONSENT CALENDAR
These items are considered routine in nature and are acted upon by a single action unless requested by an individual Commissioner or member of the public for special consideration.

1. Approve the Minutes from the Meeting of September 9, 2025.

MOTION – it was m/s by WILLIS/CASTELLANOS to Approve the Minutes from the Regular Meeting of September 9, 2025. Motion Carried 5-0. MINUTE ORDER 2025-XX Vice Chair Thompson disclosed that, in her professional role as a Management Analyst with the City of Oakdale, she had previously worked with the developer involved in the matter before the Commission. She affirmed that this prior professional interaction would not influence her ability to make a fair and impartial decision and that her vote would be based solely on the information and evidence presented during the hearing.

Commissioner Castellanos disclosed that he has also had prior experience with Florsheim Development. He stated that this experience would not impair his ability to make fair and impartial judgments regarding the public hearing item on the agenda.

Chair Dunbar informed the public that the Commission’s role is to review the project and provide a recommendation to the City Council, noting that this represents the first step in the process. He requested that any questions from the audience for staff or other individuals be directed to the Commission first.

Attachment 18

Page 1142 of 1575 ends

MINUTES
Planning Commission Meeting
October 14, 2025

Page 2 of 9 ends

PUBLIC HEARING

2. APPLICATION 24-797 – ANNEXATION, PRE-ZONING, TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP,

SPECIFIC PLAN, PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT,

INCLUSIONARY HOUSING AGREEMENT, AND ASSOCIATED ENVIRONMENTAL

ANALYSIS
SE Corner Brennan Avenue and SR 120, Escalon CA 95320
APNs 225-040-28 & 225-040-29
CM French presented the staff report and reviewed the Entitlement List, which encompasses the annexation, prezone, tentative subdivision map, specific plan, planned development, housing agreement, development agreement, and initial study/mitigated negative declaration. He also provided a brief overview of the project. Additionally, it was noted that Caltrans submitted a letter to the City confirming approval and funding for an intersection improvement at Brennan and Highway 120. Caltrans has initiated the planning, design, and environmental review process for the project, with an anticipated completion timeframe of three to four years.

Vice Chair Thompson inquired about the General Plan boundary map and sought confirmation that the project lies within the 2015 growth boundary, which CM French affirmed. She noted that this property was anticipated as one of the first to be incorporated into the City’s growth area. Commissioner Castellanos requested confirmation that no two-story homes would be located in the southern and eastern portions of the subdivision, which CM French confirmed.

Chair Dunbar referenced the packet and raised a concern regarding the developer’s portion of the intersection improvement costs, noting that his calculations were higher than those provided. CM French explained that all new developments are responsible for approximately 23% of intersection costs. Due to the project’s proximity, this developer would incur an additional 6.2% share on top of the standard development impact fee. CM French further noted that the calculations were adjusted slightly after CalTrans confirmed they would fund the project.

Commissioner Gonzales asked whether there had been any consideration to expand Brennan Avenue, suggesting that the intersection improvements might warrant adding a turn lane or similar enhancement. CM French responded that Caltrans, as the lead agency, will determine the appropriate traffic control measures and assess the required right-ofway for such improvements, noting that right-of-way acquisition is the responsibility of the development.

Chair Dunbar inquired about the basis for using the 37th permit as a benchmark. CM French responded that there is no specific process for determining this number; however, it was considered appropriate for both the City and the developer and can be adjusted if necessary.

Public Comment opened at 7:18 p.m.

Developer Dave Romano of Florsheim Homes addressed the Commission, thanking staff for their thorough report and introducing his team in attendance. He provided an overview of the project, noting that the team had made efforts to address questions raised at previous community workshops. Romano indicated that they were available to answer any questions from residents or the Commission and requested a positive recommendation upon compliance with all project requirements.

Commissioner Willis inquired whether Florsheim Homes would be constructing two-story homes adjacent to onestory homes within the subdivision. Mr. Romano confirmed that while new two-story homes would not be placed next to existing single-story homes, internal portions of the subdivision would feature a mix of one- and two-story homes, which he stated is consistent with City code. Willis also asked about the inclusion of RV driveways, and Romano indicated that there would be none adjacent to existing homes. Willis noted that with two points of ingress/egress for the 72-home subdivision, the traffic access seemed adequate. She also inquired about anticipated

Page 1143 of 1575 ends

MINUTES
Planning Commission Meeting
October 14, 2025

Page 3 of 9 ends

building permit requests under the City’s growth ordinance of 75 permits per year; Romano estimated 25–30 permits annually, noting that completing the project faster would be considered a strong pace. Willis further expressed approval of the inclusion of root barriers in the plans to help prevent sidewalk buckling.

Commissioner Castellanos asked whether the development would be constructed in phases or if all 72 lots would be completed simultaneously. Mr. Romano responded that, given the project’s relatively small size, he anticipates that all improvements would be built at one time.

Resident Curtis Russell of Alberto Lane expressed concerns regarding traffic safety impacts associated with the subdivision, particularly in relation to truck traffic from the nearby cannery. He also referenced the proposed Riverwalk project, noting that its estimated 900 homes could further exacerbate traffic conditions for drivers traveling toward Manteca. Russell stated that he was not satisfied with the Caltrans warrant report and urged the Planning Commission to thoroughly evaluate these safety concerns, including potential roadway widening or other necessary improvements, to ensure they are addressed prior to the project’s completion.

Resident Vance Nielsen, who lives on Noni Avenue, expressed concerns regarding increased traffic on Brennan Avenue and Highway 120. He inquired about the potential installation of speed bumps on residential streets and commented that root containers are ineffective. He further noted that the most recent traffic study was conducted over ten years ago and asked who would be responsible for conducting the required inspections, emphasizing the importance of having a knowledgeable individual perform them.

Resident Kevin Creamer, who lives on Edgewood, expressed his desire for the soundwall to extend north from the park to Highway 120. He voiced concern that construction activities may cause his palm trees to fall and reiterated his support for the soundwall installation. He also raised concerns regarding intersection safety.

Resident Scott, who resides on Farinelli, expressed agreement with previous speakers regarding traffic concerns. He highlighted the impact of trucks on Highway 120 due to new industrial development and noted that a throughway from Reisling, previously discussed at the last meeting, had not been addressed. He further observed that the planned park expansion is likely to increase traffic, contributing to additional wear and tear on local roads.

JD Hightower, Executive Officer for San Joaquin County LAFCO, stated that he attended the meeting to address any questions regarding the annexation process. He noted that LAFCO is in general agreement with the City, observing that the annexation establishes a logical boundary along Brennan Avenue and represents a practical extension of services for the City of Escalon.

Chair Dunbar acknowledged Mr. Hightower and asked if he had previously worked for the City, to which Mr.

Hightower confirmed. Chair Dunbar then inquired whether the annexation plan was in place during his tenure with the City. Mr. Hightower responded affirmatively, noting that the plan had been in development for a long time and that the streets were designed to provide circulation, using California Street as access to Brennan Avenue, consistent with the current plan.

Commissioner Gonzales asked whether the County had designated this project as low-density residential. Mr.

Hightower responded that the area is classified as urban reserve, though currently zoned for agriculture. He explained that, while LAFCO’s mission includes the preservation of agricultural land, this parcel is not considered viable agricultural land due to its proximity to Highway 120 and existing residential development to the east and south.

Resident John Hall, who resides on California Street, expressed concerns about the inadequate enforcement of existing traffic laws in the city. He specifically referenced AB 413, noting that vehicles frequently park near crosswalks at El Portal School. He emphasized the need for improved traffic control while clarifying that his comments were not intended as a criticism of the Escalon Police Department.

Page 1144 of 1575 ends

MINUTES
Planning Commission Meeting
October 14, 2025

Page 4 of 9 ends

Resident Natalie Gallegos stated that she had submitted a letter outlining her concerns. She noted that she resides on California Street as an original homeowner whose property backs up to the proposed development. Ms. Gallegos recalled that when the project was first introduced, residents were informed by both the City and the developer that it would be a senior community consisting of single-story homes. She added that records indicate two plans were originally submitted, acknowledging that street connections to California Street were anticipated. However, she emphasized that there is a significant difference between a deed-restricted 55-and-older community and the project now being proposed.Ms. Gallegos further stated that residents had been under the impression there would be additional access points to Highway 120. While she acknowledged that much has changed over the past two decades, she expressed concern over the current pace of development, describing it as “crazy.” She noted that although Caltrans is involved, there has been no definitive action or commitment from them, and all information remains preliminary.

She concluded that moving forward with the housing development without first addressing traffic issues would be reckless.

Resident Kurt Danziger, who lives on Noni Avenue, expressed opposition to the annexation until a traffic signal is installed on Highway 120. He confirmed that he had also submitted a letter outlining his concerns. Mr. Danziger stated that it is too dangerous to proceed at this time, noting that the City’s traffic study is outdated and does not account for the increased truck traffic associated with Weldway’s operations. He argued that the annexation is unnecessary since the area is not currently part of the City and emphasized that installation of a signal or roundabout at the intersection should be completed before any development occurs. Mr. Danziger further stated that Caltrans cannot be relied upon as a responsible agency for managing that intersection. He questioned why the Celivo access point was being used instead of extending Reisling at California Street across the railroad tracks to Highway 120.

Additionally, he noted that the Belleterra neighborhood funds the maintenance of the park through its Landscape and Lighting Maintenance District (LLMD) and asserted that the new development should be incorporated into the same district, as it would utilize the same basin facilities. He recommended that this be made a condition of project approval.

Resident Ed Alves expressed agreement with Mr. Danziger’s comments and voiced concern about traffic conditions along Highway 120. While he stated that he supports the proposed project overall, he emphasized that installation of a traffic signal must occur before the project proceeds. (Mr. Alves participated online, and portions of his comments were difficult to hear due to sound issues.)
Resident Nick Obligacion, who appeared online and resides on Farinelli Avenue, referenced the Floresheim application, noting that it identifies the current level of service at the intersection as Level E—already below the City’s acceptable standard. He stated that adding the proposed subdivision would further degrade the level of service to Level F. Mr. Obligacion added that the traffic study did not account for the impacts of Weldway’s operations and expressed concern that Caltrans funding is unreliable. He concluded that the intersection must be improved before the project moves forward.

Resident Roxanna Shatz expressed concerns regarding traffic impacts, specifically at Brennan Road and related ingress and egress points. She also highlighted issues on First Street and the roundabout, noting a history of collisions, and suggested implementing speed bumps or additional stop signs, as there are currently only two. While she stated that she supports the project and considers Floresheim to be a reputable developer, she emphasized her worry about how traffic from the development will affect Brennan Road, First Street, and California Street.

Public Comment Closed at 8:09 p.m.

Vice Chair Thompson inquired about the anticipated timeline for breaking ground on the project. Mr. Romano responded that, under a best-case scenario, site improvements could begin in the spring or summer of next year, which would take several months to complete. Following that, model homes would be constructed, with home occupancy in the first phase expected in 2027. Vice Chair Thompson confirmed that the estimated build-out period is 2–3 years, to which Mr. Romano agreed.

Page 1145 of 1575 ends

MINUTES
Planning Commission Meeting
October 14, 2025

Page 5 of 9 ends

Chair Dunbar asked Mr. Romano whether Floresheim had considered extending Reisling to Highway 120 and, if so, what issues arose. Mr. Romano explained that there were two main challenges. First, constructing a new crossing over the railroad tracks is extremely difficult, as it requires railroad approval and typically limits the number of crossings allowed. Second, an unintended consequence of such an extension would be the creation of a “raceway” from Highway 120, not only through the proposed subdivision but also providing through access to all neighborhoods south of the area, potentially increasing traffic in those communities.

Chair Dunbar asked Mr. Romano how many projects Floresheim has been involved in that are similar in scope and located near a state highway. Mr. Romano responded that while the company has experience with projects involving either railroad crossings or state highways separately, having both in a single project is somewhat unique, though not substantially different from their past work.

Chair Dunbar then inquired about Caltrans’ reliability in projects with significant issues, such as those presented in Escalon. Mr. Romano stated that Caltrans has generally been reliable in bringing projects to completion, although timing can vary. He noted that the combination of community concern and the subdivision’s recognition of the issue has created additional pressure and momentum, presenting a unique opportunity to motivate Caltrans to advance the project and secure funding—responsibilities that would typically fall on the developer.

Chair Dunbar asked how much assistance Floresheim would provide in facilitating traffic control improvements on Highway 120. Mr. Romano responded that they would advocate for improvements, but ultimately, Caltrans responds more readily to local jurisdictions, such as the City Engineer and City Manager, than to developers.

Chair Dunbar then raised the topic of a “pork chop” barrier on Brennan Road, previously discussed at an earlier meeting. He asked for clarification that installing a barrier to prohibit left turns from Brennan onto Highway 120 would not require state approval since it would be located entirely on Brennan. CM French responded that he didn’t believe so. Whether is technically on city property or not, it would be affecting the operations of the state facility.

As common courtesy, we would want to coordinate with Caltrans and work with them on any operational adjustment to their facility. It can be considered but he cannot speak to Caltrans and what their policies, guidelines are in regards to traffic control on their facilities.

Caltrans representative Arvinder Bajwa, Acting Deputy District Director of Traffic Operations, confirmed that the proposed pork chop barrier would slightly extend into the state highway but indicated it could serve as an effective interim safety measure until the larger Caltrans project proceeds. He noted that Caltrans generally supports pork chop installations to reduce conflict points and enhance traffic safety. Mr. Bajwa further commented that, given the proximity of Weldway, the measure should be considered as part of efforts to expedite project advancement. He emphasized, however, that coordination with the railroad remains a significant challenge, as obtaining necessary approvals from both the railroad and the California Public Utilities Commission (PUC) can take 24 to 36 months, regardless of Caltrans’ progress.

Chair Dunbar thanked Mr. Bajwa for attending the meeting and acknowledged the public perception that Caltrans projects often take considerable time to complete. He asked what a realistic timeline would be for Escalon moving forward. Mr. Bajwa responded that CM French had already provided a thorough overview of the process, noting that the Project Initiation Document (PID) phase is currently underway and could take approximately 12 to 13 months to complete, possibly sooner depending on the progress of required studies. He explained that Caltrans must adhere to all state and federal processes, including compliance with NEPA and CEQA during the project approval and environmental documentation phase, which also includes preliminary design and the evaluation of alternatives.

Mr. Bajwa further stated that once the project advances beyond that stage into design and right-of-way acquisition, coordination with the railroad presents a major risk, as Escalon will need to acquire property on the north side of the project area—construction cannot occur within the existing footprint. He added that both signalized and roundabout alternatives are being considered to help expedite the process; however, shifting the intersection north and securing

Page 1146 of 1575 ends

MINUTES
Planning Commission Meeting
October 14, 2025

Page 6 of 9 ends

necessary clearances with the railroad will still be required. Overall, he estimated that coordination with the railroad could add 24 to 36 months to the project timeline, depending on how quickly approvals are obtained. It also has to go through the California Transportation Commission for a vote and then goes through advertising, bidding, the award process and then to construction
Commissioner Gonzales acknowledged that the City has been requesting a signal at the intersection for years and asked whether the proposed housing development influenced Caltrans’ decision to move forward with installing a stoplight. Mr. Bajwa responded that it had not been a major factor, explaining that he has personally been advocating for the project behind the scenes and has played an instrumental role in advancing it. While the development will contribute additional traffic, he noted that existing conditions on Highway 120 already warrant attention. He emphasized that Caltrans takes this project seriously and is committed to addressing the safety and traffic concerns in the area.

Chair Dunbar referred to page 848 of the report regarding traffic analysis, noting the discussion of westbound queuing and the change in numbers from 96 to 48. It was explained that such variations occur when traffic volumes are very low. She stated that the analysis uses a process known as micro-simulation, which models vehicle movements through the network at various times. Multiple simulation runs are conducted to account for daily fluctuations in traffic, and the results are averaged to provide a realistic representation of real-world conditions. In this case, the variation in the westbound turning movement delay reflects normal variability that occurs when traffic volumes are minimal.

Commissioner Willis asked staff why the City would have input on the matter, given that it does not enforce the CC&Rs. CM French responded that while the City is not required to participate, it prefers to be involved as a party to the process. He noted that, technically, the City has no authority over CC&Rs, but sharing their provisions can be helpful for all parties involved.

Commissioner Gonzales referenced statistics through December 31, 2024, regarding reported collisions at the intersection of Highway 120 and Brennan, noting that 53% were broadside collisions and there had been one fatality.

She added that additional incidents have occurred in the past year and discussed contributing factors. At the Brennan intersection, most accidents were attributed to drivers running the stop sign. She observed that interim measures, such as enhanced striping for improved visibility, advance notification of the upcoming stop sign, and a flashing stop sign, had been suggested. Commissioner Gonzales expressed that these measures would serve as effective interim solutions until a traffic signal can be installed.

CM French presented a 15-year collision history for the intersection, reporting 47 total incidents, including two fatalities, seven major injuries, and the remainder classified as minor or non-injury accidents. Approximately half of these collisions were attributed to stop sign violations. The data was compiled by the City’s Police Department and/or the CHP. He noted that, based on the City’s research, Caltrans has consistently determined since around 2005 that the intersection does not meet signal warrants. However, tonight the Commission heard from the Acting Deputy District Director of Traffic Operations that the agency intends to move forward with funding an intersection improvement. CM French emphasized that while the formal process will take time, interim measures have been recommended to enhance safety in the meantime. He concluded that all options, including these interim measures, can be explored should the Commission decide to advance the project.

Commissioner Gonzales inquired about potential safety measures on Ullrey, particularly near the curve onto Brennan.

CM French responded that the City has a traffic calming program, through which residents can submit a form requesting evaluation of intersections or roadways for potential safety improvements such as signals, speed bumps, humps, or crosswalks.

Commissioner Gonzales then asked whether speed bumps or other traffic calming measures could be implemented around the park, given that it is an open area where many children play. CM French confirmed that this is possible,

Page 1147 of 1575 ends

MINUTES
Planning Commission Meeting
October 14, 2025

Page 7 of 9 ends

explaining that the process involves a petition reviewed by the City and its engineers, and requires obtaining consent from at least 60% of the affected neighbors.

Commissioner Willis asked whether the city limits run down the middle of Brennan and, if so, whether the City would need to coordinate with the County for any improvements. CM French responded that speed bumps are generally not warranted on arterial roadways, as the classification and intended function of such roads differ from residential streets, where slowing traffic is more appropriate. He noted that the possibility could be re-evaluated, but as a general rule, speed bumps would likely not be considered for Brennan. He added that there are several metrics that could be reviewed to determine whether Brennan might be a viable candidate for traffic calming measures.

Commissioner Gonzales addressed a prior question regarding the proposed senior housing in the area. She explained that, just before the freeze on annexation, the developer at the time had planned to build senior housing but was unable to proceed due to a catastrophic health event, so the project never materialized. She noted that, after several years, the Carr family sold the property to the Murphy family, and the original plan was not carried over. She added that the current zoning of the area is designated as low-density residential, which now guides any future development.

Resident Natalie Gallegos addressed CM French’s comments regarding speed bumps and the City’s consideration of community input. She noted that there is an online petition with approximately 200 signatures, reflecting the community’s opposition to the proposed development until the traffic safety concerns in the area are adequately addressed.

Chair Dunbar requested that staff evaluate whether the proposed pork chop plan could have broader traffic impacts, such as diverting westbound traffic from the neighborhood onto Walnut Avenue. He noted that compiling data on this potential effect would be helpful for future consideration. CM French responded that if the Planning Commission chooses to move forward and recommends the project to the City Council, staff would conduct as thorough an analysis as possible prior to the Council meeting, present the Commission’s recommendation, and allow the City Council to decide whether to approve or veto the recommendation.

Vice Chair Thompson commented that she believes many users of the intersection would be dissatisfied with the installation of a pork chop barrier. While acknowledging that the measure may address certain safety concerns, she noted that drivers often choose to make left turns at the intersection despite those issues. She expressed concern that implementing the barrier could be seen as doing a disservice to those regular users.

Commissioner Willis expressed sympathy for the challenges in measuring traffic, acknowledging that data collection may not always occur under ideal conditions. She noted that the analysis focuses on a small area, while factors beyond California, Brennan, and Reisling—such as fog reducing visibility on Highway 120 and crops grown by local farmers obstructing sightlines for left turns—also affect safety. With new housing expected in 2027 and Caltrans potentially taking another 2–3 years to determine improvements for the intersection, she emphasized that the Commission has a responsibility to prioritize community safety. Commissioner Willis concluded that approving the project before Caltrans completes its work could be putting the cart before the horse.

Commissioner Castellanos reported that he requested a traffic collision report from the police department covering the ten-year period ending December 31, 2024. During this period, there were 30 reported accidents, including two fatalities. He noted that two of these accidents involved family members at the intersection of Brennan and Highway 120. He highlighted that, over the past 25 years, the school district has adjusted the boundaries of Van Allen Elementary to the east, resulting in increased westbound traffic on Highway 120. Additionally, overall traffic has risen due to further development in the area. He emphasized that it is currently not possible to predict traffic patterns resulting from the Weldway development. While expressing support for the development, Commissioner Castellanos stressed that the timing is critical. He inquired whether Caltrans has the capability to reduce the speed limit approaching this intersection from the east. He indicated that proceeding with the project at this stage is premature without implementing safety measures such as a roundabout or traffic signal.

Page 1148 of 1575 ends

MINUTES
Planning Commission Meeting
October 14, 2025

Page 8 of 9 ends

Commissioner Gonzales acknowledged the community’s concerns regarding traffic but also highlighted additional considerations. She expressed concern over the State of California’s persistent mandates for low-income housing.

She noted that the city currently has a reputable developer, Floresheim, seeking to implement a project that has been in planning for over 20 years. She emphasized that delaying the project could unnecessarily postpone improvements, as it would bring aesthetic enhancements to the entrance of Escalon, which currently has overgrown oleanders and weeds, along with upgrades to infrastructure. She noted that the project includes eight moderately affordable homes and will be connected to MID, enhancing its appeal to buyers. She stated that requested interim safety upgrades would improve visibility at the affected intersection and highlighted that Caltrans’ willingness to fund intersection improvements is a significant positive step. Finally, she asserted that the project aligns with the city’s general plan and cautioned that delaying it would unfairly penalize Floresheim for factors beyond their control.

Vice Chair Thompson expressed strong support for the Floresheim project, noting the aesthetic improvements and park enhancements it will bring, including new pickleball and basketball courts for a currently underutilized park, which will benefit the community. While acknowledging that the intersection of Brennan and Highway 120 is not ideal, she stated that it is widely used despite known risks. She noted that, although collisions resulting in fatalities are tragic, an average of three accidents per year at this intersection is not unusually high for a major highway. She also emphasized the positive impact of the development on local housing availability, highlighting that many former residents are excited about the opportunity to return to Escalon and purchase homes, thereby allowing their children to attend local schools. She also commended Caltrans’ participation and funding commitment for the intersection improvements, which she views as a rare and positive development. She pointed out that the projected 2–5 year timeline for the development aligns with the planned intersection improvements, meaning the traffic impacts will be mitigated when the majority of new homes are occupied. Given these factors, Vice Chair Thompson concluded that there is insufficient reason to recommend rejecting the project.

Chair Dunbar expressed support for the Floresheim project, noting that it is well-suited for the area and involves a reputable developer. However, he expressed concern about the potential for additional traffic hazards at the intersection of Brennan and Highway 120. While he indicated a desire to approve the project due to its merits, Chair Dunbar stated that his support would be contingent upon the city implementing interim traffic mitigation measures prior to the completion of Caltrans’ planned improvements. He emphasized that this condition would be his “bottom line” if the Commission were to move forward with a motion to approve the project.

MOTION: it was m/s GONZALES/THOMPSON to Approve PC #2025-XX Recommending that the Escalon City Council Make the Findings and Certify the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, Approve Resolution PC #2025-XX 1. Recommending that the Escalon City Council Authorize an Application to Initiate Proceedings to San Joaquin LAFCo and 2. Recommending Adoption of Ordinance XXX to Prezone the Two Parcels, Approve Resolution PC #2025-XX 1. Recommending that the Escalon City Council Approve a Tentative Subdivision Map, a Specific Plan, an Inclusionary Page 27 of 1083 Page 17 of 18 Housing Agreement, a Development Agreement, and an Annexation and 2. Recommending Adoption of Ordinance No. XXX for the Planned Development (PD-4) and 3. Recommending Adoption of Ordinance No. XXX for the Development Agreement Between the Developer and the City and 4. All are Contingent on Future Approval by San Joaquin LAFCo. And Direct City Staff to Look Into Traffic Mitigation Measures for the Intersection of Brennan and Highway 120. Motion Carried 3-2-0 (Nay - Willis and Castellanos). MINUTE ORDER 2025-xx

MATTERS PRESENTED FROM THE AUDIENCE
None

STAFF COMMUNICATIONS
None

Page 1149 of 1575 ends

MINUTES
Planning Commission Meeting
October 14, 2025

Page 9 of 9 ends

COMMISSIONER COMMUNICATIONS
Vice Chair Thompson, Commissioner Castellanos, and Chair Dunbar all expressed appreciation for the staff report and presentation. Thompson specifically thanked staff for their effort, Castellanos noted the report was well done but commented on timing, and Dunbar agreed with the presentation and thanked staff for their guidance.

ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Chair Dunbar adjourned the meeting at approximately 9:28 p.m.

Respectfully Submitted,

_______________________________
Michele Bates, Deputy City Clerk

Page 1150 of 1575 ends

ITEM NO. 4

COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM
FOR AUGUST 10, 2026
Prepared By: Trevin W. Barber, Development & Community Services Manager Date: August 06, 2026
Subject: Annexation and Prezoning of City‑Owned Property Located at 17341 Escalon Bellota Road (APN 225‑020‑110‑000); Introduction and First Reading of Ordinance No. 2026‑XX Prezoning the Property; Consideration of Resolution No. 2026‑XX Initiating Annexation Proceedings (Project 26‑821) Recommendation:

Proceed with the annexation and prezoning of the city‑owned property located at 17341 Escalon Bellota Road (APN 225‑020‑110‑000), and taking the following actions:

1. Adopt Ordinance No. 2026-XX by title only and waive the second reading, thereby prezoning approximately 19.2 acres of City-owned property located at 17341 Escalon Bellota Road (APN 225-020-110-000) to Open Space/Parl consistent with the Escalon General Plan.

2. Direct staff to place the ordinance on the August 10, 2026 agenda for public hearing, second reading, and adoption.

3. Adopt Resolution No. 2026-XX initiating annexation proceedings for the City-owned property and authorizing staff to prepare and submit a complete annexation application to the San Joaquin Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo).

4. Find that the annexation and prezoning are exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) (Common Sense Exemption), because the annexation of City-owned land with no development proposal does not have the potential to result in a significant environmental impact.

Background:

The City of Escalon owns approximately 19.2 acres of land located at 17341 Escalon Bellota Road (APN 225‑020‑110‑000). The property is situated immediately east of existing City limits and lies within the City’s adopted 2025 Sphere of Influence (SOI) boundary, as established through the San Joaquin Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo) Municipal Services Review (MSR) adopted on March 9, 2023. The MSR identifies the area as part of Escalon’s long‑term growth horizon and confirms that the City is expected to assume jurisdiction over this territory as development and service needs evolve.

Under the Escalon General Plan, the property is designated Open Space/Park, reflecting its current use and the City’s long‑term intent to preserve flexibility for future public, recreational, or low‑intensity municipal purposes. Annexation of City‑owned land does not alter the General Plan designation; rather, it allows the City to directly regulate land use, manage infrastructure planning,

Page 1151 of 1575 ends

PROJECT SITE
implement the Hogan-Ennis Master Plan and ensure that any future public facility or open‑space improvements are governed under City standards.

Annexation of City‑owned land requires prezoning prior to LAFCo consideration. Pursuant to Escalon Municipal Code §17.61.030, all territory proposed for annexation must be assigned a zoning district consistent with the General Plan. The proposed prezoning designation of Open Space is consistent with the Open Space/Parks land use designation and ensures that the property will be regulated under City zoning standards immediately upon completion of annexation proceedings and recordation of the Certificate of Completion by LAFCo.

The City’s 2023 MSR confirms that adequate municipal services—including water, wastewater, storm drainage, police, fire, and parks—can be extended to the property upon annexation. The MSR also identifies the area as a logical and contiguous expansion of the City boundary, consistent with LAFCo policies requiring orderly growth, efficient service delivery, and avoidance of irregular or fragmented boundaries.

On July 15, 2026, the City published a Notice of Public Hearing for the August 3, 2026 City Council meeting, which included Project 26‑821. The notice satisfies the public hearing requirements of Escalon Municipal Code §17.51.050 and Government Code §36933. The City Council may therefore introduce the prezoning ordinance on August 3 and conduct the public hearing, second reading, and adoption on August 10.

This staff report presents the annexation and prezoning actions necessary to initiate LAFCo proceedings for City‑owned property and ensure consistency with the City’s long‑term land use, fiscal, and service planning objectives.

Discussion:

The proposed annexation and prezoning represent a timely and efficient boundary adjustment that supports the City’s long-range planning objectives. As the Murphy Ranch project prepares to advance to LAFCo for annexation consideration, staff identified an opportunity to consolidate multiple annexation actions into a single LAFCo review cycle. LAFCo encourages cities to group related or geographically proximate annexations to reduce administrative duplication and present a more orderly boundary configuration. The City has long intended to annex the remaining portion of Hogan-Ennis Park, which has appeared in internal planning documents for several years. By processing the Escalon Bellota Road property
concurrently with Murphy Ranch, the City maximizes staff time, reduces LAFCo processing costs, and advances
long-standing annexation objectives in a coordinated
manner. The prezoning designation consistent with the Open Space land use classification ensures that the property will be regulated under City zoning standards immediately upon LAFCo’s recordation of the Certificate of Completion.

General Plan Conformance
The proposed annexation and prezoning of the City‑owned property at 17341 Escalon Bellota Road (APN
225‑020‑110‑000), shown on Exhibit A – Project Site, are

Page 1152 of 1575 ends

consistent with the Escalon General Plan. The site carries a Open Space land use designation, which is intended for public, recreational, conservation, and low‑intensity municipal uses. Annexation of City‑owned land does not alter the General Plan designation; instead, it ensures that future public use, maintenance, and improvements are governed under City jurisdiction and zoning standards rather than County regulations.

The property is also located within the City’s 2025 Sphere of Influence boundary, as adopted through the 2023 Municipal Services Review. The SOI identifies areas where the City is expected to provide municipal services over the long term, and annexation of this parcel is consistent with the City’s planned growth pattern and boundary management objectives. Prezoning the site with a zoning district consistent with the Open Space designation ensures conformity with General Plan policies related to parks, open space preservation, public facilities, and orderly expansion of City boundaries.

Together, the annexation and prezoning actions advance General Plan goals for coordinated land use planning, efficient service delivery, and long‑term stewardship of public lands.

Escalon General Plan Map
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
The proposed annexation and prezoning of the City-owned property at 17341 Escalon Bellota Road (APN 225-020-110-000), shown on Exhibit A – Project Site, are exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), commonly referred to as the Common Sense Exemption. This exemption applies where it can be seen with certainty that the activity will not result in a significant effect on the environment.

Annexation and prezoning alone do not authorize or approve any physical development, construction, or land-disturbing activities. The property is designated Open Space in the Escalon

PROJECT SITE

Page 1153 of 1575 ends

General Plan, and no development proposal is associated with this action. Any future improvements or changes in land use would require separate discretionary review and CEQA evaluation at the time such a project is proposed. Because the current action is strictly administrative—adjusting jurisdictional boundaries and applying a zoning designation consistent with the General Plan—there is no potential for a physical environmental impact. Therefore, the project qualifies for the Common Sense Exemption under CEQA Guidelines §15061(b)(3).

Notice of Public Hearing
· Mailed: July 14, 2026 to every property owner, as noted on the latest assessor's records, within 1,200 feet of the subject site. · Website: Posted on July 14, 2026 to the Public Notices page. · Facebook: Posted on July 15, 2026.
· Newspaper: Appeared in the Escalon Times newspaper on July 15, 2026.

Fiscal Impact:

Approval of the annexation resolution and prezoning ordinance carries a negligible fiscal impact to the City. The actions are administrative in nature and do not authorize any physical development or capital improvements. The City will incur minor costs associated with preparing and submitting the annexation application to the San Joaquin Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo), including limited staff time and small processing fees for mapping, engineering exhibits, and boundary documentation.

If LAFCo approves the annexation and the remaining portion of Hogan‑Ennis Park is incorporated into the City boundary, the City will no longer be required to pay property taxes on the parkland, as municipal property located within City limits is exempt from County property tax obligations. This results in a modest long‑term fiscal benefit by eliminating recurring tax payments currently associated with the City‑owned parcel while maintaining full local control over park operations and improvements.

Attachments:
· Draft Annexation Resolution – Initiates annexation proceedings for APN 225-020-110-000 and authorizes submittal to LAFCo.
o Exhibit A – Annexation Area Map – Depicts the 19.2-acre City-owned parcel proposed for annexation.
o Draft Prezoning Ordinance – Applies a zoning designation consistent with the Open Space General Plan classification and becomes operative upon LAFCo recordation.
§ Exhibit A – Prezoning Map – Shows the proposed zoning district boundaries for the annexation area.
o Exhibit B – Plat Map — Depicts the surveyed boundary and geometric configuration of APN 225-020-110-000 for prezoning and annexation purposes. o Exhibit C – Legal Description — Provides the metes-and-bounds legal description of the annexation area consistent with LAFCo mapping standards.

Page 1154 of 1575 ends

CITY COUNCIL
RESOLUTION NO. 2026-XX

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ESCALON INITIATING ANNEXATION PROCEEDINGS FOR APPROXIMATELY 19.2 ACRES OF
CITY‑OWNED PROPERTY LOCATED AT 17341 ESCALON BELLOTA ROAD (APN 225‑020‑110‑000) AND DIRECTING STAFF TO SUBMIT AN APPLICATION TO THE

SAN JOAQUIN LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION (LAFCO)
The City Council of the City of Escalon does hereby find, order and resolve as follows:

WHEREAS, the City of Escalon (“City”) is the owner of approximately 19.2 acres of land located at 17341 Escalon Bellota Road, identified as APN 225-020-110-000 (“Property”), as shown on Exhibit A – Project Site; and
WHEREAS, the Property is designated Open Space/Park in the Escalon General Plan and is located within the City’s 2025 Sphere of Influence boundary, as adopted through the 2023 Municipal Services Review; and
WHEREAS, the Property is contiguous to existing City limits and represents a logical, orderly, and efficient expansion of the City boundary consistent with San Joaquin LAFCo policies; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has introduced Ordinance No. 2026-XX prezoning the Property to a zoning district consistent with the Open Space General Plan designation, pursuant to Escalon Municipal Code §17.61.030; and
WHEREAS, annexation of City-owned land will allow the City to directly manage future public use, maintenance, and municipal service planning for the Property; and WHEREAS, the City has long intended to annex the remaining portion of Hogan-Ennis Park, and processing the Escalon Bellota Road annexation concurrently with the Murphy Ranch annexation maximizes staff efficiency, reduces duplicative LAFCo processing costs, and presents a more cohesive boundary adjustment; and
WHEREAS, the annexation and prezoning are exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines §15061(b)(3), the Common Sense Exemption, because the administrative actions do not authorize physical development and have no potential to result in a significant environmental impact; and
WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a duly noticed public hearing on August 10, 2026, at which time all interested persons were provided an opportunity to be heard.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Escalon hereby initiates annexation proceedings for APN 225‑020‑110‑000 and directs City staff to prepare and submit a complete annexation application to the San Joaquin Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo), including all required maps, exhibits, and supporting documentation.

Attachment 1

Page 1155 of 1575 ends

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council finds the annexation consistent with the Escalon General Plan, the 2025 Sphere of Influence boundary, and applicable LAFCo policies governing orderly growth and efficient municipal service delivery.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council affirms that the prezoning adopted through Ordinance No. 2026-XX shall become operative only upon LAFCo’s recordation of the Certificate of Completion.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 10th day of August 2026, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

______________________________
Andrew Hagan, Mayor
ATTEST:
___________________________
Diana Trejo, Deputy City Clerk

Page 1156 of 1575 ends

EXHIBIT A

ANNEXATION AREA MAP

Page 1157 of 1575 ends

Page 1158 of 1575 ends

Page 1159 of 1575 ends

Page 1160 of 1575 ends

Page 1161 of 1575 ends

Ord.XXX OS Zone (Adopted xx/xx/2026) Page 1
ORDINANCE NO. XXX

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ESCALON AMENDING THE ZONING MAP UNDER ESCALON MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 17.10.040 TO APPROVE A PREZONE FOR CITY‑OWNED PROPERTY LOCATED AT 17341 ESCALON BELLOTA ROAD (APN 225‑020‑110‑000)
Location: 17341 Escalon Bellota Road, Escalon, CA 95320 APN: 225‑020‑110‑000
WHEREAS, the Escalon City Council, at its duly noticed public hearing on August 3, 2026, considered approval of a Prezone Ordinance for the City-owned annexation area located at 17341 Escalon Bellota Road; and
WHEREAS, the Escalon City Council adopted this Ordinance approving the Prezone at its duly noticed public hearing on August 10, 2026; and WHEREAS, the Project encompasses the annexation of approximately 19.2 acres of unincorporated land in San Joaquin County into the City of Escalon, consisting of City-owned property designated Open Space in the Escalon General Plan; and WHEREAS, in accordance with Escalon Municipal Code Section 17.61.030, all territory proposed for annexation must be prezoned to a district compatible with the General Plan designation of the property; and
WHEREAS, the Property is designated Open Space/Park in the Escalon General Plan and is located within the City’s 2025 Sphere of Influence boundary, as adopted through the 2023 Municipal Services Review; and
WHEREAS, the proposed prezoning designation of Open Space (OS) for APN 225-020-110-000 is consistent with the General Plan and is shown on the prezoning map included as Exhibit A; and
WHEREAS, the prezoning shall become effective only upon completion of annexation proceedings and recordation of the Certificate of Completion by the San Joaquin Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo), pursuant to Government Code Section 56375; and WHEREAS, the annexation and prezoning are exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), the Common Sense Exemption, because the administrative actions do not authorize physical development and have no potential to result in a significant environmental impact; and WHEREAS, the Escalon City Council has considered all information related to this matter, including staff reports, exhibits, public testimony, and supporting documentation presented at the public hearings identified herein.

Attachment 2

Page 1162 of 1575 ends

Ord.XXX OS Zone (Adopted xx/xx/2026) Page 2
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ESCALON DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1: Findings. The City Council hereby adopts, as its own, the findings required to approve the prezoning designation for APN 225‑020‑110‑000, in accordance with Escalon Municipal Code Sections 17.61.030 and 17.61.040, as detailed in the City Council staff report and supporting documents, which are hereby incorporated by reference.

SECTION 2: CEQA. The City Council finds that the prezoning and annexation are exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), the Common Sense Exemption, because the actions do not authorize physical development and have no potential to result in a significant environmental impact..

SECTION 3: Amendment. The Zoning Map is hereby amended to apply the prezoning designation Open Space (OS) to APN 225‑020‑110‑000, as depicted in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein.

SECTION 4: Severability. If any section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, clause, or phrase of this Ordinance is held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council declares that it would have adopted this Ordinance and each section thereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections may be declared invalid.

SECTION 5: Typographical or Clerical (Scrivener) Errors. Any typographical or clerical errors in this Ordinance may be remedied by the City Attorney with the assistance of the City Clerk and shall not constitute an alteration.

SECTION 6. Publication. This Ordinance shall be published in accordance with the provisions of Government Code Section 36933.

SECTION 7: Effective Date. This Ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days following adoption.

INTRODUCED at a regular meeting of the City Council held on August 03, 2026, and PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Escalon, State of California, on August 10, 2026, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

Page 1163 of 1575 ends

Ord.XXX OS Zone (Adopted xx/xx/2026) Page 3
ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

____________________________
ANDREW HAGAN, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________
DIANA TREJO, Deputy City Clerk

Page 1164 of 1575 ends

Ord.XXX OS Zone (Adopted xx/xx/2026) Page 4

EXHIBIT A

PREZONING MAP

HOGAN-ENNIS PARK EXPANSION
APN: 225‑020‑110‑000

Page 1165 of 1575 ends

ITEM NO. 5

COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM
FOR AUGUST 10, 2026
Prepared By: Trevin W. Barber, Development & Community Services Manager Date: August 06, 2026
Subject: Conduct a Public Hearing to Consider Adoption of the Attached Resolution No. 2026-XX Adopting the 2023-2031 Housing Element Update and Authorize Staff to File a Notice of Exemption in Accordance with CEQA Statute and Guidelines
Recommendation:

Conduct a public hearing and adopt Resolution No. 2026-02 adopting the 6th Cycle Housing Element.

At this meeting, the City Council will conduct the public hearing and introduce the legislative ordinances associated with the project. If approved, adoption of resolutions and CEQA documents will occur at the August 17, 2026 meeting following a second reading.

Background:

The Housing Element is one of the seven mandated elements of the General Plan, and the only element that must be updated on a set schedule. The Plan must consider and be consistent with the establishment of Regional Housing Needs Allocations (RHNA), which are published at eight-year intervals. The City last updated its Housing Element in 2019 and this current update will cover the planning period from 2023 to 2031.

In recent years, the Legislature has passed multiple housing bills that prescribe new requirements for Housing Elements and new “by-right” requirements for housing projects. By-right requirements primarily require cities to approve certain housing development projects. And some provisions of these laws reduce land use control for cities without a certified Housing Element, a way for the state to put pressure on jurisdictions to complete their Housing Elements. Staff’s goal for this Housing Element update is to meet the requirements established by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD), preserve the City’s discretionary land use control to the maximum extent possible and bring forward meaningful local goals, policies and programs that support housing at all levels in Escalon.

At joint meetings held on October 2, 2023, and November 6, 2023, the Planning Commission and City Council received presentations and reviewed background data for the Housing Element update including the City’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA), the inventory of potential housing sites and the results of community outreach to date. Highlights of these presentations included:
· Escalon’s RHNA for the 2023-2031 Housing Element is 367 units, which is a 13.6% reduction from the 5th Cycle RHNA; and

Page 1166 of 1575 ends

· The City has sufficient land zoned under existing conditions to accommodate the 6th Cycle RHNA with a buffer, primarily with planned and approved projects. · Most goals, policies, and programs are continued from the 5th Cycle Housing Element, with revisions primarily reflecting changes in State law.

At these meetings, the Planning Commission and City Council also reviewed and provided direction on the proposed goals and programs included in the draft Housing Element. Incorporating this direction, staff and the consultant team prepared the HCD Draft Housing Element, for a 30-day public review and then for a 90-day HCD review. The 30-day public review period started November 15, 2023. During the public review period, a community workshop was held on December 4, 2023. No comments were received during the public review period, and a revised Draft Housing Element was submitted to HCD on December 29, 2023, for its 90-day review period.

At the conclusion of HCD’s initial 90-day review period, the City received a formal letter with findings identifying required revisions. The City incorporated these edits and on November 8, 2024, the City posted a Subsequent Draft Element for 7-day public review and submitted to HCD for review on November 14, 2024, for their 60-day review. On January 13, 2025, HCD provided a letter of its findings to the City, which included a list of changes that needed to be incorporated. City staff and the consultant team incorporated these revisions and posted the Subsequent Draft Element for 7-day public review on September 5, 2025. No comments were received during this public review period, and the Draft Element was submitted to HCD on September 11, 2025. HCD provided a letter of its findings on November 10, 2025, including a list of changes that needed to be made. Subsequently, City staff and the consultant team incorporated these edits and transmitted a subsequent draft Housing Element to HCD on April 27, 2026, with a subsequent findings letter received from HCD on June 26, 2026. The attached Draft Housing Element contains non-substantive changes to reflect changes in the sites inventory and background analysis and retains consistency with State Housing Element Law as identified in HCD’s latest findings letter.

Public input was accepted and incorporated at each of the review points described above. To remain compliant with State Housing Element law, Escalon’s HCD-reviewed and revised Housing Element must have been adopted by the City Council no later than January 31, 2023; thus, the City is out of compliance. At this time, City Council is being asked to review and adopt the attached Housing Element recommended for adoption by the Planning Commission at its July 14, 2026, meeting.

The revised Adoption Draft Housing Element (included as Exhibits 2-5) contains the following sections, as required by state law:

1. Introduction and Summary: Includes summaries of community involvement, population characteristics and trends, constraints to housing development, fair housing assessment, and progress on programs in current Housing Element;

2. Housing Strategy: Goals, policies, and programs demonstrating ability to meet housing needs;

3. Housing Sites: Identified sufficient sites zoned for housing to meet Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA);

4. Technical Background Report, Fair Housing Assessment, & Appendices: Included in a separate document, this report provides in-depth data and analysis required to support the Housing Element policy document.

In the sections below, staff will provide a high-level overview of the public outreach conducted to date, as well as the Housing Strategy and Housing Sites sections included in the Housing Element.

Page 1167 of 1575 ends

Discussion:

Public Outreach
One of the many requirements for the Housing Element is the collection of data to help determine housing needs. This includes data about how many residents are overpaying for their housing, how many units are overcrowded, the costs of developing housing, and demographic information and trends. In addition to this data, staff and consultants have collected local data in real time to ensure that Escalon’s Housing Element truly addresses Escalon’s needs. Public outreach efforts are described and summarized below.
· Housing Element Update Website (https://www.cityofescalon.org/housing_element): The website provides introductory information to the Housing Element update process, a dedicated email address, links to information on past and upcoming community meetings, a project timeline, and community opinion surveys in Spanish and English. · Community Opinion Surveys: Surveys were made available in English and Spanish and could be completed on cell phones, computers, or other internet-accessing devices. Surveys were promoted through the City’s social media channels, utility newsletter, and email distribution lists.
· Kick-off presentation held at the October 2, 2023, joint City Council & Planning Commission workshop, covering the Housing Element update process, new laws, opportunities for engagement, and local housing demographics. This meeting also included an opportunity for members of the public to speak.
· Presentation at the November 6, 2023 joint City Council & Planning Commission meeting, covering the City’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA), the inventory of potential housing sites, results of community outreach to date, and both bodies provided direction for proposed goals, policies and programs for the Housing Element. These meetings also included an opportunity for members of the public to speak.
· The Draft Housing Element was posted on the City’s Housing Element webpage for the 30-day public review period from November 15, 2023. The webpage included information about how to provide comments by email.
· A Housing Element Open House was held on December 4, 2023, where consultants presented on the structure of the Housing Element, identified that the Public Review Draft Housing Element was available for review, and noted next steps in the process. · On December 29, 2023, the Draft Housing Element was submitted to HCD for its 90-day review period. The City’s webpage was updated to include the Draft Housing Element submitted to HCD and information about how to provide comments by email to the City and to HCD. · On November 8, 2024, City staff and the consultant team revised to incorporate comments from HCD and released the revised draft for a 7-day public comment period. The City’s webpage was updated to include the revised Draft Housing Element and information about how to provide comments by email to the City and to HCD.
· On November 14, 2024, the Subsequent Draft Housing Element was submitted to HCD for its 60-day review period.
· On September 5, 2025, City staff and the consultant team revised to incorporate comments from HCD and released the revised draft for a 7-day public comment period. The City’s webpage was updated to include the revised Draft Housing Element and information about how to provide comments by email to the City and to HCD.

Page 1168 of 1575 ends

· On September 11, 2025, the Subsequent Draft Housing Element was submitted to HCD for its 60-day review period.
· On April 27, 2026, the Subsequent Draft Housing Element was submitted to HCD for an additional 60-day review period following a 7-day public review period. · On July 14, 2026, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed hearing to recommend adoption of the Housing Element to the City Council.

A detailed discussion of community engagement and outreach is included as an appendix to the Housing Element (Exhibit 6). The City and HCD continue to accept public comments throughout the planning process, and have received additional public comments in the weeks preceding the City Council hearing, included as Exhibit 10.

Housing Strategy
An in-depth discussion of the Housing Strategy, including goals, policies and programs, can be found in Section 2 of the Draft Housing Element (Exhibit 2).

Below is a summary of the Housing Strategy. The Housing Element includes five goals and corresponding policies and implementation programs, which will guide City actions over the 2023-2031 Housing Element cycle. The goals, policies, and programs are designed to address the existing and projected housing needs of the City of Escalon. The proposed Housing Element Goals are listed below and continue the direction set by the current Housing Element, with modifications made to address new State law:
· Goal 1: Provide Viable Sites for Housing
· Goal 2: Facilitate Housing Development
· Goal 3: Sustain & Improve Escalon’s Housing & Neighborhoods · Goal 4: Support Affordable & Accessible Housing
· Goal 5: Eliminate Housing Discrimination
New programs are proposed in this Housing Element Update, which are designed to assist the City in complying with the full range of requirements for housing elements. Most of these new programs were reviewed by the Planning Commission and City Council in December 2023, who indicated support for included programs.

Programs include actions to suspend the City’s Growth Management Ordinance (GMO) for consistency with State law. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66300, as established by SB 330 and subsequently made permanent by State law in 2025, local agencies may not enforce housing development caps or similar growth control measures that were not adopted through a voter-approved initiative. Suspending the GMO will ensure consistency with State law and remove a constraint to achieving the City's Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) throughout the Housing Element planning period.

Housing Sites
An in-depth discussion of Housing Sites can be found starting in Section 3 of the Draft Housing Element (Attachment 2). Below is a summary of this information. The proposed sites included in the Housing Element demonstrate that the City has sufficient land available to meet its Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA), which is a requirement of State law. Each agency’s RHNA is set through a process

Page 1169 of 1575 ends

that is meant to identify and address housing needs for the state’s projected population, to improve the job-housing balance in communities, and to ensure the availability of housing affordable to all income groups. The City’s RHNA is set by the San Joaquin Council of Governments (SJCOG) and for 2023- 2031 Escalon’s RHNA is 367 units. Table 1 provides a breakdown of the City’s current RHNA by income category.

Table 1: Escalon Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA), 2023-2031 Jurisdiction Very Low
Income
(<50% AMI)
Low Income
(50-80%
AMI)
Moderate
Income (80-
120% AMI)
Above
Moderate
Income
(>120% AMI)
Total
Escalon 90 56 66 155 367
Source: San Joaquin Council of Governments Regional Housing Needs Allocation Plan The City is not required to construct the housing units included in its RHNA. It is instead required to demonstrate that it has adequate sites zoned at appropriate densities to accommodate the number of RHNA units in each income category. When a city lacks adequate available, vacant land for the development of its RHNA, it must either rezone adequate land at high enough densities to support affordable housing development or use other methods to identify where the units can go. These methods may include increasing allowable densities in certain land use categories; providing zoning overlays to allow housing on certain commercial parcels; allowing additional units within single-family neighborhoods; providing programs to encourage more, smaller units that are typically more affordable than larger units; or other creative solutions that address the City’s identified housing needs.

As part of preparing the Housing Element, staff and the consulting team identified housing sites in conjunction with preparation of the General Plan, developed a “pipeline” of housing projects that are planned to be developed in the next eight years, documented the affordability profile of planned projects, including those required by various Development Agreements, and conducted site specific outreach with owners whose property is included in the inventory. This work confirms that the City has sufficient land zoned for housing within the proposed General Plan 2019 to accommodate its RHNA and will not be proposing any zoning changes in its Housing Element. While the City also has strong, documented plans for affordable housing construction, particularly in Development Agreements, additional policies and programs are necessary to ensure that City could meet the required affordability at all levels. These new policies and programs are discussed above. Table 2 provides a summary of the strategy to fulfill the City’s RHNA within the 2023-2031 Housing Element.

Table 2: Escalon RHNA Strategy, 2023-2031
Income Level Lower
Income
Moderate
Income
Above
Moderate
Income
Total
RHNA Allocation 146 66 155 367
RHNA
Credits
Pipeline 97 9 119 225
ADUs/JADUs 6 3 1 10
Total 103 12 120 235
RHNA Shortfall After Credits 43 54 35 132
Vacant Sites 100 29 4 133
Non-Vacant Sites 0 0 0 0

Page 1170 of 1575 ends

Religious Institution Sites 241 0 0 241
Total Units in Sites Inventory 450 39 80 569
RHNA Surplus 202
HCD’s most recent findings letter on the Housing Element received on June 26, 2026 (Exhibit 6) found the document in substantial compliance with State Housing Law, and further required the City to adopt zoning code amendments to support a viable Sites Inventory and achieve full certification from HCD.

This includes the establishment of a Religious Institution Overlay (RIO) on sites included in the Housing Element owned by religious institutions, and code amendments to allow by-right approval of housing development projects with at least 20% of units affordable to low-income households on sites included in multiple Housing Element cycles, as specified. A package of zoning code amendments to implement the Housing Element was recommended for City Council approval by the Planning Commission on July 14, 2026, and will be brought forward at a successive hearing of the City Council on August 10, 2026.

Environmental Review
The proposed Housing Element Update has been reviewed in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.) and the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 15000 et seq.).

Adoption of the Housing Element Update is exempt from CEQA pursuant to the Common Sense Exemption (CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3)). The Housing Element Update is a policy-level planning document that establishes goals, policies, programs, and implementation measures to address the City's housing needs and maintain compliance with State Housing Element Law. Adoption of the Housing Element Update does not approve, authorize, or entitle any specific development project or other physical change to the environment. As a result, it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that adoption of the Housing Element Update may have a significant effect on the environment.

Public Hearing Notice
The City provided a notice of public hearing, published in the Escalon Times, and provided email notification of the hearing to interested parties.

Next Steps
If the adoption resolution is approved by the City Council, the Adopted Housing Element will be submitted to HCD, who will have 60 days to issue findings. Based on HCD’s findings, non-substantive revisions may be necessary to respond to HCD input.

Conclusion
City staff have reviewed the Housing Element Update and find that it is internally consistent with the City Escalon General Plan and substantially complies with State Housing Element Law. Staff recommend that the City Council adopt the Housing Element Update by resolution.

Fiscal Impact:

Page 1171 of 1575 ends

Adoption of the 2023–2031 Housing Element Update does not, by itself, authorize expenditures beyond those already budgeted for preparation of the document. Implementation of individual Housing Element programs may require future staff resources, consultant services, or funding allocations, which will be considered through subsequent budget and policy decisions. Adoption and maintenance of a State-compliant Housing Element is important to preserving the City's eligibility for various State housing, infrastructure, and grant funding programs. Conversely, failure to maintain compliance with State Housing Element Law may expose the City to legal action by the California Attorney General, the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD), housing advocacy organizations, or other interested parties. State law authorizes courts to impose significant penalties on jurisdictions that fail to comply with court orders requiring Housing Element compliance, including fines ranging from a minimum of $10,000 per month to as much as $100,000 per month, with additional penalties available in certain circumstances. Noncompliance may also result in increased exposure to the “Builder's Remedy,” loss of local land use authority in specific situations, court-appointed oversight, and reduced eligibility for certain State funding opportunities.

Adoption of the Housing Element Update reduces the City's potential fiscal and legal exposure while supporting continued access to State resources and housing-related funding programs.

Exhibits:
1) Resolution to Adopt the City of Escalon’s 6th Cycle Housing Element 2) Escalon Adoption Draft Housing Element
3) Escalon Adoption Draft Technical Background Report
4) Escalon Adoption Draft Fair Housing Assessment
5) Escalon Adoption Draft Housing Element Appendices
6) HCD Subsequent Draft Review Letter (2026-06-26)
7) HCD Subsequent Draft Review Letter (2025-11-10)
8) HCD Subsequent Draft Review Letter (2025-01-13)
9) HCD Initial Draft Review Letter (2024-03-28)
10) Public Comments on the Adoption Draft Housing Element

Page 1172 of 1575 ends

RESOLUTION NO. 2026-XX
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ESCALON CITY COUNCIL ADOPTING THE 2023- 2031 HOUSING ELEMENT OF THE CITY OF ESCALON GENERAL PLAN WHEREAS, the California Government Code Section 65302 mandates that each city and county shall include a Housing Element in its General Plan, and that the Housing Element be updated periodically to reflect current conditions and legal requirements and set forth goals, policies and programs for the preservation, improvement and development of housing for all economic segments of the community and housing for persons with special needs; and
WHEREAS, State Housing Element Law (Government Code Sections 65580 et seq.) requires that the City Council adopt a Housing Element for the eight-year period 2023-2031 to accommodate the City’s regional housing need allocation (“RHNA”) of 367 housing units; and
WHEREAS, maintaining an adequate amount of housing and diverse residential opportunities and land uses is identified as a goal of the City of Escalon in the 2015-2023 Housing Element; and
WHEREAS, the Housing Element of the General Plan provides an assessment of current and projected housing stock and land available for development; and WHEREAS, the Housing Element of the General Plan addresses the housing needs of identified populations including seasonal workers, the elderly, the disabled, low and very low income, and others; and
WHEREAS, the Housing Element of the General Plan establishes the City’s programs to meet housing needs and demand; and
WHEREAS, the Housing Element of the General Plan provides an opportunity for the City to demonstrate how the goal of providing an adequate amount of housing and diverse residential opportunities will be achieved; and WHEREAS, the City of Escalon is required by State law to prepare a Housing Element which provides information, policies, and programs to encourage the development of housing to meet the needs of all of the City’s residents; and WHEREAS, the City has worked closely with the public and private agencies and individuals representing various populations and housing interests during the preparation of the 2023-2031 Housing Element; and
WHEREAS, in preparation of the updated Draft Element, City staff has worked closely with the State of California Department of Housing and Community Development, which is the state agency responsible for reviewing Housing Elements; and Attachment 1

Page 1173 of 1575 ends

RESOLUTION NO. 2026-02
WHEREAS, tribal consultation has been executed in accordance with Senate Bill 18 and Assembly Bill 52 (Government Code Section 65352.3 and Public Resources Code Section 21080.3.1); and
WHEREAS, the San Joaquin County Environmental Review Officer has recommended that the City Council find that the proposed project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines; and
WHEREAS, the Housing Element Update is a policy-level planning document that establishes goals, policies, and programs but does not approve, authorize, or entitle any specific physical development project, and it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that adoption of the Housing Element Update may have a significant effect on the environment; future projects and implementing actions that may result in physical changes to the environment will be subject to environmental review pursuant to CEQA, as applicable, at the time such actions are considered; and WHEREAS, in accordance with Government Code Section 65585 (b), on September 5, 2025, the City submitted the draft Housing Element to the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) for its review; and WHEREAS, on November 10, 2025, the City received a letter from HCD providing its findings regarding the draft Housing Element; and WHEREAS, in accordance with Government Code Section 65585 (b), on April 27, 2026, the City submitted a subsequent draft Housing Element to the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) for its review; and WHEREAS, on June 26, 2026, the City received a letter from HCD providing its findings regarding the draft Housing Element including that the revised draft element, including revisions, meets the statutory requirements of State Housing Element Law; and WHEREAS, City staff and consultants reviewed the findings and revised the draft Housing Element to incorporate HCD’s comments and requested changes, creating the adoption draft 2023-2031 Housing Element; and
WHEREAS, on July 14, 2026, the Planning Commission conducted a duly and properly noticed public hearing, reviewed the adoption draft Housing Element and all pertinent maps, documents and exhibits, including HCD’s findings, the City’s response to HCD’s findings, the staff report and all attachments, all oral and written public comments, and after doing so, recommends that the project be exempt from further CEQA review and determines the Housing Element to be consistent with State law and the City of Escalon General Plan.

WHEREAS, on August 10, 2026, the City Council conducted a duly and properly

Page 1174 of 1575 ends

RESOLUTION NO. 2026-02
noticed public hearing, independently reviewed the Planning Commission's recommendation, the adoption draft Housing Element and all pertinent maps, documents, and exhibits, including HCD's findings, the City's response to HCD's findings, the staff report and all attachments, all oral and written public comments, and after doing so, determined that the project is exempt from further review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), determined that the Housing Element is consistent with State law and the City of Escalon General Plan, and finds that adoption of the Housing Element, as presented or as modified by the City Council, is in the public interest.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Escalon City Council adopts the 2023-2031 Housing Element of the General Plan.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council makes the following findings:
a. The Housing Element Update is internally consistent with the City of Escalon General Plan.
b. As required by Government Code Section 65585(e), the City Council has considered the findings made by the Department of Housing and Community Development included in the Department’s letter to the City dated June 26, 2026. c. The Housing Element substantially complies with State Housing Element Law, as provided in Government Code 65580 et seq. and contains all provisions required by State Housing Element Law.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council hereby rescinds the current Housing Element and adopts a Resolution exempting the project from CEQA and adopting the 2023-2031 Housing Element Update.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council recommends that the City Manager or his designee be delegated the authority to make additional non-substantive changes to the adopted Housing Element, including its Technical Background Report, Fair Housing Assessment, and Appendices, to address further requirements from HCD necessary to achieve State certification.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a special meeting of the City Council of the City of Escalon, State of California, on the 10th day of August, 2026, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

Page 1175 of 1575 ends

RESOLUTION NO. 2026-02
____________________________________________________________ Andrew Hagan, Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________________
Michele Bates, Secretary
City of Escalon City Council

Page 1176 of 1575 ends

Adoption Draft
Housing Element
August 2026
Attachment 2

Page 1177 of 1575 ends

Escalon 2023-2031 Housing Element – Adoption Draft | p. 1

TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS.................................................................................................. 1 TABLES AND FIGURES................................................................................................. 4 SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION & SUMMARY................................................................. 5

1.1 Introduction............................................................................................................ 5

1.2 Definition and Purpose .......................................................................................... 5

1.3 Consistency with State Laws and General Plan .................................................... 5

1.4 Public Participation ................................................................................................ 5

1.5 Organization of the Housing Element .................................................................... 6

1.6 Definition of Terms ................................................................................................. 7

1.7 Data Sources......................................................................................................... 8

1.8 Community Profile ................................................................................................. 9

1.9 Changing Housing Needs and Demographics ..................................................... 10

1.10 Special Needs Populations................................................................................ 12

1.11 Characteristics of Housing Stock ....................................................................... 14

1.12 Summary of Constraints .................................................................................... 15

1.13 Summary of Fair Housing Analysis .................................................................... 16

1.14 Regional Housing Needs Allocation................................................................... 17

1.15 Escalon 5th Cycle Housing Element Review ...................................................... 17

1.16 Policy Changes.................................................................................................. 17 SECTION 2: HOUSING STRATEGY ............................................................................ 18 SECTION 2.1: INTRODUCTION ............................................................................... 18 SECTION 2.2: GOALS & POLICIES.......................................................................... 19 Goal 1: Provide Viable Sites for Housing................................................................... 20 Goal 2: Facilitate Housing Development.................................................................... 20 Goal 3: Sustain & Improve Escalon’s Housing & Neighborhoods .............................. 20 Goal 4: Support Affordable & Accessible Housing ..................................................... 21 Goal 5: Eliminate Housing Discrimination.................................................................. 21 SECTION 2.3: HOUSING PROGRAMS .................................................................... 22 Program 1-1: Maintain Housing Capacity .................................................................. 22 Program 1-2: Maintain Viable Sites ........................................................................... 23

Page 1178 of 1575 ends

Escalon 2023-2031 Housing Element – Adoption Draft | p. 2 Program 1-3: Accessible & Transparent Development Application Information and Standards .................................................................................................................. 24 Program 2-1: Zoning for a Variety of Housing Types ................................................. 25 Program 2-2: Senior Housing .................................................................................... 27 Program 2-3: Missing Middle Housing....................................................................... 28 Program 2-4: Accessory Dwelling Units..................................................................... 28 Program 2-5: Affordable Housing Funding and Incentives......................................... 30 Program 2-6: Farmworker Housing............................................................................ 31 Program 3-1: Neighborhood Improvements............................................................... 32 Program 3-2: Housing Rehabilitation Program .......................................................... 33 Program 3-3: Conservation of Affordable Units & Mobile Homes .............................. 34 Program 3-4: Energy Conservation and Efficiency .................................................... 35 Program 4-1: Removal of Constraints........................................................................ 37 Program 4-2: Housing Outreach and Stakeholder Engagement................................ 38 Program 4-3: Parking Standards ............................................................................... 39 Program 5-1: Equal Housing Opportunity .................................................................. 40 Program 5-2: Removal of Impediments to Fair Housing............................................ 41 Program 5-3: Anti-Displacement Actions ................................................................... 42 Program 5-4: Housing Choice Vouchers.................................................................... 44 Program 5-5: Reasonable Accommodation ............................................................... 45 Program 5-6: Limit Code Enforcement Activities ....................................................... 45 SECTION 2.4: QUANTIFIED OBJECTIVES.............................................................. 46 SECTION 3: HOUSING SITES..................................................................................... 49 SECTION 3.1: CONTEXT.......................................................................................... 49 SECTION 3.2: DEVELOPMENT CAPACITY ASSUMPTIONS .................................. 50

3.2.1 Accessory Dwelling Units.................................................................................. 50

3.2.2 Planned, Approved, and Pending Projects ....................................................... 52

3.2.3 Units Credited Toward RHNA ........................................................................... 53 SECTION 3.3: REALISTIC CAPACITY OF SITES ZONED FOR HOUSING............. 54

3.3.1 Vacant Sites...................................................................................................... 54

3.3.2 Non-Vacant Sites .............................................................................................. 63

3.3.3 Religious Institution Sites.................................................................................. 63

3.3.4 Sites Suitability Analysis ................................................................................... 68

Page 1179 of 1575 ends

Escalon 2023-2031 Housing Element – Adoption Draft | p. 3

3.3.5 Realistic Capacity Analysis ............................................................................... 69 SECTION 3.4: PROGRAMS TO ENSURE ADEQUATE SITES................................. 72

3.4.1 Summary of Programs to Ensure Adequate Sites............................................. 72 SECTION 3.5: FAIR HOUSING CONSIDERATIONS ................................................ 73

3.5.1 Relationship of Sites to Fair Housing Analysis.................................................. 73

3.5.2 Improved and Exacerbated Conditions............................................................. 76 SECTION 3.6: INFRASTRUCTURE CONSIDERATIONS ......................................... 76

3.6.1 Water ................................................................................................................ 76

3.6.2 Sewer ............................................................................................................... 76

3.6.3 Storm Drainage................................................................................................. 77

3.6.4 Other Utilities .................................................................................................... 77 SECTION 3.7: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS ........................................... 78

3.7.1 Fire ................................................................................................................... 78

3.7.2 Earthquake ....................................................................................................... 78

3.7.3 Flood................................................................................................................. 78

3.7.4 Landslides......................................................................................................... 79 CONCLUSION........................................................................................................... 80

Page 1180 of 1575 ends

Escalon 2023-2031 Housing Element – Adoption Draft | p. 4

TABLES AND FIGURES
TABLES
Table 1: Population by Race/Ethnicity 2010-2021 ......................................................... 11 Table 2: Income Distribution by Household Type........................................................... 12 Table 3: City of Escalon 2023-2031 RHNA.................................................................... 17 Table 4: Quantified Objectives, City of Escalon, 2023-2031.......................................... 46 Table 5: Housing Program Objectives, 2023-2031 ........................................................ 47 Table 6: Escalon Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA), 2023-2031................... 49 Table 7: ADU Permits Issued or Completed by Year in Escalon.................................... 51 Table 8: Planned, Approved, and Pending Projects for RHNA Credit............................ 52 Table 9: RHNA Credits .................................................................................................. 53 Table 10: Realistic Capacity of Vacant Parcels ............................................................. 54 Table 11: Realistic Capacity of Religious Institution Parcels.......................................... 64 Table 12: RHNA and Adequate Sites............................................................................. 69 Table 13: Summary Table of Housing Element Sites..................................................... 70

FIGURES
Figure 1: City of Escalon Location within San Joaquin County ..................................... 10 Figure 2: Housing Opportunity Sites in Escalon ............................................................ 56 Figure 3: Escalon Housing Opportunity Sites #1-3........................................................ 57 Figure 4: Escalon Housing Opportunity Site #4............................................................. 58 Figure 5: Escalon Housing Opportunity Sites #5-7........................................................ 59 Figure 6: Escalon Housing Opportunity Site #8............................................................. 60 Figure 7: Escalon Housing Opportunity Site #9............................................................. 61 Figure 8: Escalon Housing Opportunity Site #10........................................................... 62 Figure 9: Escalon Housing Opportunity Site #11........................................................... 65 Figure 10: Escalon Housing Opportunity Site #12......................................................... 66 Figure 11: Escalon Housing Opportunity Site #13......................................................... 67 Figure 12: Distribution of Housing Sites in Escalon....................................................... 73 Figure 13: Location of Planned, Approved, and Pending Projects ................................ 74 Figure 14: HOLC Redlining Map for City of Stockton .................................................... 75 Figure 15: Earthquake Shaking Probability Map ........................................................... 78 Figure 16: Escalon Flooding Risk Factor Map............................................................... 79

Page 1181 of 1575 ends

Escalon 2023-2031 Housing Element – Adoption Draft | p. 5 SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION & SUMMARY

1.1 Introduction
This section within the Escalon General Plan, the Housing Element, is dedicated to presenting the goals, policies, actions, and needs pertaining to the provision of housing for the current and future residents of the City of Escalon. The Housing Element serves a dual function: first, it outlines specific policies and actionable measures designed to meet Escalon's unique and clearly identified housing needs; and second, it aims to align with regional standards and attain State certification, as required by State law.

1.2 Definition and Purpose
A housing element is a crucial component of a local jurisdiction’s comprehensive plan, also known as a General Plan. A housing element must identify and assess existing and projected housing needs, existing policies and programs, and constraints to housing development. It must also establish goals, policies, quantified objectives, financial resources, and scheduled programs to meet housing needs.

State law requires that Housing Elements be revised periodically. This document updates the 2019-2023 Escalon Housing Element and covers the period from December 31, 2023, to December 31, 2031. The purpose of a housing element is to adequately address local housing needs in a way that does not constrain development, by facilitating the development of diverse housing options and promoting fair housing practices.

1.3 Consistency with State Laws and General Plan
Under California law, local jurisdictions are required to update their housing elements on a set schedule to align with changing demographics, economic conditions, and regional housing goals. The components of a housing element are set by the California “Housing Element law” (Government Code § 65580 - 65589.11). State law requires the various sections, or elements, of a General Plan to be consistent with one another. Upon adoption, this Housing Element becomes a part of the Escalon General Plan and is found to be consistent with the rest of the General Plan. As the General Plan is amended in the future, the City will ensure the Housing Element remains consistent.

New State law requires that the Safety Element be updated to address climate adaptation upon revision of the Housing Element. The City will ensure compliance with this requirement.

The City is the local water and sewer provider for its residents, and will therefore apply priority service to proposed affordable housing developments for lower income households.

1.4 Public Participation
Effective housing policy must reflect the values and priorities of the community. The public participation requirement of Housing Element law presents an opportunity to engage

Page 1182 of 1575 ends

Escalon 2023-2031 Housing Element – Adoption Draft | p. 6 residents in defining housing issues, and in creating solutions that both meet the needs of the community and the requirements of State law. It is the cornerstone of the process.

For the development of the 2023-2031 Escalon Housing Element, methods of obtaining public participation and input included, but were not limited to, the following:
▪ Housing Needs and Opportunities Community Opinion Survey (English and Spanish)
▪ Informational flyer and survey mailed to all utility customers ▪ Updates provided via email to the Escalon Housing Element Update interest list ▪ Joint City Council and Planning Commission Housing Element Kickoff Workshop of October 2, 2023 (hybrid format)
▪ Joint City Council and Planning Commission Draft Housing Strategy Workshop of November 6, 2023 (hybrid format)
▪ Public Review Draft Workshop on November 6, 2023 (virtual format) ▪ Stakeholder survey sent to 75+ housing development professionals to assess housing constraints
▪ Stakeholder survey sent to local and regional service providers to assess constraints and fair housing contributing factors
▪ Housing Element updates posted on the City of Escalon website ▪ Planning Commission Adoption Hearing of July 17, 2026 ▪ City Council Adoption Hearing of August 10, 2026

1.5 Organization of the Housing Element
The Escalon Housing Element is comprised of the following five major components:
▪ Section 1 introduces the overall Housing Element update effort, a summary of housing needs and constraints, a Fair Housing summary, and a review of the effectiveness of the 2019 Housing Element including the City’s progress in its implementation.
▪ Section 2 sets forth the City’s Housing Strategy, which is comprised of the Goals, Polices, and Programs that it intends to implement over the next 8-year planning cycle. The City’s Quantified Objectives are also included in Section 2. ▪ Section 3 presents a detailed Housing Sites Inventory, including a discussion of the availability of services, and compares this Inventory to the City’s projected housing needs.
▪ Section 4, the Technical Background Report, provides statutorily required data including an assessment of housing needs and programs, an analysis of nongovernmental and governmental constraints to the provision of housing, and a discussion of special needs populations.
▪ Section 5, the Fair Housing Assessment, identifies factors that contribute to local fair housing issues and barriers and includes meaningful actions within the Housing Element Policies and Programs to address those factors.

Page 1183 of 1575 ends

Escalon 2023-2031 Housing Element – Adoption Draft | p. 7 ▪ Appendices provide background context on sites, community engagement, and program implementation.

1.6 Definition of Terms
Throughout the Housing Element, a variety of technical terms related to income levels are used in describing and quantifying conditions and objectives. The definitions of these terms follow:
▪ Above Moderate-Income Households: Households earning over 120% of the County’s Area Median Income (AMI), adjusted for household size. ▪ Affordable Housing: Housing that costs no more than 30 percent of a moderatelow-, very low-, or extremely low-income household’s gross monthly income. For affordable rental units, monthly rent is capped at 30 percent of the relevant Area Median Income (AMI), divided by 12, with any tenant-paid utilities deducted. For homeownership units, the maximum sales price is calculated assuming no more than 30 percent of the relevant AMI household’s monthly income will be spent on the monthly housing payment, which includes mortgage payments, taxes, insurance, and homeowners' dues.
▪ Area Median Income (AMI): The income figure representing the middle point of the County household income. Fifty percent of households earn more than or equal to this figure and 50% earn less than or equal to this figure. The AMI varies according to the size of the household. For the year 2024, the AMI for a four-person household in County of San Joaquin was $103,800.
▪ Cost Burden: The condition of a household spending more than 30% of their income on rent, mortgage, utilities, and other housing needs. ▪ Extremely Low-Income Households (ELI): Households earning not more than 30% of the County AMI, adjusted for household size.
▪ Federal Poverty Threshold: Issued by the Census Bureau and varies by family size, number of children, elderly. There is no geographic variation. For 2022, the poverty threshold for a family of four was $29,950, and for a family of two, it was $18,900. (Note: this differs from the Federal Poverty Guidelines issued by Health & Human Services)
▪ Low-Barrier Navigation Center: a "Housing First," low barrier, temporary, service-enriched shelter that helps homeless individuals and families to quickly obtain permanent housing.
▪ Low-Income Households: Households earning between 51-80 percent of the County AMI, adjusted for household size.
▪ Missing Middle Housing: A range of house-scale buildings with multiple units compatible in scale and form with detached single-family homes. (Source:
https://missingmiddlehousing.com/)
▪ Moderate-Income Households: Households earning 81 to 120 percent of the County AMI, adjusted for household size.

Page 1184 of 1575 ends

Escalon 2023-2031 Housing Element – Adoption Draft | p. 8 ▪ Plexes: Typically, a single structure that contains more than one dwelling unit. The units share common walls, and each typically has an outside entrance. Examples include duplex, triplex, quadruplex, etc.
▪ SJCOG: San Joaquin Council of Governments (SJCOG) is a joint powers authority comprised of the County of San Joaquin and the cities of Stockton, Lodi, Manteca, Tracy, Ripon, Escalon, and Lathrop. SJCOG fosters intergovernmental coordination within San Joaquin County, neighboring jurisdictions, and other regional agencies, the state of California, and Federal agencies. It is governed by a Board of Directors comprised of City and County elected officials within the region, and representatives from Caltrans, the San Joaquin Regional Transit District, and the Port of Stockton. SJCOG serves as the federally designated Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), Regional Transportation Planning Agency (RTPA), and Local Transportation Sales Tax Authority for San Joaquin County.
▪ Special Needs Populations: Special needs population groups include seniors, extremely low-income, female-headed households, persons with disabilities, farmworkers, and individuals experiencing homelessness. Special needs groups may have additional housing needs that require specific program responses to increase access to and availability of suitable housing options. ▪ Very Low-Income Households (VLI): Households earning between 31-50% of the County AMI, adjusted for household size.

1.7 Data Sources
In preparing the Housing Element, various sources of information were utilized. The 2020 Census provided the basis for population characteristics. The Bureau of the Census also provides updated survey data through the American Community Survey (ACS) process, which is used to supplement Census data whenever possible. The following sources of data were used to help identify historic patterns of segregation, assess constraints to housing and the market conditions in Escalon, and to better identify specific housing needs:
▪ California Department of Education, California Assessment of Student Performance and Progress
▪ California Department of Education, California School Dashboard ▪ California Office for Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, CalEnviroScreen

4.0 ▪ California Tax Credit Allocation Committee (TCAC) Opportunity Area Map and Scoring 2024
▪ City of Escalon Housing Element Annual Progress Reports 2015-2022 ▪ City of Escalon Geographic Information System (GIS) mapping layers ▪ Freddie Mac Primary Mortgage Market Survey, 2013-2023 ▪ Healthy Places Index

Page 1185 of 1575 ends

Escalon 2023-2031 Housing Element – Adoption Draft | p. 9 ▪ San Joaquin Council of Governments, San Joaquin County Demographic and Employment Forecast, 2020
▪ San Joaquin Continuum of Care Point in Time Count Local Report ▪ San Joaquin Council of Governments Regional Housing Needs Allocation Plan ▪ State of California Department of Finance, E-1 City/County Population Estimates with Annual Percent Change, 2022-2023
▪ UC Berkeley Othering & Belonging Institute, Mapping Race in America ▪ UC Berkeley Urban Displacement Project Map, 2022
▪ University of Southern California, The Great California Shakeout ▪ U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW), Stockton-Lodi MPO, 2022 Q1 employment
▪ U.S. Census 2010 and 2020-2021 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates ▪ U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Agricultural Statistics Service, Census of Agriculture, 2017
▪ U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, CHAS 5-Year Estimates ▪ Zillow.com, Land Cost and Median Rent data

1.8 Community Profile
The region where present-day Escalon is located is within the original lands of the Miwok and Yokuts indigenous peoples.

In the mid-1800s, Western expansion brought settlers to the area. Among them was John Wheeler Jones, an early inhabitant who acquired land and began planting grains and raising cattle in the area that would become Escalon. Railroad expansion attracted investment and migration of workers, spurring the first layout of the town in the late 1890s.

Development soon accelerated and by the 1920s, Escalon was a modernizing community with paved roads, streetlights, public festivals, and storefront-lined streets. Escalon was incorporated as an independent city in 1957.

The City of Escalon is located in California’s Central Valley within San Joaquin County, approximately nine miles north of Modesto and 22 miles southeast of Stockton. Set within scenic and fertile farmlands, the City is an agriculturally productive area of the San Joaquin Valley, supporting the local economy including approximately 7,300 residents within City limits. Escalon is a safe community with high-performing schools, quality residential homes, and a quaint, 1920’s era downtown centered on historic Main Street.

Community preservation is core to Escalon’s local culture.

Escalon is in a highly accessible area of San Joaquin County serviced by many roadways.

Highway 120 bifurcates the City, connecting Escalon to Manteca to the west and Oakdale to the east. Santa Fe Road connects Escalon to Riverbank in adjacent Stanislaus County, while Highway 108 connects Escalon to Modesto in the south and Farmington to the north.

The City of Escalon strives to provide a vibrant and diverse community that is welcoming to all. The City’s mission statement, “Taking pride in our community through quality

Page 1186 of 1575 ends

Escalon 2023-2031 Housing Element – Adoption Draft | p. 10 service,” is apparent through its community preservation, maintenance of family atmosphere, and pursuit of a high quality of life.

Figure 1: City of Escalon Location within San Joaquin County

1.9 Changing Housing Needs and Demographics
This section summarizes the characteristics and housing needs of Escalon residents and helps to provide direction in updating the City’s Housing Element goals, policies, and programs. More detailed information is provided in Section 4, the Technical Background Report and in Section 5, the Fair Housing Assessment.

Population Characteristics and Trends
Escalon’s population increased 25.07% percent between 2000 and 2021, from 5,963 to 7,458. In comparison, San Joaquin County’s population rose 38.26% percent during the general same period, from 563,598 in 2000 to 779,233 in 2020. As of 2023, the State

Page 1187 of 1575 ends

Escalon 2023-2031 Housing Element – Adoption Draft | p. 11 Department of Finance estimates that the population in Escalon slightly decreased to 7,264.

Age Composition
Escalon’s population is slightly younger than the region’s population. The median age in Escalon is 33.7 years old compared to 35.2 in San Joaquin County, and 37.9 years of age statewide. Nearly 44% of the population is under the age of 35, while 18% of the population is age 60 and above.

Race and Ethnicity
Census statistics include the race and ethnicity of a City’s population. The most prevalent racial and ethnic categories are as shown in Table 1 below. The 2021 population estimates show that Escalon’s largest population of White (Non-Hispanic) residents increased 8.11% from 4,953 in 2010 to 5,355 in 2021. Increases also occurred in the population of Native Hawaii or Other Pacific Islander, from 0 to 30. Notably, the population of the Two or More Races category rose by nearly 2,500% from 20 to 515 in this period.

The City’s Hispanic or Latino residents decreased from 1,792 to 1,429 during this same period. The Asian population slightly decreased from 117 to 107. Escalon’s Black or African American population decreased from 61 in 2010 to 22 in 2021, while the Native American population fell from 111 to 0 during this same period. Additional discussion of Escalon’s racial and ethnic composition is included in Sections 4 and 5.

Table 1: Population by Race/Ethnicity 2010-2021
Racial or Ethnic Group 2010 2021
Hispanic or Latino 1,792 1,429
White (Non-Hispanic) alone 4,953 5,355
Black or African American alone 61 22
Native American alone 111 0
Asian alone 117 107
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander alone 0 30
Some other race alone 0 0
Two or More Races 20 515
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community 5-Year Estimates, 2010 and 2021 Employment and Income
According to the 2021 5-Year estimate American Community Survey, Escalon has 3,506 residents 16 years and older employed in the workforce. The top three industries with the highest percentage of employees are in Education, Health, and Social Services (21.3%), Retail trade (18.9%), and Manufacturing (12.4%). The vast majority of workers, 64.1%, are employed in the private sector, followed by 19.4% employed in public sector jobs.

Page 1188 of 1575 ends

Escalon 2023-2031 Housing Element – Adoption Draft | p. 12 Household Incomes and Housing Affordability
Escalon’s median household income was $67,176 in 2021. This is significantly lower than the San Joaquin County 2021 median household income of $86,056 and the statewide median household income of $91,551. Comparatively, the household income of families, particularly married couples in Escalon, is substantially higher than the city, county, and state median. Since 2019, approximately 11% of Escalon households are considered Extremely Low-Income. The distribution of income by household type is shown in Table

2. Table 2: Income Distribution by Household Type
Households Income
Household Median Income $67,176
Families $95,825
Married-couple Families $103,588
Non-family Households $57,623
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community 5-Year Estimates, 2021

1.10 Special Needs Populations
Segments of the population may have more difficulty in finding decent, affordable housing due to their special needs. Special circumstances may be related to one’s employment and income, family characteristics, disability, and household characteristics, among other factors. Consequently, certain residents in Escalon may experience incidences of discrimination, housing access obstacles, or other housing problems.

Homelessness
Escalon’s two most recent San Joaquin Continuum of Care (SJCoC) Point-in-Time (PIT) Counts of homeless were conducted in 2019 and 2024. The 2019 PIT Count reported four (4) transient persons experiencing homelessness in the City. A PIT Count was not conducted in Escalon in 2022 due to a drop in volunteers after COVID-19. The 2024 PIT Count reported only one (1) transient person experiencing homelessness in Escalon, despite a 104% increase in the countywide homeless count between 2022 and 2024.

Notwithstanding this most recent data, the SJCoC estimates a probable increase in persons experiencing homelessness in the region, which is inconsistent with observations in Escalon.

Persons with Disabilities
The term “disabled” refers to a disability (physical, mental, developmental, or sensory), which prevents or precludes a person from doing their work either in or outside of the home. Individuals with disabilities are the most likely population to experience homelessness, be rent burdened or unable to afford housing, and face the highest rates of housing discrimination. The number of disabled persons in a community has important implications for providing certain social services, in the removal of barriers to facilities, and in developing housing which has specialized access for disabled residents.

Page 1189 of 1575 ends

Escalon 2023-2031 Housing Element – Adoption Draft | p. 13 Census data from the 2021 American Community Survey indicate that 7.8% of all residents in Escalon have a disability. Of the 578 persons with a disability, 313, or 54.15%, are 64 years old or younger. Escalon’s two most prevalent disabilities are residents with cognitive difficulty (4.7%) and independent living difficulty (4%). Additional information on Persons with Disabilities is available in Section 5.

Seniors
Seniors often have fixed incomes and can have additional special needs related to access and care that may require physical improvements to their homes such as ramps, handrails, lower cupboards and counters, creation of a downstairs bedroom, or other modification to enable them to remain in their homes. They may also need assistance in the form of a part-time or live-in caretaker.

According to the 2021 American Community Survey, over 11% of Escalon’s population is aged 65 and above. While a majority of seniors in Escalon own their homes, 11.45% of residents aged 65 and older are renters.

Large Households
Household size is an important consideration when it comes to planning for housing.

Household size can be influenced by a lack of affordable housing options, an increase or decrease in family formations, or families leaving an area. Ethnicity can also affect sizes of households if a particular ethic group has a tradition of living with family members upon retirement age.

Escalon has 2,866 households. Among these, there are 240 large households (5 or more persons) and according to Census data 92.5% of large households are renters. The average household size is 3.05 persons, compared to a higher household size of 3.76 persons in San Joaquin County.

Female-Headed Households
Female-headed households generally have lower incomes and higher living expenses and childcare costs making the search for affordable, decent and safe housing more difficult. The higher cost burdens for female-headed households increase housing insecurity.

In 2021, Escalon had 270 female-headed family households, or 9.4% of the total household population. Approximately 141 of the 270 female-headed family households are under the poverty level. Data from the same year show single female-headed households with no spouse earning a median annual household income of $28,571, nearly 58% less than Escalon’s median income. Additional analysis is provided in Section

5. Farmworkers
Farmworkers play a key role in the operation and delivery of the state’s food system.

Escalon is located in San Joaquin Valley, an area rich in agricultural production. Farms in the San Joaquin Valley produce milk, fruits, including grapes, cherries, and tomatoes,

Page 1190 of 1575 ends

Escalon 2023-2031 Housing Element – Adoption Draft | p. 14 lettuce, a variety of nuts, such as almonds, walnuts, pistachios, and cotton, alfalfa, and cattle. In 2021, 3.18% of Escalon residents were employed in the agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting, and mining industry. At the County level, there are approximately 20,000 farmworkers, 40.5% of whom are classified as permanent farmworkers working 150 days or more per year.

Given their precarious employment and low-income status, farmworkers encounter hardships finding affordable housing. As a result, many farmworkers live in overcrowded and substandard housing arrangements. This situation presents a need to provide safe and affordable housing for the farmworker community. A detailed analysis of farmworker households in the City is provided in Section 4.

1.11 Characteristics of Housing Stock
Type
The housing stock in Escalon is predominantly single-family residences, though the City maintains some multifamily housing including duplexes, 3-4 unit dwellings, 5+ unit dwellings, and mobile homes. Between 2010 and 2021, Escalon saw increases in the number of single-family residences and 3-4 unit dwellings. Duplexes, 5+ unit multifamily dwellings, and mobile homes decreased during the same period.

Tenure
Between 2010 and 2021, the number of homeowner households slightly decreased from 2,067 to 2,048. As of 2021, 71.4% of households in Escalon are homeowners. However, the proportion of homeownership decreased from 77.7% in 2010 and 74.9% in 2000.

Since 2000, the number of renter households steadily increased from 514 to 818 in 2021.

As homeownership affords long term stability and investment equity, owning a home is a way to achieve greater housing security.

Age and Condition
Of Escalon’s housing stock of 2,913 units, 2,619 units (89.88%) were built between 1940 and 2009. In the two-decade span of 2000 and 2019, Census data indicates 685 new homes were built, and City records indicate that 538 new homes were built, whereas only 5 new homes were built between 2020 and 2023.

Overcrowding
Residential overcrowding is determined by the number of persons per room. The Census defines overcrowding as more than 1 person occupying 1 room, excluding bathrooms, hallways, balconies, and porches. Severely overcrowded households are more than 1.51 persons per room.

Overcrowding results from many conditions, such as a lack of affordable housing, insufficient housing stock, and an increasing population. Overcrowding is influenced by demographic and socioeconomic factors such as race, class, and housing tenure. Olderadult immigrants, recent immigrants, low-income families, and renter-occupied households are more likely to experience overcrowding. Overcrowding can exacerbate

Page 1191 of 1575 ends

Escalon 2023-2031 Housing Element – Adoption Draft | p. 15 the potential for contracting communicable diseases, suffering respiratory illnesses, and increased vulnerability to homelessness. According to the U.S. Census Bureau 2021 American Community Survey, there were 11 overcrowded households and zero severely overcrowded households in the City. The full analysis of overcrowding is included in Section 5.

Vacancy
In 2021, Escalon’s occupied housing units accounted for nearly 99% of the total, leaving 42 units vacant. The unoccupied units were classified as “Rented, not occupied” in U.S.

Census ACS, a category comprising vacant units rented but not yet occupied, including units where rent has been paid or agreed upon but renters have not moved in. A vacancy rate of less than 5% can indicate a shortage of available rental housing.

Prices
The median value of a home in Escalon rose from $306,900 in 2010 to $418,500 in 2021, an increase of 36.36%. During this same period, median gross rent dramatically rose

83.6% from $709 to $1,302. By comparison, there was a 22% increase in the median value of a home and a 37% increase in median gross rent in California, as well as a 21% increase in the median value of a home and a 34% increase in median gross rent in San Joaquin County between 2010 and 2021.

Cost burden, or the ratio of housing costs to household income, has increased in the last several years. A household is considered cost burdened if more than 30% of monthly income pays for housing. Severely cost-burdened households pay more than 50% of monthly income to housing costs. Data from 2019 shows 71% of all renter households and 22% of ownership households have experienced some level of cost burden.

1.12 Summary of Constraints
Constraints to affordable housing production are created by governmental, infrastructure, market, environmental, and social factors, among others. Constraints can be divided into two types: “Governmental constraints” are those created by federal, state, and local governments, whereas “Nongovernmental constraints” do not arise from government policy, regulation, program, or practice.

Governmental constraints result from land use controls including policies, regulations, zoning ordinances, and development standards; permit processing times; and taxes and fees. Escalon’s zoning regulations guide development by establishing rules, standards, design criteria, and permit types. Additionally, development fees are charged to cover the cost incurred for processing, evaluation, and enforcement of regulations. The City also collects a variety of development impact fees to mitigate impacts resulting from a project.

Policies and programs are included in Section 2 to address governmental constraints analyzed in the Technical Background Report (Section 4) and identified by housing development stakeholders.

Nongovernmental constraints arise from a range of factors impacting housing affordability but are not directly connected to government actions. These include construction costs,

Page 1192 of 1575 ends

Escalon 2023-2031 Housing Element – Adoption Draft | p. 16 including land prices, building materials, and labor; availability of mortgage financing; market conditions such as housing price, consumer preferences, demand, and competition; interest and capacity of developers; natural hazards and environmental conditions that impact housing availability and costs; and availability of infrastructure.

1.13 Summary of Fair Housing Analysis
Under State housing law, Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing means “taking meaningful actions, in addition to combating discrimination, that overcome patterns of segregation and foster inclusive communities free from barriers that restrict access to opportunity based on protected characteristics.” AFFH entails taking decisive actions to remove entrenched housing discrimination barriers and to locate housing so that it is affordable and equitably accessible to populations in need.

In compliance with Housing Element law, the City must prepare a Fair Housing Assessment to identify factors that contribute to local fair housing issues and barriers and include meaningful actions within the City’s Housing Element Goals, Policies, and Programs to address those factors. The City must incorporate Fair Housing Assessment findings into the Housing Element’s Sites Inventory. To ensure meaningful public participation, outreach and engagements efforts for the Housing Element must also affirmatively further fair housing.

In addition to these factors, the Fair Housing Assessment addresses: Engagement, Enforcement and Outreach Capacity, Segregation and Integration Patterns and Trends, Disparities in Access to Opportunity, Disproportionate Housing Needs including Displacement, Areas of Concentrated Poverty and Affluence Across Racial and Ethnic Groups, Identification of Contributing Factors, Identification of Contributing Factors, and a Summary of Fair Housing Issues.

The City of Escalon commits to affirmatively further fair housing and incorporate the lens of fair housing and equity – racial, social, gender, and economic – throughout this Housing Element.

Page 1193 of 1575 ends

Escalon 2023-2031 Housing Element – Adoption Draft | p. 17

1.14 Regional Housing Needs Allocation
The Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) is a part of State Housing Element law that determines the projected and existing housing needs for each local jurisdiction in California. State housing law requires each jurisdiction’s Housing Element to demonstrate that the jurisdiction has sufficient land zoned for housing and plans to meet its RHNA, and that there are no unnecessary barriers to the housing approval process to meet the RHNA targets. The San Joaquin Council of Governments (SJCOG) conducts the RHNA process for jurisdictions in San Joaquin County every eight years as required by HCD.

For the 6th Cycle Housing Element period 2023 – 2031, Escalon has a RHNA of 367 units, divided among income groups as shown in Table 3:

Table 3: City of Escalon 2023-2031 RHNA
Type RHNA Allocation 2023-2031
Very Low (< 50% of AMI) 90
Low (50-80% of AMI) 56
Moderate (80-120% of AMI) 66
Above Moderate (>120% of AMI) 155
Total 367
Source: San Joaquin Council of Governments RHNA Plan
The housing need for extremely low-income households is considered to be one-half of the very low-income need.

1.15 Escalon 5th Cycle Housing Element Review
Progress Implementing Programs
The City has made progress in implementing many of the programs in its 2019 Housing Element. Some programs have been amended and carried forward in the 2023 Housing Element. The programs have been enhanced to affirmatively further fair housing and zone for a variety of housing types. Additionally, changes have been made to programs to include more robust engagement efforts. Limited-term programs that have been completed, such as amendments to the Zoning Code, and are no longer applicable have not been carried forward. A more detailed analysis of the City’s implementation of the 2019 Housing Element programs and their status is included in Appendix A.

1.16 Policy Changes
The 2019 Housing Element contained six goals and twenty-six policies. The 2023 Housing Element Update simplifies and restructures the goals and policies to maximize the City’s ability to implement the 2023 Housing Element and to meet changing needs of the community. The City’s successful implementation of the 2015 Housing Element provides opportunity to focus the housing strategy on implementation of new housing laws. Goals, policies, and implementation programs are included in Section 2.

Page 1194 of 1575 ends

Escalon 2023-2031 Housing Element – Adoption Draft | p. 18 SECTION 2: HOUSING STRATEGY
SECTION 2.1: INTRODUCTION

2.1.1 Background: Goals, Policies & Programs
The Housing Element provides an opportunity for jurisdictions to address housing issues more effectively. In accordance with state law, this Section contains the City’s Housing Strategy for the 2023-2031 Housing Element planning period. The Housing Strategy is made up of goals, policies, and implementation programs. Goals establish the purpose, policies establish a guiding action and commitment, and programs establish specific actions, procedures, programs, or other techniques to carry out a policy. The expected unit-specific outcomes of programs are summarized as quantified objectives for the 2023- 2031 Housing Element planning period in Table 4 below.

Housing Strategies must include the following components to ensure effective implementation:
▪ The geography (citywide, or regarding particular sites, neighborhoods, or Specific Plan areas) in which the implementation program will take place. ▪ A concise statement of specific City actions that will be taken to implement each program.
▪ The agency or department responsible for implementation. ▪ The funding source that will be used for implementation. ▪ A timeframe that indicates when each action is anticipated to be completed. ▪ A quantifiable objective to assess program success over the planning period.

The City’s 2019 Housing Element contained six goals. These goals, policies, and implementing programs have been revised to maximize the City’s ability to implement its vision for the 2023 Housing Element. Additionally, programs implemented and not applicable for continuation since the last Housing Element in 2019 have been removed.

2.1.2 Community Input in Housing Policy Development
The Community Housing Needs & Opportunities Survey was circulated widely in digital and written formats, yielding just under 200 responses by the time of the Public Review Draft Housing Element. Responses with regard to production were most favorable to senior housing, accessory dwelling units, and missing middle housing, reflected in three respective housing programs under Goal 2: Facilitate Housing Development.

Respondents also heavily favored neighborhood improvements, infrastructural considerations, and rehabilitation of the aging housing stock, reflected in programs throughout the Housing Strategy. A complete summary of community input is included in Appendix C.

2.1.3 Stakeholder Input in Housing Policy Development
The Housing Element strategy was crafted through consultation with a diverse group of local stakeholders, ensuring a comprehensive and inclusive approach.

Page 1195 of 1575 ends

Escalon 2023-2031 Housing Element – Adoption Draft | p. 19 Development professionals were asked to provide input on constraints to housing development in Escalon. Respondents noted that among the most prohibitive constraints were fees and exactions, zoning, processing and permitting procedures, availability of financing, availability of labor, costs (labor, materials, and land), and community opposition. Constraints are considered in full in Section 4 and are mitigated through program actions to reduce barriers and actively facilitate housing development.

Service providers were asked to provide input on contributing factors to fair housing issues in Escalon. As detailed in Section 5, a ranking of four to six core contributing factors with associated programmatic actions were selected from a broader list of 15 potential contributing factors among categories provided by the California Department of Housing & Community Development (HCD).

SECTION 2.2: GOALS & POLICIES
As mentioned above, the 2023 Housing Element refines the Housing Goals, Policies, and Programs to maximize the City’s ability to implement its vision for the 2023 Housing Element. The City’s 2019 Housing Element contained six overarching goals:
▪ Goal 1: Preserve and Improve Escalon’s Housing and Neighborhoods ▪ Goal 2: Facilitate and Encourage Development of Housing to Meet the City’s Housing Needs
▪ Goal 3: Provide Adequate Sites for Housing
▪ Goal 4: Expand Housing Opportunities for the Elderly, Disabled Persons, Including Developmentally Disabled, Households with Extremely Low to Moderate Incomes and for Persons with Special Housing Needs ▪ Goal 5: Eliminate Housing Discrimination
▪ Goal 6: Encourage Energy Efficient Resources in New Residential Development as well as the Existing Housing Stock
The 2023 Housing Element includes the following five reconfigured goals:
▪ Goal 1: Provide Viable Sites for Housing
▪ Goal 2: Facilitate Housing Development
▪ Goal 3: Sustain & Improve Escalon’s Housing and Neighborhoods ▪ Goal 4: Support Affordable & Accessible Housing
▪ Goal 5: Eliminate Housing Discrimination
Each of the five goals has corresponding policies, which are listed below. The strategic changes made to the policies and programs from the 2019 Housing Element are recorded as parenthetical notes and within individual program tables. See Section 2.3 for programs and implementation actions.

Page 1196 of 1575 ends

Escalon 2023-2031 Housing Element – Adoption Draft | p. 20 Goal 1: Provide Viable Sites for Housing
▪ Policy 1A: Adequate Sites
o Maintain adequate sites, with appropriate General Plan and zoning designations and regulations, for new housing development for all economic sectors to support the Regional Housing Needs Allocation. [Source: 2019 Escalon Housing Element, Policy 2A, 3A, and 3F, modified] ▪ Policy 1B: Accessible Information
o Encourage the development of viable sites with adequate infrastructure by maintaining accessible and transparent information on the City’s website. [Source: 2019 Escalon Housing Element, Policy 1D, 2F, and 3B, modified] Goal 2: Facilitate Housing Development
▪ Policy 2A: Zoning for Housing Development
o Ensure that the City’s zoning regulations are compliant with state law and do not form an unnecessary constraint to the development, conservation, and rehabilitation of housing.
[Source: 2019 Escalon Housing Element, Policy 2E, modified] ▪ Policy 2B: Housing Variety
o Encourage the development of a mix of housing types to meet the diverse housing needs of Escalon residents, including special needs populations, through zoning and land use regulations, regional collaboration, and funding programs.
[New]
Goal 3: Sustain & Improve Escalon’s Housing & Neighborhoods ▪ Policy 3A: Facilities and Services
o Provide, maintain, and upgrade facilities and services in support of complete neighborhoods.
[Source: 2019 Escalon Housing Element, Policy 1A and 1C, modified] ▪ Policy 3B: Neighborhood Preservation and Rehabilitation o Implement methods to sustain neighborhoods, such as through public and private investments, preserving the existing housing stock, and conserving affordable housing supply.
[Source: 2019 Escalon Housing Element, Policy 1E and 1F, modified] ▪ Policy 3C: Energy Conservation and Efficiency
o Encourage energy efficiency and energy conservation in residential development to ensure sustainable practices and to reduce housing costs. [Source: 2019 Escalon Housing Element, Policy 6A, modified]

Page 1197 of 1575 ends

Escalon 2023-2031 Housing Element – Adoption Draft | p. 21 Goal 4: Support Affordable & Accessible Housing
▪ Policy 4A: Removal of Constraints
o Ensure constraints that pose a barrier to the maintenance, improvement, and development of housing, including housing for all income levels and housing for persons with disabilities, are addressed and removed where possible.
[Source: 2019 Escalon Housing Element, Policy 2E, modified] ▪ Policy 4B: Housing for All
o Actively support the development of high-quality affordable and accessible housing opportunities that meet the needs of all residents, including special needs populations.
[Source: 2019 Escalon Housing Element, Policy 4A, modified] Goal 5: Eliminate Housing Discrimination
▪ Policy 5A: Prohibit Discrimination
o Support the strict observance and enforcement of anti-discrimination laws and practices including prohibiting discrimination in the sale or rental of housing with regard to race, color, national origin, ancestry, religion, disability, source of income, gender/gender identity, sexual orientation, marital status, and familial status.
[Source: 2019 Escalon Housing Element, Policy 5B, modified] ▪ Policy 5B: Affirmatively Further Fair Housing
o Affirmatively further fair housing for all residents consistent with State and Federal law.
[New]

Page 1198 of 1575 ends

Escalon 2023-2031 Housing Element – Adoption Draft | p. 22 SECTION 2.3: HOUSING PROGRAMS
The City is committed to achieving the goals and policies outlined above through the implementation of the following programs and implementing actions by December 31, 2031. The effectiveness of the 22 housing implementation programs will be monitored, and adjustments will be made as deemed appropriate by the City in coordination with California Department of Housing & Community Development (HCD).

Program 1-1: Maintain Housing Capacity
The City will assess the effectiveness of Housing Element implementation on an annual basis and provide an opportunity for the public to learn about and provide feedback on the effectiveness of the housing programs.
▪ Action (A): Administer housing policy administration to support the implementation of the City’s Housing Element and timely achievement of program timeframes. ▪ Action (B): Assess the City’s progress towards Housing Element implementation and complete the Housing Element Annual Progress Report (APR). ▪ Action (C): Facilitate a public workshop to promote awareness of the progress made towards the implementation of the Housing Element programs. ▪ Action (D): Submit the APR to HCD.

Context Continuing program, revised to fulfill RHNA and address State law. Previously “Adequate Lower Income Sites.” Incorporates Former Program 3-5 (Housing Element Monitoring Program).

Geography Citywide
Responsibility Development Services Department
Funding Source General Fund
Timeframe Action (A): Ongoing
Action (B-D): Annually, prior to April 1.

Objective Provide housing administration to meet the City’s Housing Element program deadlines and ensure no net loss of housing capacity throughout the planning period. Maintain access to key State housing, planning, and infrastructure funds.

Target development of 50% of the City’s RHNA by income
category by December 31, 2027 (halfway through the planning period), and pursue alternative actions to fulfill the City’s RHNA if lower-income targets are not met in coordination with Program Action 1-2(F).

Page 1199 of 1575 ends

Escalon 2023-2031 Housing Element – Adoption Draft | p. 23 Program 1-2: Maintain Viable Sites
The City will work to maintain viable sites to support development of housing at all income levels at or beyond RHNA throughout the eight-year planning cycle. ▪ Action (A): To ensure sufficient residential capacity is maintained to accommodate the RHNA for each income category, within one year of adoption of the Housing Element, develop and implement a formal, ongoing (project-by-project) evaluation procedure pursuant to Government Code section 65863. The evaluation procedure will track the number of extremely low-, very low-, low, moderate-, and above moderate-income units constructed to calculate the remaining unmet RHNA. The evaluation procedure will also track the number of units built on the identified sites to determine the remaining site capacity by income category and will be updated continuously as developments are approved.
▪ Action (B): Maintain an administrative list of feasible replacement sites in the event of redevelopment or other constraints posed to development of opportunity sites, to maintain no net loss of housing development capacity in the planning period. ▪ Action (C): Allow residential development as a by-right use on C-2 sites included in the City’s Housing Element Sites Inventory. All sites in inventory used to accommodate a portion of the lower-income RHNA will permit owner-occupied and rental multifamily uses by right pursuant to Government Code Section 65583.2(i) for developments in which 20 percent or more of the units are affordable to lower income households. Permitting multifamily developments with 20 percent affordability will also include sites identified in prior planning periods. ▪ Action (D): Develop an overlay zone to incentivize development of housing on land owned by religious institutions in support of the Housing Element Sites Inventory.

Rezoning will meet by-right requirements consistent with State law pertaining to minimum densities and affordability, and permit housing development eligible for by-right approval without discretionary action.
▪ Action (E): Post the housing sites inventory on the City’s website to further assist the development in selecting potential development sites. ▪ Action (F): Review production of units within the City four years into the planning period and compare with Housing Element projections. If actual production is below the projected level, and the City is not meeting its RHNA targets proportional to the duration of the planning period (i.e., 50% of RHNA in each income category), implement an alternative action program aimed at meeting RHNA targets.

Context Continuing program (includes previous Program 3-3: Encourage Mixed-Use and Residential Development in Commercial Areas), amended to address State law.

Action (C-D): Government Code Section 65583.2(h-i).

Page 1200 of 1575 ends

Escalon 2023-2031 Housing Element – Adoption Draft | p. 24 Action (D): Government Code Section 65913.16 – Affordable Housing on Faith and Higher Education Lands Act of 2023 (SB 4) Geography Citywide
Responsibility Development Services Department
Funding Source General Fund
Timeframe Action (A-B): Annually, starting by March 31, 2025.

Action (C-D): December 31, 2025.

Action (E): Within one year of Housing Element certification.

Action (F): Evaluate housing production on all sites, including religious institution sites, by July 1, 2028. For religious institution sites, continue outreach and facilitation to churches on designated sites. If at least one designated site has not initiated development by July 1, 2028 and if the City is not otherwise on track to meet at least 50% of its lower-income RHNA, then City will outreach to additional churches and offer rezoning to add the RI Overlay, or will identify and rezone one or more alternative parcels to ensure adequate sites remain available as needed to fulfill the City’s RHNA, with alternative actions completed by February 28, 2029.

Objective Maintain capacity to accommodate the RHNA by income group throughout the entire planning period.

Program 1-3: Accessible & Transparent Development
Application Information and Standards
The City will increase accessibility and transparency of housing development standards and opportunities by publicizing opportunities for housing streamlining incentives and meet the new transparency and development fee requirements of AB 602 and SB 319 through the following actions:
▪ Action (A): Develop a formalized procedure and preliminary application for the SB 35/SB 423 streamlining approval process and post materials on the City’s website. ▪ Action (B): Develop a supplemental application form for projects eligible under AB 2162, AB 2011, SB 6, SB 684/SB 1123, and SB 4, and post on the City’s website. ▪ Action (C): Develop a pre-application form and procedure or adopt the Preliminary Application Form developed by HCD pursuant to SB 330, and post on City’s website.

Page 1201 of 1575 ends

Escalon 2023-2031 Housing Element – Adoption Draft | p. 25 ▪ Action (D): Post all required information about development standards and fees on the City’s website along with relevant information on zoning, development standards, and affordable housing-related ordinances.
▪ Action (E): Ensure compliance with AB 602 requirements for new development impact fee studies and publicizing resulting fees.
▪ Action (F): Create and publish a summary that identifies the sites on the City’s Sites Inventory and make the summary available online in map format. Provide site-specific development information and support whenever possible to provide a clear development process for interested housing developers. ▪ Action (G): Ensure ongoing compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and Permit Streamlining Act and timing requirements for all development.

Context New program to address State law:

Action (A): California Gov. Code § 65913.4
Action (B): California Gov. Code § 65583 and 65650 (AB 2162); Section 65912.101 et seq. (AB 2011); Section 65852.24 (SB 6); Action (D-E): California Gov. Code § 65940.1, 65940.2, and 66016.5
Geography Citywide
Responsibility Development Services Department
Funding Source General Fund
Timeframe Action (A-F): May 1, 2026.

Action (G): Ongoing, with an initial review one year into the planning period.

Objective Maintain capacity to accommodate the RHNA by income group throughout the entire planning period, and ensure transparent access to development services information for current and prospective housing development stakeholders and the public.

Program 2-1: Zoning for a Variety of Housing Types
The City will update its Zoning Code to accommodate a variety of housing types and achieve consistency with State law through the following actions:
▪ Action (A): Allow Permanent Supportive Housing, as defined in Government Code Section 65650, to be a by-right use in all zones where multifamily and mixed-uses are permitted.

Page 1202 of 1575 ends

Escalon 2023-2031 Housing Element – Adoption Draft | p. 26 ▪ Action (B): Allow Low Barrier Navigation Centers to be a by-right use in zones where multifamily and mixed-uses are permitted, including the nonresidential zones where multifamily is permitted.
▪ Action (C): Allow Employee Housing, consisting of no more than 36 beds in group quarters (or 12 units or less) designed for use by a single family or household to be treated as an agricultural use, subject to a streamlined, ministerial approval process and is not subject to a conditional use permit (CUP) if the development is an eligible agricultural employee housing development.
▪ Action (D): Allow JADUs within all single-family dwellings and ensure all ADU/JADU requirements are compliant with State law. The City’s accessory dwelling unit ordinance (ADU) will be revised to ensure ongoing compliance with State ADU law.
▪ Action (E): Allow Residential Care Facilities and group homes for 7 or more clients, regardless of licensing status, as a permitted use within a residential structure in residential zones, subject only to clear, transparent, objective standards and byright approval. ▪ Action (F): Amend the City’s Zoning Code to permit manufactured homes in the same manner, in the same zones, and only subject to the same requirements as other single-family residential uses.
▪ Action (G): Amend the definition of family in the City’s Zoning Code to ensure compliance with fair housing laws.
▪ Action (H): Amend the City’s Zoning Code to provide clarity and ensure continued compliance with state law, and update to reflect Government Code § 65915 (Density Bonus Law).
▪ Action (I): Amend the City’s Zoning Code to allow Single-Room Occupancy (SRO) housing in the C2 zoning district, subject to objective criteria and by-right approval.

The standards used to establish and operate SROs shall be designed to encourage SROs and not constrain the use of existing structures for this use. ▪ Action (J): Amend the City’s Zoning Code to revise the definition of Emergency Shelters and allow Emergency Shelters as a permitted use without discretionary action in the R-3 Zone, and update the City’s Emergency Shelter Standards to ensure that they are objective and do not serve as unnecessary constraints.

Context Continuing program (includes previous Programs 1-1, 2-1, 2-2).

Amended to address the following State laws:
▪ Action (A): California Government Code § 65650
▪ Action (B): California Government Code § 65660
▪ Action (C): California Health and Safety Code § 17000, et seq.
▪ Action (D): California Government Code § 65852.2
▪ Action (E): California Health and Safety Code § 1566.3 ▪ Action (F): California Government Code § 65852.3

Page 1203 of 1575 ends

Escalon 2023-2031 Housing Element – Adoption Draft | p. 27 ▪ Action (G): California Government Code § 65583
▪ Action (H): California Government Code § 65915
▪ Action (I): California Health and Safety Code § 17958.1 Geography Citywide, in applicable zones as detailed within program actions.

Responsibility Development Services Department & Finance Department Funding Source General Fund
Timeframe Action (A-F): December 31, 2025.

Action (G-J): December 31, 2026.

Objective Achieve consistency with State law.

Program 2-2: Senior Housing
The City will take an active role in supporting the housing needs of seniors. ▪ Action (A): Post and maintain an active list of housing resources for seniors, including but not limited to a list of senior and assisted living housing developments, home modifications to increase accessibility, and accessory dwelling units on the City’s website. Information regarding programs that aim to help seniors to age in place, such as In-Home Supportive Services, shall also be posted on the City’s website.
▪ Action (B): Meet with the Department of Aging and Community Services and local nonprofits biannually to foster a relationship that will help to connect seniors to available resources and programs.
▪ Action (C): In coordination with Action 2-1(E), develop objective standards for residential care facilities and assess opportunities for assisted living housing developments for seniors. Conduct outreach to at least three providers and support interested entities in accessing tax-exempt funding through the California Health Facilities Financing Authority.

Context New program, responds to community input.

Geography Citywide
Responsibility Development Services Department
Funding Source General Fund
Timeframe Action (A): Within 6 months of Housing Element adoption, ongoing thereafter.

Action (B): Biannually
Action (C): March 31, 2027.

Page 1204 of 1575 ends

Escalon 2023-2031 Housing Element – Adoption Draft | p. 28 Objective Support new and existing senior housing development, with a target of 50 additional affordable senior housing units and/or residential care facility beds established throughout the planning period.

Program 2-3: Missing Middle Housing
The City will establish development standards to encourage the development of missing middle housing and multi-dwelling unit housing types on a lower-density neighborhood scale. Missing middle and multi-unit housing types include accessory dwelling units (separately covered in Program 2-4), duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes, townhomes, lot splits allowed under SB 9, and small lot subdivisions allowed under SB 684/SB 1123. ▪ Action (A): Streamline approval processes for development projects of 10 or fewer residential units on eligible urban lots in accordance with SB 684/SB 1123, the Starter Home Revitalization Act (SHRA).
▪ Action (B): Provide information on the City’s website about the SHRA and SB 9 (2021), which allows property owners to split a single-family lot into two lots and develop up to four dwelling units on most City lots.

Context New program added to address State law and community input to facilitate development of housing comparable to single-family densities.

Action (A): Government Code Section 66499.41
Action (B): Government Code Sections 65852.21 and 66411.7 Geography Citywide, in zones allowing housing.

Responsibility Development Services Department
Funding Source General Fund
Timeframe Action (A-B): March 31, 2026.

Objective Increase transparency for residential development project applicants and achieve consistency with State law. Target the development of 20 missing middle homes over the planning period, with an emphasis on relatively higher resource and higher income areas.

Program 2-4: Accessory Dwelling Units
The City will implement a suite of actions to address State law and community input to increase the City’s production of accessory dwelling units (ADUs).

Page 1205 of 1575 ends

Escalon 2023-2031 Housing Element – Adoption Draft | p. 29 ▪ Action (A): Evaluate applicable changes to ADU law and policy on an annual basis and report relevant changes to the Planning Commission & City Council as part of the APR, in conjunction with Program 1-1.
▪ Action (B): Establish a pre-approved ADU program per AB 1332 (2023). ▪ Action (C): Prepare a resolution to allow separate conveyance of accessory dwelling units (ADUs) as a condominium unit, as allowed by AB 1033 (2023), to incentivize the production of ADUs and entry-level homeownership opportunities. ▪ Action (D): Provide multilingual guidance and educational materials for building ADUs on the City's website and meet with homeowner associations to inform them that covenants, conditions, and restrictions (CC&Rs) prohibiting ADUs are not permitted under State law. Engage with homeowner associations (HOAs) and property management entities to encourage the development of ADUs in multifamily developments.
▪ Action (E): To help ensure a balance of residential and commercial uses, consider amendments to the City’s Zoning Code to allow accessory commercial units (ACUs) in neighborhoods throughout Escalon, including allowances for selected commercial uses on corner lots in low-density mixed-use applications (i.e., small neighborhood retail uses like cafés, salons, and bookstores).

Context New program to address State law and community input to facilitate integrated development and reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT). Specific State laws include the following:
▪ Action (B): California Government Code § 65852.27
▪ Action (C): California Government Code § 65852.2
▪ Action (D): California Government Code § 66323(a)
Geography Citywide, in zones allowing housing.

Action (D): In subdivisions which may include CC&Rs, including Belle Terra, Vintage Estates, Westwood Country, The Estates, Brentwood Estates, Orchard Place, and Autumnwood Estates, and multifamily complexes with or without HOAs with the ability to expand development capacity through ADUs.

Responsibility Development Services Department
Funding Source General Fund
Timeframe Action (A): Annually, starting by March 31, 2026.

Action (B): January 1, 2027.

Action (C-D): March 31, 2027.

Action (E): May 1, 2030.

Page 1206 of 1575 ends

Escalon City CouncilAugust 10, 2026

Escalon City Council
August 10, 2026