Escalon City Council
August 10, 2026

SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA

CITY COUNCIL OF THE

CITY OF ESCALON
MEETING OF AUGUST 10, 2026
City Council Chambers, 2060 McHenry Avenue - 7:00 P.M.

Beginning Minute Order No. 49-26
Beginning Resolution No. 33-26
Beginning Ordinance No. 603

The following alternatives are available to members of the public to observe these meetings: Please be advised and warned that, in the event of a disruption, disturbance, or disconnection of remote access (via phone or GoTo Meeting), such remote access may be suspended or eliminated. Therefore, remote participants are encouraged to attend in person (rather than via phone or Goto Meeting) to ensure they have every opportunity to participate in the meeting. The City cannot guarantee against any interruption, disturbance, disruption, or cessation of such remote access to the meeting. The City Council meeting may still proceed as agendized in the event of such disconnection or disturbance.

WATCH
Live stream of the City Council meetings at
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=city+of+escalon Live stream of the City Council meetings via your computer, tablet, or smartphone at:
https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/323691381
(Please note that you may be required to download the app in order to view the meeting. If you wish to speak during the meeting, please use the “Raise Hand” feature. A request to unmute will then be sent to you)
You can also dial in using your phone
United States + 1 (408) 650-3123
One Touch tel:+14086503123,,323691381#
Access Code: 323-691-381
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk, 209-691-7400 or email [email protected]. If you need language translation, please notify the City Clerk. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting. (28 CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title II)
CALL TO ORDER Mayor Andrew Hagan
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Andrew Hagan
ROLL CALL Mayor Andrew Hagan
Mayor Pro Tem Malinda Walker
Councilmember Jeremy Engle
Councilmember Shawn Strohman
Councilmember Jeff Kay

PRESENTATIONS

1. Recognition of Elias, Amaya, Isaiah, and Julius Krumeich for their Achievement in Qualifying for the US Junior Olympics and Their Success at the Event

CONSENT CALENDAR

2. Approve the Minutes of the Regular City Council meeting on August 3, 2026

3. Waive the Second Reading and Adopt Ordinances 603 – 605 and Resolutions 33-26 – 35-26 approving Development Application 24-797 “Murphy Ranch” (APNs 225-040-28 & 225-040-29) Entitlement Package, including Annexation, Pre-Zoning, Tentative Subdivision Map, Specific Plan, Planned Development, Development Agreement, Inclusionary Housing Agreement, and the CEQA Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and Direct Staff to File a Notice of Determination with the State Clearinghouse

4. Waive the Second Reading and Adopt Ordinance No. 606 and Resolution No. 36-26 Approving Annexation and Pre-zoning of City‑Owned Property Located at 17341 Escalon Bellota Road (APN 225‑020‑110‑000) (Project 26‑821). Action is Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), and Direct Staff to File a Notice of Exemption with the State Clearinghouse

STAFF COMMUNICATIONS & UPDATES

MATTERS PRESENTED FROM THE AUDIENCE
The public may comment on any matter not listed on the agenda that is within the City of Escalon’s subject matter jurisdiction. Members of the public may address the City Council on any agenda item when that item is called for consideration. Each speaker is limited to five (5) minutes, and unused time may not be transferred to another speaker. Speakers may provide their name and address for the record, but are not required to do so. Under state law, the City Council generally may not discuss or take action on matters that are not listed on the agenda, except to provide a brief response. If further action is warranted, the matter may be referred to staff or placed on a future agenda. The Mayor has discretion to determine whether a matter is within the City’s subject matter jurisdiction.

PUBLIC HEARINGS

5. Adopt Resolution No. XX-26 Adopting the 2023–2031 Housing Element Update, Find the Action Exempt from CEQA Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), and Direct Staff to File a Notice of Exemption with the State Clearinghouse

6. Introduce and Waive the First Reading of Ordinance No. XXX Amending Title 17 (Zoning) of the Escalon Municipal Code to Implement the 2023–2031 Housing Element Programs and Ensure Consistency with State Housing Law, Find the Action Exempt from CEQA Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), and Direct Staff to File a Notice of Exemption with the State Clearinghouse

ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS
NONE

COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS

CLOSED SESSION

ADJOURNMENT

DECLARATION OF POSTING
I, Diana Trejo, Deputy City Clerk, certify under penalty of perjury, under the State of California, that the Escalon City Council Agenda for the Special Meeting of Monday, August 10, 2026 was posted 72 hours prior to the meeting in accordance with the Ralph M. Brown Act, in the area designated below on Thursday, August 6, 2026.

Escalon City Hall City of Escalon Website
2060 McHenry Avenue www.cityofescalon.org
Escalon, CA 95320
Dated: Thursday, August 6, 2026 ___________________________________ Diana Trejo, Deputy City Clerk

ITEM NO. 2

COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM
FOR AUGUST 10, 2026
Prepared By: Diana Trejo
Date: August 6, 2026
Subject: Review and Approve the Minutes
Recommendation:

Approve the Minutes from the Regular Council Meeting of August 3, 2026.

MINUTES

CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ESCALON
MEETING OF AUGUST 3, 2026
City Council Chambers, 2060 McHenry Avenue - 7:00 P.M.

Beginning Minute Order No. 43-26
Beginning Resolution No. 32-26
Beginning Ordinance No. 603

PRESENT: Mayor Andrew Hagan
Mayor Pro Tem Malinda Walker
Councilmember Jeremy Engle
Councilmember Shawn Strohman
Councilmember Jeff Kay
Councilmember Strohman participated remotely pursuant to Government Code section 54953(b) from Hilton Santa Clara, 4949 Great America Parkway, Room 705, Santa Clara, California 95054.

STAFF PRESENT: Jaylen French, City Manager (CM)
Robert Hardgraves, Chief of Police
Celinda Bickner, Finance Director/Human Resource Administrator (FDHRA) Trevin Barber, Development and Community Services Manager (DCSM) Juston Collins, Public Works Superintendent (PWS)
Frank Splendorio, Legal Counsel
Marshall Swift, City Engineer

PRESENTATIONS

1. Recognition of the Escalon Police Explorers’ Performance in the 2026 Central Valley Explorer Competition
Police Chief Hardgraves recognized the Escalon Police Explorers for their performance in the Central Valley Explorer Competition held June 26-28, 2026, in Tracy. The Explorers competed against 29 agencies in 14 law-enforcement scenarios and earned first place in the traffic-stop scenario. Council congratulated the Explorers and thanked the program advisers for rebuilding the program.

CONSENT CALENDAR

2. Approve the Minutes of the Regular City Council meeting on July 20, 2026

3. Approve the Register of Demands – July 14, 2026 – July 27, 2026 in the Amount of $467,405.02

4. Adopt Resolution XX-26 Authorizing the Police Department to Accept Funds from the Cannabis Tax Fund Grant Program (CTFGP) for the Purchase of Equipment, Training, and Personnel Costs
MOTION – it was m/s by Kay/Strohman to Approve the Consent Calendar as Presented with Item No. 4 being Resolution No. 32-26. Motion carried 5-0 by roll call vote. MINUTE ORDER 43-26.

STAFF COMMUNICATIONS & UPDATES

5. Review Finance Department Quarter 4 Report
FDHRA Bickner reported preliminary Fiscal Year 2025-26 revenue totaled $6,734,157, or 106% of budget, while expenditures totaled $6,069,356, or 96% of budget, resulting in a preliminary surplus.

Fiscal-year investment earnings totaled $845,412.

PWS Collins reported that corrective work was being coordinated for recent street-project quality concerns, with striping expected during the week. Staff also continued to coordinate with AT&T regarding pavement repairs and remaining utility flags in residential yards.

MATTERS PRESENTED FROM THE AUDIENCE
Ed Alves expressed concern regarding the loss of approximately 50 parking spaces serving youth soccer and other recreation uses. He encouraged the City to reach a prompt, mutually acceptable arrangement with the adjacent property owner.

Gabriella Vargas thanked Council and staff for completing a requested streetlight, requested attention to a tree in the alley, and commended the Escalon Police Department for handling a personal matter with care, respect, and dignity.

ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS
By Council consensus, Items 8 and 9 were moved up in order before the public hearings.

8. Agenda Item Request to Consider Escalon City Council Attendance at the California Cities 2026 Annual Conference and Expo in Anaheim
CM French introduced the council requested item seeking direction regarding council attendance at an upcoming conference. He further indicated that staff intended to bring an item forward which would consider all council travel for the year. . Council debated the value of education and regional networking, the appropriate number of attendees, fiscal responsibility, and the need for consistent standards governing Council conference attendance.

Public speakers questioned the purpose of attending, the cost, and suggested alternatives.

Council consensus was not to authorize City-funded attendance at this time and to direct staff to return with a policy establishing conference-attendance and expenditure guidelines.

9. Agenda Item Request to Consider Fee Waiver for the Escalon Lions Club for Use of the Community Center for Fundraising Purposes
CM French reported that the Escalon Lions Club requested fee waivers for two Community Center events (bingo fundraisers) anticipated to be held in October. Councilmember Engle stated for the record that he was a non-salaried Lions Club member and had no material financial interest in the decision under FPPC regulations.

Mayor Hagan recused himself because of his direct involvement with the Hogan-Ennis Park expansion fundraising effort as the President of Escalon Strong who is managing the work, and left the dais.

Councilmember Engle, on behalf of the Lions Club, stated that net proceeds from the two events, with a fundraising goal of $15,000, would be donated directly to the Hogan-Ennis Park expansion, principally for the installation of fencing around the perimeter of the improved area.

Public comment supported the request and discussed event limits, precedent, parking, and the park master plan.

MOTION – it was m/s by Kay/Engle to Approve a Community Center fee waiver for up to two Escalon Lions Club fundraising events benefiting the Hogan-Ennis Park expansion. Motion carried 4-0 by roll call vote, with Mayor Hagan recused. MINUTE ORDER 44-26.

ADDITIONAL URGENCY ITEM
City Manager French reported that recent changes to parking near Hogan-Ennis Park created safety concerns that arose after the agenda was posted and therefore the Council could considered adding an urgency item to authorize a temporary, cost neutral lease arrangement with a private property owner for recreational parking.

MOTION – it was m/s by Strohman/Kay to find that immediate action was necessary and that the need arose after posting of the agenda, and to add consideration of a temporary recreation-parking agreement as an urgency item to the end of the agenda. Motion carried 4-1 by roll call vote, with Councilmember Engle voting no. MINUTE ORDER 45-26.

PUBLIC HEARINGS

6. Introduce by Titles and Waive First Readings of Ordinances, Review Resolutions, and Conduct a Public Hearing Regarding Development Application 24-797 “Murphy Ranch” (APNs 225-040- 28 & 225-040-29) Entitlement Package, including Annexation, Pre-Zoning, Tentative Subdivision Map, Specific Plan, Planned Development, Development Agreement, Inclusionary Housing Agreement, and associated CEQA Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Reporting Program.

CM French presented the proposed Murphy Ranch residential development (approximately 18 acres) located at the southeast corner of Brennan Avenue and State Route 120. The project proposes 72 single family residential lots, landscaping improvements, an approximately 1.1-acre expansion of Shadowood Park, and recreational amenities requires approval of an annexation, pre-zoning, specific plan, planned development, tentative subdivision map, development agreement, inclusionary housing agreement, and associated environmental documents. Eight (8) moderate income units would be integrated throughout the development, and all 72 units would count toward the City’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation.

Access to the development would be provided by stubbed streets from the southerly adjacent Farinelli subdivision..

CM French reviewed potential traffic impacts, including conditions at the Brennan Avenue and State Route 120 intersection and projected traffic volumes along California Street. He explained that Caltrans is in the process of developing permanent improvements to the intersection and presented potential interim measures, per the Escalon Planning Commission’s recommendation, that could improve safety until the permanent solution is constructed.

CM French further explained that the property has been designated low density residential since or before the Escalon General Plan was adopted in 2005. He stated that in 2008, the Escalon City Council enacted an annexation moratorium due to concerns with sewer line capacity, but that in February 2020, via resolution, the Council approved two (2) properties to move toward annexation—the property in this development application and the Saron Lutheran Church property as these annexations were in the pipeline prior to the 2008 moratorium and that the first phase of the sewer trunkline project had been

completed. The project was permitted to proceed despite the City’s annexation moratorium because the Council had previously authorized the applicant to continue processing the application.

Council called a brief recess at 9:12 PM and reconvened at 9:20 PM.

Applicant representative Dave Romano stated that the proposed 72 lot Murphy Ranch development is consistent with the City’s General Plan and Housing Element and would include eight moderate income units. He reviewed revisions made in response to community input, including expansion of Shadowood Park, one story homes adjacent to existing homes, landscaping improvements, and assigning park maintenance costs to new project residents. He requested Council approval, noting that the Planning Commission had recommended approval.

Applicant representative Kari McNickle with Fehr & Peers presented the traffic analysis, including anticipated trips, vehicle queues, traffic distribution, and delays and queuing at the Brennan Avenue and State Route 120 intersection.

The Public Hearing was opened and public testimony was received at 9:36 PM.

Curtis Russell, 1419 Alberto Lane, expressed traffic safety concerns and urged the Council to delay the project until Caltrans improves the Brennan Avenue and State Route 120 intersection.

Danette Show opposed the project due to anticipated noise, traffic, and safety impacts, particularly at the Brennan Avenue intersection.

A speaker raised concerns about fatalities and injuries in the area and urged the Council to prioritize tangible safety improvements before approving the project.

Anna Rica Russell, 1419 Alberto Lane, opposed the project, stating that the traffic analysis underestimated the number of vehicles the development would generate and expressing serious safety concerns based on her family’s experience with a fatal collision in the area.

Kevin Sanchez, 18986 Brennan Road, urged the Council to make project approval contingent upon Caltrans first completing binding safety improvements at the Brennan Road and State Route 120 intersection.

Jim Claire, 1310 Kern Street, supported the project as a sensible means of addressing community and youth recreation needs while acknowledging traffic concerns and timing of improvements and urged the City to take a proactive leadership role in planning for future growth.

Lindsey Youngberg opposed the project, citing an outdated traffic analysis that did not account for Weldway Steel, the history of fatal collisions at Brennan Avenue and State Route 120, and the lack of guaranteed Caltrans and railroad approval for permanent intersection improvements.

Karen Deichs, 361 First Street, supported the Murphy Ranch project, stating that it provides a well planned approach to growth, expands housing opportunities, addresses affordability and infrastructure needs, and contributes to the City’s long term fiscal sustainability.

Jeff Riley, a Sanchez Street resident and retired fire captain, expressed concern that the project would worsen traffic safety at Brennan Road and State Route 120, redirect traffic onto nearby streets, and increase demands on fire, police, and emergency medical services.

Claire Moore, who traveled from England, opposed the project and urged the Council to delay construction until traffic signals, signage, and other safety improvements are completed, citing the death of her 33 year old nephew at the Brennan Road and State Route 120 intersection.

Kim Bacher opposed the project and urged the Council to delay development until permanent safety improvements are completed at the Brennan Avenue and State Route 120 intersection, where her son Zac was killed in 2024.

Elizabeth de Michaels supported the Murphy Ranch project as a thoughtful approach to meeting state mandated growth requirements while Caltrans works to improve safety along State Route 120.

Scott, a Farinelli resident, asked who would pay for the Brennan Avenue landscaping and park maintenance, expressed concern about increased traffic on California Street, and urged the City to complete safety improvements and consider extending Irwin Avenue to State Route 120 before development proceeds.

Shelley Kepler, sister of Justin Kepler, who was killed at the intersection nearly 10 years ago, urged the City to address the intersection so affected families can grieve without further tragedies reopening their trauma.

A Farinelli resident expressed concern that the traffic analysis did not reflect actual neighborhood conditions or a proposed truck and trailer operation across the street and urged completion of necessary infrastructure and Caltrans safety improvements.

Gloria Yorston, a Farinelli Parkway resident, expressed concern that the traffic analysis did not reflect actual congestion and safety conditions and urged the Council to delay the project until improvements, such as a traffic signal, are completed at Brennan Avenue and State Route 120.

Marty Van Houten, 481 First Street, questioned whether the traffic study adequately considered the proposed truck parking area and its potential effects on the Brennan Avenue and State Route 120 intersection, and urged the City to pause the project and complete an updated traffic study.

A speaker acknowledged the difficult balance between meeting state housing requirements and addressing traffic safety, supported making project approval contingent upon safety improvements, and urged the City to press Caltrans and the railroad to promptly improve the Brennan Avenue and State Route 120 intersection.

A speaker supported the project, stating that it would provide needed housing options with manageable traffic impacts, preserve local control over development, and allow time for Caltrans to complete improvements at Brennan Avenue and State Route 120.

Peter Krumeich discussed the potential drawbacks and benefits of the project, including increased traffic and demands on public services, additional customers for local businesses and tax revenue, expanded park space, and the possibility that the development could help advance a traffic signal at Brennan Avenue and State Route 120.

A real estate agent supported the Murphy Ranch project, stating that it would provide newer, more affordable housing opportunities for local families, teachers, first responders, and seniors while supporting the local economy, provided the developer is held to appropriate standards and accountability.

Jennifer, an Escalon resident, supported the project, stating that it would provide new families an opportunity to raise their children in a safe community and offer a preferable approach to meeting state affordable housing requirements.

A Farinelli resident opposed the project as proposed, stating that after four public meetings Florsheim Homes had not meaningfully addressed community concerns or modified the proposed traffic circulation and that the one-story homes cited as a concession were already required by City ordinance.

Kurt Danziger, Farinelli resident urged the Council to consider the annexation separately from the Florsheim Homes project and postpone action until after the election and the beginning of the following year, allowing the full Council to consider additional information and firm commitments from Caltrans, the County, and other agencies regarding transportation improvements and alternative access routes.

The speaker also expressed concerns regarding the use of landscape and lighting districts (LLDs).

Vance Nelson stated that he did not oppose the proposed housing but questioned the accuracy of the traffic study and urged Caltrans to reduce the speed limit and install a traffic signal at Brennan Avenue and State Route 120.

A California Street resident expressed concern about increased traffic, emergency access, and neighborhood safety, and urged the Council to delay construction until a traffic signal is installed at Brennan Avenue and State Route 120.

The public hearing was closed following public testimony at 10:07 PM.

Staff clarified that the new subdivision would fund its share of the expanded park, basketball court, gazebo, turf, and drainage basin through a separate LLD or community facilities district (CFD). The Council discussed balancing the need for housing and local control over development with traffic safety concerns. The Council debated making approval contingent upon Caltrans completing a traffic signal or other acceptable safety improvement, including temporarily closing Brennan Avenue at State Route 120 if Caltrans’ intersection improvements are delayed, and.

Arvinder Bajwa, Caltrans representative, stated that the project initiation document is expected to be completed in December 2026, after which the preferred improvement and a more definitive schedule would be determined. The representative estimated that a traffic signal could take approximately five years after December due to environmental review, design, and coordination with the railroad, while a roundabout could be completed sooner but may affect properties north of State Route 120. Caltrans also identified closure, right turn access restrictions, channelizers, and roadway striping as possible interim safety measures and stated that the funded project is a high priority.

Council deliberation focused on whether the project could proceed while reducing existing and projectrelated traffic risk.

MOTION – it was m/s by Engle/Kay to introduce and waive the first readings of the Ordinances; receive and file the related resolutions and entitlement documents for consideration at the second hearing; and consider approval of the entitlement package with coordination with Caltrans on a northbound right-turnonly treatment at Brennan Road using pylons and double-yellow striping, and radar speed feedback signs.

If the permanent Caltrans improvement is not complete before issuance of the first certificate of occupancy, the City will consider the closure of northbound Brennan Road at State Route 120 on the project side and conduct additional review of traffic impacts at California Street and Irwin Avenue. Motion carried 4-1 by roll call vote, with Councilmember Strohman voting no. MINUTE ORDER 46-26.

7. Annexation and Pre-zoning of City‑Owned Property Located at 17341 Escalon Bellota Road (APN 225‑020‑110‑000); Introduce by Title and Waive First Reading of Ordinance No. XXX Prezoning the Property; Consideration of Resolution No. 2026‑XX Initiating Annexation Proceedings (Project 26‑821). Project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3).

City Manager French presented the proposed annexation and Open Space/Park pre-zoning of approximately 19.2 acres of City-owned land. Annexation would place the property under City jurisdiction, advance the park master plan, and allow the action to be processed efficiently with the Murphy Ranch LAFCo application. Staff clarified that the action did not authorize development and was exempt from CEQA under the common-sense exemption.

The public hearing was opened. No public testimony was received and the hearing was closed at 11:07 PM.

MOTION – it was m/s by Strohman/Kay to Introduce and Waive the First Reading of Ordinance No. XXX pre-zoning the property to Open Space/Park; review Resolution No. xx-26 initiating annexation proceedings and authorizing a LAFCo application; and find the action exempt from CEQA pursuant to Guidelines section 15061(b)(3). Motion carried 5-0 by roll call vote. MINUTE ORDER 47-26.

ADDITIONAL URGENCY ITEM
City Manager French explained that a temporary reciprocal-use arrangement would restore parking for recreation activities while allowing the adjacent property owner to use a portion of City-owned land. A longer-term agreement and any required Surplus Land Act findings would return to Council.

MOTION – it was m/s by Kay/Walker to Authorize the City Manager, in consultation with Legal Counsel, to enter into an appropriate temporary agreement with the adjacent property owner for a term not to exceed three months. Motion carried 4-1 by roll call vote, with Councilmember Engle voting no. MINUTE ORDER 48-26.

COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS
Councilmember Kay thanked the Escalon Lions Club for organizing a successful Park Fete and for its service to the community.

Councilmember Strohman thanked residents for attending and providing feedback and apologized that work obligations required his remote participation.

Councilmember Engle acknowledged the difficulty of the Murphy Ranch decision, thanked the community for participating, and stated that Council had worked to reach the decision it believed best for the City.

Mayor Pro Tem Walker encouraged continued public participation, praised the opening of the youth soccer season, and thanked the Lions Club and City staff for Park Fete.

Mayor Hagan stated that the traffic-safety strategy would reduce risk while allowing orderly community growth and thanked the public for its time.

CLOSED SESSION
None

ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Mayor Hagan adjourned the meeting at approximately 11:20 PM.

Respectfully submitted,
__________________________________
Diana Trejo, Deputy City Clerk

ITEM NO. 3

COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM
FOR AUGUST 10, 2026
Prepared By: Trevin W. Barber, Development & Community Services Manager Date: August 05, 2026
Subject: Consider Adoption of Ordinances, Review Resolutions, and Conduct a Public Hearing Regarding Development Application 24-797 “Murphy Ranch” (APNs 225-040-28 & 225-040-29) Entitlement Package, including Annexation, PreZoning, Tentative Subdivision Map, Specific Plan, Planned Development, Development Agreement, Inclusionary Housing Agreement, and associated Environmental Analysis; Second Reading
Recommendation:

Consider Application 24-797 “Murphy Ranch” Entitlement Package, including Annexation, PreZoning, Tentative Subdivision Map, Specific Plan, Planned Development, Development Agreement, Inclusionary Housing Agreement, and associated Environmental Analysis.

At this meeting, the City Council will conduct the second public hearing of the legislative ordinances associated with the project and consider adoption.

Council actions include:

1. Conduct the public hearing; waive the second reading of the associated ordinances:
a. Ordinance approving the Development Agreement.
b. Ordinance establishing PD-4 pre‑zoning for the project site (APNs 225-040-28 and 225-040-29).
c. Ordinance adopting the Murphy Ranch Specific Plan.

2. Considered for adoption:
a. Resolution for Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Murphy Ranch project.
b. Resolution for Annexation of APNs 225‑040‑28 and 225‑040‑29. c. Tentative Subdivision Map for 72 single‑family residential lots. d. Inclusionary Housing Agreement implementing eight (8) moderate‑income units.

3. Direct staff and the applicant to continue coordination with Caltrans District 10 to identify and implement feasible interim safety measures at Brennan Road/SR‑120 until Caltrans’ long‑term capital project is constructed.

4. Authorize staff to file the Notice of Determination upon Council action.

Background:

Planning Commission Referral
On October 14, 2025, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on the Murphy Ranch entitlement package, including annexation, pre-zoning, Specific Plan, Planned Development, Tentative Subdivision Map, Development Agreement, Inclusionary Housing Agreement, and associated environmental analysis. After receiving public testimony and deliberating, the Commission voted 3-2 to recommend approval of the project to the City Council.

During the hearing, Caltrans District 10 provided formal confirmation that the agency has approved and funded a future intersection improvement at Brennan Road and State Route 120. Caltrans stated that the project has entered the Project Initiation Document (PID) phase, and they expect at least three to four years for the project to be complete due to required environmental review, design, right-of-way acquisition, and railroad coordination.

The Escalon Planning Commission’s recommendation included a condition that the applicant continue working with Caltrans and the City to identify the best possible interim traffic mitigation measures until the long-term Caltrans project is constructed.

Schedule
The project was heard and approved by City Council on August 3, 2026, for first reading of the legislative ordinances associated with the entitlement package. Second reading and adoption of the ordinances is now before City Council on August 10, 2026. If the City Council approves the project, the City will prepare and submit an annexation application to the San Joaquin County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo) in late-2026.

Upon submittal, LAFCo will have three (3) months to complete the Certificate of Filing review. After issuance of the Certificate of Filing, LAFCo will schedule and conduct a public hearing on the annexation. If approved, LAFCo will issue a Certificate of Completion and transmit the action to the State Board of Equalization for final boundary adjustment. Based on statutory timelines, the annexation process is expected to conclude in Spring–Summer 2027, assuming approval at all levels.

Following completion of the LAFCo process, the Developer will proceed with filing the Final Map, submitting City of Escalon civil improvement plans, and applying for building permits to initiate on-site improvements.

Comments received during the Planning Commission public hearing, along with the Commission’s recommendation, are included in this staff report for Council consideration as part of the final decision-making process.

Staff has reviewed all comments received from responsible agencies and has prepared proposed

Conditions of Approval (Attachment 7). Pursuant to EMC 17.51.130, the Planning Commission—and subsequently the City Council—may impose such reasonable conditions as deemed appropriate to ensure compliance with City standards and to mitigate project impacts.

Murphy Ranch Development Project
The proposed Murphy Ranch development (Project) is located south of State Route 120 and east of Brennan Road in the northwest section of the City, directly adjacent to the western boundary of Escalon.

The 17.98 acre project proposes a Specific Plan to guide development of two parcels into 72 lots on which one- and two-story single-family residences would be constructed. A park/retention basin would be installed in the southeast corner of the site expanding the existing Shadowood Park. Access to the proposed development would be from extensions of Celivo Way and Riesling Way north of California Street. Water, sewer, and storm drainage services would be provided by the City of Escalon upon anticipated annexation to the City. A Tentative Subdivision Map is proposed to permit the proposed residential development of the two parcels in accordance with the Specific Plan.

The project would require Specific Plan and Tentative Subdivision Map approval from the City Council, along with annexation approval by the San Joaquin Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo).

Pursuant to EMC Section 17.61.020, Development agreements required for annexations, the applicant has applied for a Development Agreement with the City.

The Escalon General Plan, adopted in 2005 and updated in 2010 and 2019, has designated the project site for Low Density Residential use. At this time, the project site is currently unincorporated under the planning jurisdiction of San Joaquin County. The San Joaquin County General Plan, adopted in 2016, also designates the site for Low Density Residential development. The project site’s current zoning classification is AU-20, Agriculture-Urban Reserve, 20-acre minimum parcel size. The AgricultureUrban Reserve zone is intended to retain in agriculture those areas planned for future urban development within cities in order to facilitate compact, orderly urban development and to assure the proper timing and economical provision of services and utilities.

The Escalon General Plan Housing Element, an element of the Escalon General Plan, was adopted in 2019. The 6th Cycle Regional Housing Needs Plan, prepared by the San Joaquin Council of Governments (SJCOG) allocated Escalon with 367 housing units across four (4) income categories—90 very low-income units, 56 low-income units, 66 moderate income units, and 155 above moderate units.

If approved, the Murphy Ranch project would fulfill 64 of the above moderate units and eight (8) of the moderate units.

Discussion:

Existing Setting
The property is comprised of two contiguous parcels. The smaller parcel, occupying the northwest corner of the
property, contains a residence (18092 Brennan Road) in
the northeast corner of the parcel and several dilapidated sheds and shade structures that surround the residence. A second residence (18112 Brennan Road) is in the
southwest portion of the larger parcel. An animal barn of

PROJECT SITE

concrete masonry unit construction is also located in the southwest portion of the property, southeast of the southern residence near the southern property boundary. The remainder of the project site is vacant and is predominantly in use for livestock pasture. The project site has been used for agricultural production but appears to have been fallow since 1993 (Baez Geotechnical Group 2023a).

Single-family residential development has occurred east and south of the project site. Adjacent to and north of the project site are State Route 120 and railroad tracks operated by the Union Pacific Railroad.

Beyond the tracks and the highway are agricultural fields and limited residential and commercial development. Agricultural land is also located west of the project site, across Brennan Road.

General Plan Conformance
The Escalon General Plan, adopted in 2005 and updated in 2010 and 2019, has designated the project site for Low Density Residential use, consistent with the proposed Project and consistent with the prezoning. The City’s LDR designation requires minimum 6,000 square foot interior lots, and 7,000 square foot corner lots, and a density range between 2.0 and 6.0 dwelling units per net acre. The project proposes a net density of 5.3 units per acre, consistent with the General Plan. Other development standards, including lot coverage, maximum height, setbacks, and floor area is consistent as well.

Additionally, the proposed park land is consistent with Section 3.2, Recreation, Policies and Standards #1, The City shall provide parks at a minimum rate of 5.0 acres of park per 1,000 population. This requirement has been converted to a formula in EMC Section 16.02.330, Park Land and Facilities Dedication, in which number of units multiplied by 0.015 derives at the park land required for each development. Per this formula, the project’s park requirement is 1.095 acres.

Escalon General Plan Map

PROJECT SITE

Parks and Open Space
The project proposes a 1.095 acres expansion of the existing Shadowood Park, which is part of the Farinelli Subdivision and maintained by the Belleterra Landscape and Lighting Maintenance District (LLMD). The project is required to establish a Community Facilities District or a LLMD to ensure long-term maintenance of the expanded park area and amenities.

The park includes:
- Half-Court Basketball Court
- Picnic Area with Covered Gazebo
- One-Stall Restroom Facility
- Continuous Sidewalk Around Entire
Perimeter of Existing and Expanded Park
- Removal of Existing Rocked Storm Outfall
The proposed development further includes:
- Separated sidewalks and landscape strips
- Tree for each lot and two for corner lots
- Landscaped area along norther edge (masonry wall)
- Enhanced landscaping and sidewalk along Brennan Road
- Vines to cover north side of project sound wall
Traffic and Circulation
The proposed subdivision is to be accessed by vehicles via Celivo Way and Riesling Way from California Avenue. Both Celivo and Riesling are stubbed streets into the proposed development area.

California Avenue is considered a Minor Collector Road in the adopted Escalon General Plan (2005). A Minor Collector is to “be used to provide connectivity within neighborhoods,” and provide access to traffic generating land uses such as homes, schools and recreation areas. California Avenue is connected to two Arterial Roads, Brennan Road to the west and McHenry Avenue to the east. A Collector Road is designed to carry up to 4,000 trips per day. Currently, California Avenue carries between 594 and 750 trips per day.

Through the public outreach period for this project, which occurred generally between November 2024 and March 2025, many questions were received regarding the intersection of Brennan Road and State Route 120, which is roughly the NW corner of the project boundary. There have been expressed concerns about the safety of the intersection and the impact that new development could have on the traffic flow and safety of the intersection.

According to the Development Impact Fee Justification Study prepared by David Taussig & Associates, now DSA, in December 2016, all new development is responsible for 26.2% of the cost for a traffic signal (or other intersection improvement) at Brennan Road and SR 120, meaning that the need for intersection improvements is an existing issue and to be borne by other means than new development alone. Further, in a Technical Memorandum dated November 22, 2023, Fehr & Peers, consultant to Florsheim Homes, calculated that “the project’s fair share contribution is six and a half percent (6.5%) and the project should be responsible for funding 6.5% of the intersection improvements identified by Caltrans through the ICE for SR 120/Brennan Road.”
In April 2025, Caltrans (California State Department of Transportation) provided a letter to the City indicating that they have approved and will fund an intersection improvement. Recently, Caltrans has initiated the process to plan, design and perform the required environmental analysis associated with this construction project. Such projects typically take 3-4 years to complete.

In the period until the intersection improvements are complete, Caltrans is requiring that the project, if approved and prior to being open to the public, shall:
a. Install 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.”

Outbound Project Trip Distribution AM (PM)

Inbound Project Trip Distribution AM (PM)

The applicant’s traffic engineer, Fehr & Peers, completed a roadway segment analysis to evaluate how the proposed project would impact daily traffic on California Street and Brennan Road. The City of Escalon Police Department collected speed and volume data on California Street between Brennan Road and Riesling Way in 2024.

This data, along with peak hour data collected at the California Street/Walnut Avenue intersection and Brennan Road/California Street intersection, was used to estimate ADT on California Street between Riesling Way and Walnut Avenue and Brennan Road between SR 120 and California Street. Project trips were added to existing ADT to estimate existing plus project ADT. Table 6 displays both existing and existing plus project ADT on the roadway segments.

Table 6 – Roadway Segment Analysis
As displayed, with the addition of project trips, volumes on California Street would increase to between approximately 1,000 to 1,100 ADT and volumes on Brennan Road would increase to approximately 1,600 ADT. The City of Escalon General Plan includes a goal of maintaining a roadway LOS of D or better on local streets, Minor Collectors, Collector and Arterial Streets but does not include specific LOS D thresholds. However, based on the Highway Capacity Manual’s generalized daily service volume thresholds for two-lane urban streets, California Street and Brennan Road would operate at LOS D or better with the addition of project trips.

Additionally, the City of Escalon Municipal Code Section 16.02.020 (C) requires access routes from residential subdivisions to collector or arterial streets be designed to encourage vehicle speeds of less than 25 miles per hour and traffic volumes of less than 4,000 ADT, or as otherwise provided for in the circulation element of the General Plan or in the city standards. While this applies to local roads and California Street is designated as a collector and Brennan Road is designated as an arterial (which are both intended to carry higher volumes than local access roads), neither California Street nor Brennan Road would exceed 4,000 ADT with the addition of the project trips, well below the designed capacity..

Should the City Council choose to see temporary improvements at Brennan Road and SR 120, prior to the completion of the Caltrans project. The following options have been considered:
· Full, temporary closure of Brennan Road just south of SR 120 intersection · Right turn only onto SR 120 from northbound Brennan Road using pylons on Brennan Road.

This may also preclude northbound left turns from SR 120 to Brennan Road, and could be

done without railroad right-of-way. This option would require city maintenance. · Right turn only onto SR 120 from northbound Brennan Road using double yellow line striping on SR 120. This option would require city maintenance. · Striping to visually narrow the eastbound SR 120 lane into Brennan Road intersection.

Current project condition.
· Radar Speed Feedback sign. Current project condition.

Annexation and Pre-zoning
The Project requires annexation of the 17.98 gross acres of land currently located in unincorporated area of San Joaquin County into the City of Escalon. The Project is located in the City’s adopted Sphere of Influence (SOI), within the 2015 growth boundary. The SOI was adopted by the San Joaquin Local Area Formation Commission (LAFCo) on March 9, 2023. According to LAFCo, a SOI is a planning tool adopted and used by LAFCo to designate the future boundary and service area for a city or special district. It is the designated future growth areas of cities.

If the annexation request is approved by the City Council, City staff will prepare an application to file with LAFCo. Once an annexation application is filed with LAFCo, the application follows their procedural process including property owner protest proceeding. Since there is one owner, a willing seller, the protest hearing should not pose a barrier to ultimate approval.

The post annexation entitlements for this project are:
- Prezone
- Tentative Subdivision Map
- Planned Development
- Specific Plan
- Development Agreement
- Inclusionary Housing Agreement
- Final Map
- Improvement Plans
- Building and Civil Permits
Physical development within the plan
area will not occur until the above
entitlements are approved by the City.

Concurrent with annexation, the plan area
will be prezoned. This process is defined
by EMC Section 17.61.030, Provision for
Zoning, “Whenever any land is proposed
for annexation to the city, the map of
such land, which accompanies the
proposal, shall include proposed precise
zoning of all such land. Prior to
annexation of any property to the city, the

property shall be prezoned to a district that is compatible with the general plan designation of the property. This prezoning shall be processed pursuant to the requirements of this title. It is recognized that, prior to the ultimate development of the area, a planned development ordinance may replace the ordinance adopted to prezone the property for annexation. (Ord. 495 § 1, 2005).” Ultimately, the City Council must make the findings for an Annexation, listed previously in this staff report.

Per EMC Chapter 17.24, the Planned Development, dictated by the Specific Plan, shall serve as the zoning classification for the plan area. The PD is consistent with the City’s R-1 zoning classification.

All Planned Development Zones are numbered. If approved, this project would carry PD-4.

Development Agreement
The proposed Development Agreement establishes the long‑term obligations between the City and the applicant and provides certainty regarding the timing, financing, and implementation of the Murphy Ranch Specific Plan. The agreement vests the applicant’s rights to develop the project consistent with the approved Specific Plan, Tentative Subdivision Map, and Conditions of Approval, while ensuring that all required public improvements, infrastructure contributions, and mitigation measures are completed in accordance with City standards. Key provisions address the phasing of construction, payment of development impact fees, implementation of the Inclusionary Housing requirements, and coordination of off‑site improvements, including those related to State Route 120.

Under Government Code section 65867.5, a development agreement is a legislative act and must be adopted by ordinance. For this reason, the agreement is introduced and the first reading is waived at the initial hearing, with final adoption occurring at the second hearing following Council consideration of public testimony and adoption of CEQA. The agreement is consistent with the Murphy Ranch Specific Plan and provides the City with enforceable mechanisms to ensure orderly development, infrastructure delivery, and long‑term compliance with all project obligations.

Municipal Services Review
The City of Escalon Municipal Services Review (MSR) was adopted by the San Joaquin LAFCo on March 9, 2023 via LAFCo Resolutions No. 23-1514 and 23-1515. The MSR was prepared in accordance with Section 56430 of the California Government Code, and is intended to ensure the City is able to adequately accommodate planned growth per the City’s 2019 General Plan Update. The MSR reviews the City’s ability to provide services to residents and businesses within its existing boundaries as well as the future residents and businesses within 10-year and 30-year growth horizons. The proposed project is within the City’s adopted 10-year growth boundary.

LAFCo is responsible for determining if an agency is reasonably capable of providing needed infrastructure and services to serve areas within its Sphere of Influence. LAFCo is required to evaluate present and long-term infrastructure demands and resource availability and to evaluate whether the resources and services are available at needed service levels and that orderly maintenance and expansion of such resources and services are made in line with increasing demands.

Escalon’s existing public facilities and current level of service are adequate to meet the needs of the existing population. Escalon will need to expand fire, law enforcement, water, wastewater, and drainage facilities and services as the City grows. Future growth and development within the proposed SOI will require continued improvements and upgrades to infrastructure and services; however, the City has

policies and procedures and funding mechanisms in place that ensure the proper timing and adequate funding for needed infrastructure and services. Development fees and connection fees will address the capital cost of new development. Areas where growth is projected will be sufficiently served by public facilities, and mechanisms are in place to ensure that adequate facilities and services are provided as growth occurs. Chapter 5 of the MSR provides the detail to support these statements.

Affordable Housing
EMC Chapter 17.50, Affordable Housing, outlines the City’s Inclusionary Housing Ordinance. In 2005, the City found:

A. The public welfare requires the city to take action to ensure that affordable housing is constructed and maintained within the city.

B. Housing purchase prices in the city have risen significantly in recent years and continue to rise.

C. Rents in the city have been rising and the majority of apartments are one- or two-bedroom units which are not suitable for families. Small, low-income households have difficulty finding affordable unassisted housing and larger households of any income level have difficulty finding affordable units.

D. Federal funds for the construction of new affordable housing units are limited or are no longer available, and state funds are limited.

E. To meet the city’s share of the regional housing need for very low, lower, and moderate income households, the city included implementing policies and programs in the housing element of its general plan to provide for such housing.

F. The general plan programs require the city to consider adoption of an inclusionary housing ordinance to require that between 10 and 15 percent of all housing units in any new development be available for persons and households of low or moderate income. (Ord. 562 § 3 (Exh. A), 2017; Ord. 495 § 1, 2005
For all residential projects that require a tentative and final map, the developer shall enter into an inclusionary housing agreement and provide affordable housing units pursuant to this chapter.

The inclusionary housing agreement shall be executed and recorded pursuant to this chapter as a condition of approval for any tentative or parcel map. (Ord. 562 § 3 (Exh. A), 2017; Ord. 495 § 1, 2005).

Attachment 8 is the Inclusionary Housing Agreement with Florsheim Homes should the project be approved. The plan calls for eight (8) units, of the 72 proposed, to be for those who have incomes of between 80% to 120% of the Area Median Income (AMI). The proposed eight (8) units will be distributed throughout the subdivision and not concentrated in one location and shall be located on lots with a total area equal to or greater than the medium lot size for the project and shall be visually indistinguishable from the market rate units. The sale and affordability compliance for the units will be outsourced to a private company or not-for-profit organization.

Affordable Housing Lotting Plan

California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
The proposed project is subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and the City of Escalon is the Lead Agency for the project under CEQA. BaseCamp Environmental, Inc., consultants for the applicant, prepared a CEQA Initial Study. The Initial Study concludes that the project would have significant environmental effects, but that recommended mitigation measures would reduce all these effects to a level that would be less than significant. As a result, the City has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration and notified the public of the City’s intent to make recommendations on adoption of the IS/MND.

The document was placed on the City website, notice was published in the Escalon Times and written Notice of Intent to recommend adoption of the Negative Declaration was provided by email and mail to a range of agencies, organizations, and surrounding residents, all in accordance with CEQA requirements. Since the 20-day review period closed after this Planning Commission agenda was posted, there may be additional issues and concerns that need to be addressed in handouts and/or testimony during the Commission's hearing.

On the basis of the whole record before it, which is documented in the project files of the City of Escalon Planning Department, there is no substantial evidence that the project, with mitigation measures, will have a significant effect on the environment. The applicant has agreed to the mitigation measures, and these measures will be included in a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan (MMRP), which will go before Council for adoption.

Before adopting the IS/MND and MMRP, the Council must find that it utilized its own independent judgment in review of the document, considered any comments received during the public review period, that, although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, required mitigation measures will mitigate or avoid significant impacts to the environment, and these mitigation measures are included in the MMRP for the project. The MMRP is to be developed after the first 20-day public review period which ends on October 13, 2025 in order to incorporate any received public comments at the Public Hearing. The MMRP will be included in the agenda package for the Council and will be considered as part of their deliberative process.

Public Outreach
On November 20, 2024, the Developer, Florsheim Homes, in coordination with the City, hosted a community meeting at the Escalon Community Center. According to the sign-in sheet, approximately 48 people attended the meeting.

Subsequently, on March 3, 2025, the City hosted a joint Planning Commission and City Council Workshop in the Council Chambers at City Hall. Approximately 30 people attended this meeting.

Residents within 1,200’ of the project site were notified via direct mailer of both meetings.

Additionally, for the workshop in March, notification for the meeting was placed on the City’s website and posted to its Facebook page.

Notice of Public Hearing
· Sign Board: Posted on property December 10, 2024
· 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.

Project Comments Received
Project comments received by other agencies and departments are attached to the staff report or their comments are incorporated into the Conditions of Approval.

The City received many questions and comments on the project during the course of the public outreach effort (November 2024 to March 2025). The following is a list of questions received during that time and responses to those questions as appropriate.

Questions and Answers
Community Meeting Hosted by Florsheim Homes, November 20, 2024

1. What roof material is to be used for the homes?
A. Slate / Tile

2. What type of fences will be throughout the project?
A. Typical good neighbor fencing will be constructed between lots within the subdivision.

Masonry walls will be constructed along the park, Brennan Road and State Route 120. An enhanced wood fence, 7’ tall will be installed along the south property line, ie between the existing homes and the new subdivision. The existing fences will remain.

3. How will the new lots adjacent to existing lots be graded? A. This will be determined during the building permit phase of the project. It is required that properties cannot drain onto others and therefore new lots should not impose on existing lots.

4. What improvements will be made at intersection of SR120 and Brennan and when? A. The City can confirm that in April 2025, Caltrans committed to funding full improvements to this intersection. Caltrans is considering a roundabout or traffic signal and will determine through design and environmental. Improvements may take 3-4 years, the time it takes for such infrastructure projects to go through the established process. Caltrans expects to kick off the preliminary design and environmental process in the coming months.

It should be further stated that it was mistakenly stated that Caltrans was performing an Intersection Control Evaluation (ICE) study. Caltrans is now undertaking a Project Initiation Document (PID) effort.

5. Why is an entrance/exit not included on Brennan?
A. The plan area, since the development of the Farinelli subdivision, was designed to accommodate vehicular traffic from Celivo and Riesling. Further, the City’s engineering has determined that an entrance/exit from Brennan would not allow for adequate distance from the railroad for car storage and therefore a conflict with the railroad, which is a safety issue.

6. City Code indicates that two-story homes are not allowed behind existing homes.

A. While a Planned Development, if approved by the City Council, could provide a path to approval for such a proposal; however, the developer has decided to locate only one-story homes adjacent to all existing homes.

7. Will the homes be for all ages?
A. Yes, if the project is approved, the homes will not have an age restriction.

8. Existing homeowners were informed that the project was to be gated and age-restricted.

A. The City cannot validate this comment, which may be true. This may have been the desire of the past owner or developer. However, over the years, the owner, developer and times have changed. The current owner and developer have agreed to propose this project.

9. Will this be an affordable housing project?
A. No. However, the City has an Inclusionary Housing Ordinance that requires between 10- 15% of all homes are affordable. The Developer has proposed to include eight (8) units affordable to individuals that make between 80-120% of the County’s Area Median Income.

This process will be managed by an outside entity that has experience in this area.

10. Can the School District handle the number of children expected in the project? A. Yes, the school district reviewed the project and projected that 51 children across the three school levels would be expected. The District provided a response on June 25, 2024 indicating that the project would have an impact, but not further expressing concern on ability to accommodate. The District further indicated to the City verbally that they could accommodate the development.

11. Will the Belleterra LLMD be impacted by the new development? A. No. If approved, the project will establish a Community Facilities District or a LLMD, which will fully cover the cost of the park addition, including amenities. The rate to the Belleterra LLMD will not be affected.

12. Can the wastewater treatment plant accommodate the new project? A. Yes. The City’s waste water treatment plant is at approximately 55% capacity and can accommodate the proposed project. The City continues to work on capital investment and deferred maintenance items, which are normal course of business.

13. Does the project pose an emergency situation challenge with only two increase/egress points?
A. No. Per standard fire and police requirements, two entrance and exit points are required to a development.

14. Will the proposed soundwall be 8’ tall across the entire project limits? A. Yes, along the railroad tracks.

15. The traffic study collected counts on a Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday. This may have produced lesser results, because it is busy on the weekends.

A. Typically, traffic counts are conducted mid-weeks to fully address school traffic. Since Caltrans has subsequently determined to fund the intersection improvements of SR120 and Brennan, this raised concern has been addressed.

16. What are the proposed park amenities? They are not defined.

A. The project is proposing to include, a one-stall restroom, a walking path along the entire park, a picnic area and covered gazebo, and a concrete pad for half- court basketball.

17. Did the election have to do with the timing of this meeting? A. No.

18. The property was owned by the Carr family for many years, why is it now called Murphy Ranch?
A. The property is now owned by the Murphy family. If approved, Florsheim Homes may develop a marketing name for the subdivision. Murphy Ranch is the planning name.

19. Has the City’s Sewer Annexation Moratorium been lifted? A. No. In 2020, via Resolution 04-20, the Escalon City Council directed staff to process the pending annexation applications and continue the suspension of acceptance of all new annexation applications until sewer capacity shortage is addressed. The two pending applications were: Saron Lutheran Church, 2 acres and Carr Escalon Property, 18 acres).

20. Who will be the electrical utility provider for the development? A. Modesto Irrigation District (MID)

21. Will there be another meeting?
A. Yes, the City held a Joint Planning Commission/City Council Workshop on March 3, 2025.

Joint Planning Commission/City Council Workshop, March 3, 2025

22. Will questions from November meeting be answered?

A. Yes, the questions will be answered at the time the item comes before the Planning Commission so that the developer can determine how they choose to proceed and the City can work through the issues raised.

23. Will the City take into consideration the development in Liberty Business Park (LBP), especially as it pertains to the traffic at SR120 / Brennan? A. Caltrans has indicated that they will fund the approved intersection improvements.

24. Will development in LBP contribute to mitigation of the SR 120/Brennan Intersection? A. Caltrans has indicated that they will fund the approved intersection improvements. In general, yes, the City is in the process of developing a Plan Area fee for the LBP area, which will pay for their infrastructure and impacts to adjacent roads.

25. Concern raised that traffic will be increased in the Farinelli Subdivision.

A. The project traffic study estimates that the project will generate approximately 700 trips in a 24 hour period, which is a typical trip generation rate for single family homes.

26. Will a soundwall be constructed to block noise from businesses to the north, including Weldway Steel Fabrication?
A. Yes, a 8’ soundwall is proposed along the entire norther stretch of the project site.

27. Concerns raised about two-story homes built behind existing homes.

A. See response #6 above. Florsheim Homes has decided to build only one-story homes behind existing homes.

28. Concerns raised about the safety of navigating the SR 120 / Brennan intersection.

A. See response #4, 15, 22, and 23 above.

29. Concerns raised about an entrance/exit onto Brennan Road.

A. See response #5 above. The City Engineer has determined that an outlet on Brennan could affect the stacking on Brennan and create a safety issue with the railroad tracks.

Fiscal Impact:

The Murphy Ranch project will generate development impact fees, annexation‑related revenues, and long‑term property tax revenue. However, residential development also increases demand on City services, including police response, park and open‑space maintenance, storm drainage operations, and roadway upkeep. It is generally understood that residential development in California due to Proposition 13, generates a long term fiscal negative on a city, as generated property tax dollars are not sufficient to provide services and long-term maintenance of infrastructure.

To ensure that the project does not create an outsized unfunded service burden, the developer is conditioned to form a Community Facilities District (CFD) as part of the entitlement package. The CFD will provide a dedicated, project‑specific revenue source to offset ongoing municipal service impacts attributable to the development.

The CFD will function similarly to the Landscape & Lighting Maintenance Districts (LLMDs) established for previous subdivisions in Escalon, which fund long‑term maintenance of public

improvements and service obligations associated with those neighborhoods. Consistent with past practice, the Murphy Ranch CFD is anticipated to fund:
· Police and public safety services
· Street maintenance, including pavement, signage, and striping · Storm drainage system maintenance
· Park and open‑space maintenance, including the planned park expansion · Street lighting and landscaping within public rights‑of‑way · Other municipal services proportionally attributable to the development Formation of the CFD ensures that Murphy Ranch contributes its fair share toward the long‑term cost of City services, preventing future impacts to the General Fund and maintaining consistency with the financing mechanisms used for other residential neighborhoods in Escalon. Should the Council ultimately choose to not approve a CFD, City staff will work with the developer to form a Landscape and Lighting District (LLD), consistent with the four (4) newest neighborhoods in the City.

Property Tax Allocation Agreement
The City and the County currently operate under a master Annexation Allocation Agreement governing the allocation of property tax revenues upon annexation. As stated in the agreement the agreement provides the statutory basis required for LAFCo to process boundary changes. For Escalon, the agreement establishes a fixed allocation ratio of 36.6 percent to the City and 63.4 percent to the County, applicable to all annexations until the City’s population exceeds 18,000. The agreement also specifiesthat its provisions apply to all annexations “through July 31, 2026”, after which the agreement expires unless renewed or replaced.

Because the Murphy Ranch annexation will be processed during the final year of the agreement’s term, the existing allocation formula will not remain in effect for this application. The approaching expiration date means that the City and County will need to negotiate a successor agreement to ensure that future annexations can proceed. The current agreement acknowledges this need for ongoing coordination, noting that “CITY and COUNTY have increasing service responsibilities with restrained revenue resources” and that annexation-related fiscal issues require continued collaboration.

For purposes of this project, the Annexation Agreement is provided for information only. No Council action is required at this time, and the agreement does not affect the timing or structure of the legislative approvals for the Murphy Ranch project. It does, however, establish the property tax allocation framework that LAFCo will rely upon when processing the annexation.

Attachments:

Ordinances Introduced and First Reading Waived (Action at Second Hearing) 1) Resolution Approving Entitlement Package
2) Draft Development Agreement Ordinance
a) Development Agreement
3) Draft PD-4 Pre-Zoning and Specific Plan Ordinance
a) Zoning Map
b) Specific Plan

Items Received and Filed for Review (Action at Second Hearing) 4) Resolution adopting the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
a) Public Review Draft Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) b) Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
c) IS/MND Public Review Comment Letters Received
5) Resolution for Annexation of APNs 225‑040‑28 and 225‑040‑29 a) Plat Map
b) Legal Description
6) Tentative Subdivision Map
7) Proposed Conditions of Approval
8) Draft Inclusionary Housing Agreement
References Received and Filed (Included for reference; no Council action required.) 9) Project Application and Environmental Form
10) Vicinity Map
11) Architectural Designs
12) Residential Yard Landscape Designs
13) Park and Streetscape Designs
14) Caltrans Intersection Improvement Approval Memo
15) Agency/Department Comment Letters
16) Public Comment Letters
17) Property Tax Allocation Agreement with San Joaquin County 18) Minutes of the Escalon Planning Commission Meeting of October 14, 2025

CITY COUNCIL
RESOLUTION NO. 2026-XX

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ESCALON APPROVING A

TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP, A SPECIFIC PLAN, AN INCLUSIONARY HOUSING

AGREEMENT, A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, ANNEXATION AND ADOPT AN ORDINANCE FOR A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (PD-4) AND ADOPT AN

ORDINANCE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR THE MURPHY RANCH ANNEXATION PROJECT (PROJECT #24-797) PARCELS APNS: 225-040-280, 225-040-290 The City Council of the City of Escalon does hereby find, other and resolve as follows:

WHEREAS, a development application was filed by NRB Investment, LLC, Florsheim Homes 1701 W. March Lane, Ste. D, Stockton, CA 95207, for an Annexation, Prezone, Planned Development, Tentative Subdivision, Specific Plan, Inclusionary Housing Agreement, and Development Agreement for the Murphy Ranch Annexation Project (the “Project”); and WHEREAS, the Project encompasses the annexation of approximately 17.98 acres of unincorporated land in San Joaquin County into the City of Escalon. The Project includes the prezoning of all the approximate 17.98 acres, a Tentative Subdivision Map encompassing all of the approximate 17.98 acre of the annexation area; and
WHEREAS, the Project’s Tentative Subdivision Map entails the creation of 72 singlefamily residential lots, including a 1.095 acre park expansion area and on-site improvements, on APNs: 225-040-280 and 225-040-290 subject to Conditions of Approval, attached as Exhibit A and incorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein; and WHEREAS, pursuant to California Government Code Sections 65450 et seq., the City Council is authorized to prepare, adopt and implement specific plans for areas within the incorporated city and its General Plan planning area upon submission of such application and the approval of a specific plan shall be done by adoption of a resolution by the City Council. (Ord. 495 § 1, 2005); and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the general police power of the city set forth in Article XI, Section 7 of the California Constitution the City desires to provide affordable housing in Escalon consistent with state law and the city’s general plan and requires that ten to 15 percent of all new for-sale units and of all new multifamily rental units in any residential project shall be available to very low-, lower-, or moderate-income households at an affordable housing cost or affordable rent; and
WHEREAS, as a condition of approval for any annexation to the city of five or more acres, the applicant shall enter into a development agreement with the city and all development agreements entered into shall comply with the city’s procedures and requirements then in effect and with the Government Code Section 65864, et. seq., as amended; and WHEREAS, the Development Agreement, attached as Exhibit C, is consistent with the adopted Escalon General Plan and complies with its objectives and requirements as noted in the staff report for the August 03, 2026, City Council meeting, as mandated by Government Code Section 65867.5(b); and
Attachment 1

WHEREAS, an Ordinance for the Development Agreement is attached as Exhibit D, and incorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein, has been prepared in accordance with Council Resolutions 27-04 and 28-04; and
WHEREAS, an Ordinance for the Planned Development (PD-4) attached as Exhibit B, and incorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein, has been prepared in accordance with Chapter

17.24 of the Escalon Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, an Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration (SCH # 2025091127) and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program was prepared for the Project pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Pub. Res. Code, § 21000 et seq.), and CEQA Guidelines; and
WHEREAS, a Notice of Public Hearing was circulated in accordance with the Escalon Municipal Code § 17.51.050; and
WHEREAS, at the duly noticed public hearing on October 14, 2025, the Escalon Planning Commission reviewed the Tentative Subdivision Map, Specific Plan, Inclusionary Housing Agreement, Development Agreement, Annexation, Planned Development (PD-4), and the associated Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (SCH #2025091127), received public testimony, and thereafter recommended that the City Council approve the Project entitlements and certify the IS/MND and adopt the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program; and WHEREAS, the Escalon City Council conducted the first reading and introduction of the Planned Development (PD-4) Ordinance and the Development Agreement Ordinance at its duly noticed public hearing on August 3, 2026, and subsequently conducted the second reading and adoption of both ordinances at its duly noticed public hearing on August 17, 2026; and WHEREAS, the Escalon City Council is the recommending body and the City Council is the final decision-making body for the aforementioned entitlements; and WHEREAS, the City Council understands that minor changes or modifications to the project may occur at the discretion of the City Council without further review from the City Council; and
WHEREAS, all legal prerequisites to adopt the foregoing resolution have occurred.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Escalon City Council does hereby approve a tentative subdivision map, a specific plan, an inclusionary housing agreement, a development agreement, an annexation and adopt an Ordinance for a Planned Development (PD-4) and adopt an Ordinance for the Development Agreement for the Murphy Ranch Annexation Project (Project #24- 797) parcels APNS: 225-040-280, 225-040-290, based on the following required findings:

Tentative Subdivision Map

1. That the proposed map is not consistent with the general plan and/or any applicable specific plans.

2. That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is not consistent with the general plan and/or any applicable specific plans.

3. That the site is not physically suitable for the type of development.

4. That the site is not physically suitable for the proposed density of development.

5. That the designs of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat.

6. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements is likely to cause serious public health problems.

7. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. The City Council may recommend approval or conditional approval of a map if it finds that alternate easements, for access or for use, will be provided and that these will be substantially equivalent to ones previously acquired by the public. This subsection shall apply only to easements of record or to easements established by judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction.

Inclusionary Housing Agreement

1. The public welfare requires the city to take action to ensure that affordable housing is constructed and maintained within the city.

2. Housing purchase prices in the city have risen significantly in recent years and continue to rise.

3. Rents in the city have been rising and the majority of apartments are one- or two-bedroom units which are not suitable for families. Small, low-income households have difficulty finding affordable unassisted housing and larger households of any income level have difficulty finding affordable units.

4. Federal funds for the construction of new affordable housing units are limited or are no longer available, and state funds are limited.

5. To meet the city’s share of the regional housing need for very low, lower, and moderate income households, the city included implementing policies and programs in the housing element of its general plan to provide for such housing.

6. The general plan programs require the city to consider adoption of an inclusionary housing ordinance to require that between 10 and 15 percent of all housing units in any new development be available for persons and households of low or moderate income. (Ord. 562 § 3 (Exh. A), 2017; Ord. 495 § 1, 2005)
Annexation

1. That granting annexation will not adversely affect properties in the vicinity and will not be contrary to the public interest.

2. That the proposed land use and overall development plan is consistent with the approved specific plan and development agreement.

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

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

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

EXHIBIT A

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL

EXHIBIT B
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (PD-4) ORDINANCE

EXHIBIT C

DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT

EXHIBIT D

DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT ORDINANCE

Ord.XXX DA – NRB Investments, LLC. (Adopted xx/xx/2026) Page 1 ORDINANCE NO. XXX

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ESCALON ADOPTING

THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT RELATING TO THE DEVELOPMENT KNOWN AS MURPHY RANCH FOR PARCEL NUMBERS: 225-040-280 AND 225-040-290 WHEREAS, the City of Escalon (“City”) has received an application from NRB Investments, LLC., of Florsheim Homes for approval of a planned development at APN 225- 040-280 and 225-040-290 to allow the development of a 72-unit single family residential subdivision (“Project”); and
WHEREAS, on October 14, 2025, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter; received public comment; and made a written recommendation to the City Council that it approve the associated Development Agreement and associated ordinance, an ordinance amending the zoning map and approving a planned development for the Project; and WHEREAS, the Escalon City Council introduced and waived the first reading of this ordinance at its duly noticed public hearing on August 3, 2026, and subsequently conducted the second reading and adopted the ordinance at its duly noticed public hearing on August 17, 2026; and
WHEREAS, having considered all facts and circumstances, including the application, the staff report, the Planning Commission’s recommendation, and all public comment on the same, the City Council desires to adopt a development agreement with the Applicant relating to the development known as Murphy Ranch.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ESCALON DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. Authority. The City Council enacts this Ordinance under the authority granted to cities by Article XI, section 7 of the California Constitution.

SECTION 2. Severability. Should any provision of this Ordinance, or its application to any person or circumstance, be determined by a court of competent jurisdiction to be unlawful, unenforceable or otherwise void, that determination shall have no effect on any other provision of this Ordinance or the application of this Ordinance to any other person or circumstance and, to that end, the provisions hereof are severable.

SECTION 3. Agreement. The subject Development Agreement is attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference.

SECTION 4. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take legal effect 30 days from and after the date of its passage.

Attachment 2

Ord.XXX DA – NRB Investments, LLC. (Adopted xx/xx/2026) Page 2 SECTION 5. Publication. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this ordinance and shall publish this ordinance in accordance with state law.

SECTION 6. Findings. The City Council makes the following findings:
a. GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY. The City Council hereby finds that the provisions of that certain development agreement relating to the development known as Murphy Ranch (“Agreement”), a copy of which is available in the Office of the City Clerk, and incorporated herein by this reference, and which has been reviewed by the Escalon Planning Commission and recommended for approval, is consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the City’s General Plan and with the adopted Murphy Ranch Specific Plan. The site is designated for low-density residential development, and is being used consistent with the General Plan objectives, policies and programs. b. ZONING CONSISTENCY. The City Council hereby finds that the provisions of that the Murphy Ranch Development Agreement (“Agreement”), is compatible with the uses authorized in, and the regulations prescribed for, the land use district in which the real property is located. The site has been prezoned consistent with the General Plan designation and will therefore be compatible with the zoning district.
c. VESTING LIMITED TO APPROVED ENTITLEMENTS. The City Council hereby finds that the Agreement vests development rights only to the extent consistent with the Project entitlements approved by the City Council, including the Specific Plan, Planned Development (PD-4), Tentative Subdivision Map, Inclusionary Housing Agreement, and Conditions of Approval. Nothing in the Agreement grants development rights beyond those expressly approved by the City Council, and all future development must comply with the adopted entitlements and all applicable City regulations. d. GENERAL WELFARE CONFORMITY. The City Council hereby finds that the provisions of that the Murphy Ranch (“Agreement”), is in conformity with public convenience, general welfare and good land use practice. The project is consistent with the land use planning of the existing residential development to the south, has been designated as low density residential for over 20 years and is consistent with transportation planning best practices. e. HEALTH AND SAFETY BENEFIT. The City Council hereby finds that the provisions of that the Murphy Ranch (“Agreement”), is beneficial to the health, safety and general welfare. The project is consistent with actions that preserve or do not diminish the social, economic and environmental conditions which support the community and residents within the community.
f. ORDERLY DEVELOPMENT. The City Council hereby finds that the provisions of the Murphy Ranch Development Agreement (“Agreement”), will not adversely affect the orderly development of property or the preservation of property values. The project is consistent with the land use planning of the existing residential development to the south, has been

Ord.XXX DA – NRB Investments, LLC. (Adopted xx/xx/2026) Page 3 designated as low density residential for over 20 years and is consistent with transportation planning best practices
g. ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE. The Agreement has been properly reviewed and assessed by the City pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, California Public Resources Code Section 21000 et. Seq., the CEQA Guidelines, 14 California Code of Regulations Section 15000 et. Seq., and local regulations promulgated thereunder (collectively referred to as “CEQA”). Based on the initial study and Mitigated Negative Declaration, and the record before the City Council, the City Council hereby finds that Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Murphy Ranch project, represents the independent judgment of the City and that there is no substantial evidence that the approval of the Project may have any significant environmental impacts that have not been mitigated to a less than significant threshold. The documents and other material which constitute the record on which this decision is based are located in the Department of Community Development, and are in the custody of the Development Services Department.

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:

ABSENT:

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

Ord.XXX DA – NRB Investments, LLC. (Adopted xx/xx/2026) Page 4

Ord.XXX DA – NRB Investments, LLC. (Adopted xx/xx/2026) Page 5

EXHIBIT A
Development Agreement

82108.00102\42947873.2
NRBI-60157\3148007.1

OFFICIAL BUSINESS
Document entitled to free recording
Government Code Section 6103

RECORDING REQUESTED BY
AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO:

City of Escalon
2060 McHenry Avenue
Escalon, CA 95320
Attn: City Clerk
(SPACE ABOVE THIS LINE RESERVED FOR
RECORDER’S USE)
[PRE-ANNEXATION]

DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT

BY AND BETWEEN

THE CITY OF ESCALON
AND

NRB INVESTMENTS, LLC

RELATIVE TO THE MURPHY RANCH PROJECT

82108.00102\42947873.2
NRBI-60157\3148007.1 1

DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT

RELATIVE TO THE MURPHY RANCH PROJECT
This [Pre-Annexation Development Agreement/Development Agreement] (“Agreement” or “Development Agreement”) is entered into as of this __ day of ______, 20__, by and between the CITY OF ESCALON, a California municipal corporation (“City”), and NRB INVESTMENTS, LLC, a California limited liability company (“Developer”), pursuant to the authority of Government Code section 65864 et. seq., relating to Development Agreements. City and Developer are hereinafter collectively referred to as the “Parties” and singularly as “Party.” Article I. RECITALS
A. Authority. To strengthen the public planning process, encourage private participation in comprehensive planning and reduce the economic risk of development to both developers and cities, Government Code section 65865(b) allows the City and any party having a legal or equitable interest in unincorporated territory within a city's sphere of influence to enter into a Development Agreement., establishing certain development rights and responsibilities in the Property which is the subject of the development project application. In addition, City has the authority pursuant to Government Code sections 65300 and 65301 to include in its General Plan land outside its boundaries which is in the City's sphere of influence or in the City's judgment bears a relation to its planning and, pursuant to section 65450, to adopt specific plans for any part of the area covered by the General Plan. City also has the authority pursuant to Government Code section 65859 to pre-zone property adjoining the City for the purpose of determining the zoning designation that will apply to the property in the event of a subsequent annexation of the property to the City. Pursuant to Government Code section 65865, subdivision (b), the City may enter into a Development Agreement regarding real property within a City’s sphere of influence, with such Development Agreement becoming operative upon annexation.

B. Definitions. All capitalized terms as used herein are defined in Section 3 of this Agreement or otherwise herein.

C. Property. Developer owns or has equitable interest in fee title to APN’s 225- 040-280 and 225-040-290 totaling approximately 17.98 gross acres located in the City’s Sphere of Influence, County of San Joaquin, more particularly described in Exhibit A-1 and Exhibit A2, attached hereto (the “Property” or “Developer’s Property”), which is the subject of this Development Agreement.

D. Public Hearings and Approval of this Agreement. On __________, 20__, the Planning Commission of the City of Escalon, serving as City’s planning agency for purposes of Development Agreement review pursuant to Government Code section 65867 and Escalon Municipal Code 17.61, held a public hearing to consider this Development Agreement.

Following the hearing, the Planning Commission recommended for City Council approval, Escalon Ordinance No. __-20__approving this Agreement.

E. On ________, 202x, the City Council of the City of Escalon held a public hearing to consider approval of this Development Agreement. Following the hearing, the City Council approved Ordinance No. __-20__ on __________, 20__, approving this agreement.

F. Environmental Review. In compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), on ________, 20__, by Resolution No. ________, the City Council certified as

82108.00102\42947873.2
NRBI-60157\3148007.1 2
adequate and complete, a Mitigated Negative Declaration (“MND”) for the Project. Mitigation measures were required in the MND and are incorporated into the Project and into the terms and conditions of this Agreement, as reflected by the findings adopted by the City concurrently with this Agreement.

H. Development Agreement Ordinance. To protect the interests of the City and provide certainty to developers through the annexation and development process, Section

17.61.020 of the Escalon Municipal Code requires developers and the city to enter into a development agreement where an annexation of five or more acres is proposed. City and Developer have taken all actions mandated by, and fulfilled all requirements set forth in that section in accordance with the City’s requirements.

I. Consistency with General Plan. Having duly examined and considered this Development Agreement and having held properly noticed public hearings hereon, in City Ordinance No. __-20__, City found that this Development Agreement satisfies Government Code section 65867.5, and this Agreement is consistent with the policies and requirements of the General Plan.

J. Negotiations and Public Benefit. The Parties have, in good faith, negotiated terms set forth in this Development Agreement, which terms are intended to carry out the legislative purposes of the Development Agreement Statute and Escalon Municipal Code

17.61.020, and which provide for the mutually desirable development of the Property. The Parties desire to enter into this Agreement relating to the Property in conformance with the applicable provisions of state and local law in order to achieve the development of the Project in accordance with the Entitlements, City ordinances and resolutions, the City Code, and the Zoning Code, which together assure the health, safety and general welfare of the City and its existing and future residents. In addition, the Parties want to provide clear public benefits not usually obtained through the land development approval process and to achieve the development permitted under this Agreement and the provision of public services, public uses and infrastructure all in the promotion of the health, safety and general welfare of the City. City has determined that as a result of the development of the Property in accordance with the Entitlements, including this Agreement, clear public benefits will accrue to the public that may not otherwise be obtained to the same extent through applicable development approval processes.

K. Contribution to Costs of Facilities and Services. Developer agrees to contribute to the costs of such public facilities and services as may be required herein to mitigate impacts on the community resulting from development of the Property, and City agrees to provide such public facilities and services as may be required herein to assure that Developer may proceed with and complete development of the Property in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. City and Developer recognize and agree that, but for Developer's contributions to mitigate the impacts arising as a result of development entitlements granted with this Agreement, City would not and could not approve the development of the Property as provided by this Agreement and that, but for City's covenant to provide certain facilities and services for development of the Property, Developer would not and could not commit to provide the mitigation as provided by this Agreement. City's vesting of the right to develop the Property as provided herein is in reliance upon and in consideration of Developer’s agreement to make contributions toward the cost of public improvements as herein provided to mitigate the impacts of development of the Property as development occurs.

82108.00102\42947873.2
NRBI-60157\3148007.1 3
L. Property Annexation. City is authorized to enter into binding agreements with persons having legal or equitable interest in real property located within the City's sphere of influence thereby establishing the conditions under which such property may be annexed into the City and governing development of such property upon its annexation. In addition, Developer has requested City to apply to the San Joaquin County Local Agency Formation Commission ("LAFCO") to annex the Property. City is not opposed to Developer’s request and will consider said request upon Developer’s execution of this Agreement. The Parties desire to enter into this Development Agreement for the purpose of establishing certain policies to initiate development within the sphere of influence area, thus assuring development certainty for Developer, and to add certainty to the annexation process to be pursued.

Article II. AGREEMENT

1. Incorporation of Recitals. The preamble, the recitals, all defined terms set forth herein, and all exhibits attached hereto, are hereby incorporated into this Development Agreement as if set forth herein in full.

2. Relationship of City and Developer. This Development Agreement is a contract that has been negotiated and voluntarily entered into by City and Developer. Neither Party is an agent of the other Party. City and Developer renounce the existence of any form of joint venture or partnership between them. Nothing contained in this Agreement, or in any document executed in connection with this Agreement, may be construed as making City and Developer joint venturers or partners.

3. Definitions.
“Project Infrastructure” means the infrastructure improvements generally described and shown as Project infrastructure on the Project’s Tentative Map and Specific Plan, and all public facilities including but not limited to, major roadways, signals, trails, pedestrian over/under crossings, sewer, water, drainage facilities, parks and parkland, and other utilities, that shall be prepared to the satisfaction of the City Public Works Department in accordance with the Entitlements for the Project.
“City CCI Index” means the construction cost index applied by City in documents authorizing the subject fee, assessment, or tax to adjust fees to account for changes to the costs of construction as published by the Engineering News Record, and as may be revised by the City for such Fee Programs.
“City CPI Index” means the consumer price index applied by City in documents authorizing the subject fee, assessment, or tax to adjust for changes in the costs of performing and/or providing municipal services as published by the United States Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics.
“City Council” means the City Council of the City of Escalon. “Conditions of Approval” means the conditions of approval for the tentative subdivision map approved by the City on ______________ by Resolution No. ________. “EDU” means the single-family residential equivalent dwelling unit, as applied within the context of the applicable improvement, facility, or service. All other land uses are assigned EDUs based

82108.00102\42947873.2
NRBI-60157\3148007.1 4
on their relative impact compared to a single-family unit with respect to the applicable improvement, facility, or service.
“Effective Date” of this Development Agreement means the effective date of City Ordinance No. ________, adopting this Development Agreement.
“Entitlements” means (a) the applicable provisions of the City’s General Plan and any amendments thereto adopted and in effect at the time of this Agreement’s Effective Date; (b) all applicable Municipal Code sections adopted and in effect at the time of this Agreement’s Effective Date; (c) the Project-specific CEQA mitigation measures, findings, and exemptions by City by Resolution No. ______; (d) this Development Agreement, approved by City on ___________, by Ordinance No. ____ (the “Adopting Ordinance”); and, (e) zoning of the Property approved by City on ________ by Resolution No. _____; (f) the tentative subdivision map approved by the City on _______ by Resolution No. _____, and (g) the Specific Plan, including Design Review, approved by the City on ____________, by Resolution No.__________.
“General Plan” means the City of Escalon General Plan, including all appendices thereto, approved by City and in effect as of the Effective Date of this Agreement. “Park Development Fee” means the City’s Park Development Fee. “Project” means Developer’s planned development of the Property, as set forth in, and subject to the conditions of approval for the Project and Entitlements. “Public Facilities” means the public facilities owned by the City, or any other public agency. “Map or maps” means a subdivision map processed and approved pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act that would, upon recordation thereof, create either individual lots or parcels upon which permits for the construction and sale of single-family residential units are intended and may be issued, or for the construction and sale of individual condominium units within a parcel for multifamily residential use.
“Subsequent Entitlements” mean those additional permits, plans, and approvals that may be approved following approval of the Entitlements, and which will allow for implementation of the Entitlements by subdivision, development and construction within the Project. Subsequent Entitlements may include, without limitation, small lot tentative subdivision maps, small lot final subdivision maps, parcel maps for non-residential areas, lot line adjustments, conditional use permits, and design review permits.

4. Term and Termination.

4.1 Term. The term of this Development Agreement commences on the Effective Date. Pursuant to Government Code section 65865, subdivision (b), this Development shall not become operative unless annexation proceedings annexing the Property to the City are completed within two (2) years of the Effective Date. If the annexation proceedings annexing the Property to the City is not completed within this time or any extension thereof, this Development Agreement shall terminate and be null and void. Upon becoming operative, this Agreement shall continue in force for a period of ten (10) years from the Effective Date, with extensions to be approved by the City Manager, if Developer has met all conditions of the DA,

82108.00102\42947873.2
NRBI-60157\3148007.1 5
unless terminated, modified, or extended consistent with the terms of this Development Agreement.

4.2 Effect of Termination. Unless terminated sooner as set forth above or otherwise extended by the Parties, this Development Agreement automatically terminates upon expiration of the ten (10) year term, with extensions to be approved by the City Manager, if Developer has met all conditions of the DA, and shall then be of no further force and effect. If and when this Development Agreement expires, Developer shall thereafter retain no vested rights under this Development Agreement, and City shall have the right to modify or repeal the Entitlements and apply new laws, regulations, and fees to the development of the Property.

4.3 Tolling and Extension During Legal Challenge or Moratoria.

Developer may, at its discretion, extend the term of this Development Agreement for a maximum period of three years if:

4.3.1. a third-party lawsuit is filed challenging any of the Entitlements;

4.3.2. the Developer is unable to proceed, or reasonably elects not to proceed with the Project because of litigation described in Section 4.3.1 above; and

4.3.3. the Developer submits to City written notice that this Agreement is tolled.

During any such period that this Agreement and development of the Project tolled pursuant to this Section 4.3, Developer may, at its sole expense and risk, submit applications to process Subsequent Entitlements, including but not limited to tentative subdivision maps and improvement plans for the Property, provided City shall not be obligated to approve and may defer approval of any Subsequent Entitlements so long as the City complies with state law, including laws applicable to housing development projects, in its processing of applications for Subsequent Entitlements.

4.4 Length of Extension. The tolling period will begin when City receives written notice from the Developer. The tolling period may only extend the term of this Agreement until a final order of judgment is issued upholding the challenged Entitlements, the case or cases giving rise to the tolling allowed by this Section are dismissed, or the three-year maximum tolling period is reached, whichever is shorter. The Developer may also elect to end the tolling period at any time and proceed with the Project at its risk, effective upon delivery of written notice to City.

5. Vested Rights. Contingent upon approval of Developer’s annexation request by LAFCO and subject to the terms of this Agreement, Developer shall have the vested right to proceed with development of the Property in accordance with the Entitlements, and to have Subsequent Entitlements considered for approval or denial, based upon the terms, standards and requirements set forth in the Entitlements.

5.1 Permitted Uses, Density and Intensity, Maximum Height and Size of Structures, and Reservation or Dedication of Land Vested. The permitted uses of the Property, and the density and intensity of use, shall be consistent with the City’s General Plan and pre-zoning as established in the Entitlements at the Effective Date. The maximum height and size of proposed buildings, provisions for reservation or dedication of land or payment of fees in lieu of dedication for public purposes, the location and maintenance of on-site and offPage 48 of 1575 82108.00102\42947873.2
NRBI-60157\3148007.1 6
site improvements, the location of public utilities, and other terms and conditions of development shall be those set forth in the Entitlements. Accessory Dwelling Units will only be permitted within the development to the extent required by state law and in conformance with the development standards set forth in state law.

5.2 Vested Against Moratorium, Quotas, Restrictions or Other Growth Limitations. Subject to applicable law relating to the vesting provisions of Development Agreements, City agrees that, except as otherwise provided in or limited by the provisions of this Agreement, this Development Agreement vests the Entitlements against subsequent City ordinances, resolutions, rules, regulations, initiatives, and official policies that directly or indirectly limit the rate, timing, or sequencing of development, or prevent or conflict with the permitted uses, or the density or intensity of uses, or the terms, provisions, standards, or requirements for development, as set forth in the Entitlements. To the extent allowed by the laws pertaining to development agreements and state housing law, however, Developer will be subject to any growth limitation ordinance, resolution, rule, regulation, or policy which is adopted on a uniformly applied, Citywide or area-wide basis, and that directly arises out of an imminent public health or safety emergency, in which case City shall treat in a uniform, equitable, and proportionate manner all properties, public and private, which are impacted by that public health or safety emergency.

5.3 Vested Rights Exclude Changes in State or Federal Law. This Agreement shall not preclude the application to development of the Property of changes in City laws, regulations, plans or policies, the terms of which are specifically mandated and required by changes in state or federal law or regulation. In the event that state or federal laws or regulations enacted after the Effective Date of this Development Agreement prevent or preclude compliance with one or more provisions of this Agreement or any Entitlements, the Parties shall meet and confer in good faith in a reasonable attempt to modify this Agreement and such Entitlements to comply with such federal or state law or regulation. Any such amendment or suspension of this Agreement or Entitlements shall be approved by the City Council in accordance with the Municipal Code and this Agreement.

5.4 Vested Rights Exclude Building and Fire Codes. The Project shall be constructed in accordance with the provisions of the Uniform Building, Mechanical, Plumbing, Electrical and Fire Codes, City standard construction specifications, and Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations, related to Building Standards (collectively “Building Code”), in effect at the time the applicable building, grading, encroachment or other construction permit is granted for the Project. If no permits are required for infrastructure improvements, such improvements will be constructed in accordance with the provisions of the Building Code in effect at the time of approval by City of the improvement plans for such infrastructure. If a permit that has been granted expires, the Project shall be required to be constructed in accordance with the provisions of the Building Code in effect at the time the applicable replacement permit to the expired building, grading, encroachment or other construction permit is granted for the Project.

5.5 Vested Rights Exclude Processing Fees and Charges. Except to the extent that state law provides otherwise, Developer shall pay those processing, inspection, and plan check fees and charges required by City under ordinances, resolutions, rules, regulations, initiatives, and official policies which are in effect when such fees or charges are due under thenexisting code or policy.

5.6 Vested Rights Limited for Development Impact Fees, Exactions and Dedications. Developer shall pay all development impact fees, connection or mitigation fees, and exactions required by City to support the construction of any public facilities and

82108.00102\42947873.2
NRBI-60157\3148007.1 7
improvements or the provision of public services in relation to development of the Property (together “Exactions”) authorized by City after the Effective Date, as long as said Exactions otherwise comply with applicable law, and are either (i) required on a Citywide basis, (ii) apply uniformly to all properties within City that are zoned with density and uses similar to those of the subject properties in the Entitlements, or (iii) apply on a fair share basis to all properties that are similarly situated within the City. Except as otherwise provided in this Agreement, Exactions required by City to be paid by Developer that do not meet one of the preceding criteria shall only be the Exactions that were authorized on the Effective Date. Furthermore, notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Section 5.6, development of the Property shall not be subject to any impact fee, mitigation fee, or exaction related to the provision of affordable housing or inclusionary housing, or other such fee or exaction related to the provision of affordable housing or inclusionary housing that may be subsequently adopted by City during the period that this Section 5.6 is vested by this Agreement.

5.7 Subsequent Entitlements. Subject to Section 11 hereof, City shall accept for processing, review, and action any and all applications submitted by Developer for Subsequent Entitlements, necessary or convenient for the exercise of Developer’s rights under the Entitlements for the use and development of the Property.

5.8 Term of Tentative Maps. Consistent with the authority provided in Government Code section 66452.6(a)(1), the term of any tentative subdivision map approved for all or any portion of the Project shall extend until the date this Agreement expires or on a date otherwise provided by state law, including but not limited to any applicable provision of the Subdivision Map Act, whichever term is longer.

5.9 Annexation-Developer’s Obligations. Developer shall take all actions reasonably necessary to apply for, process, and complete proceedings before LAFCO on the Annexation. Developer shall be responsible for payment of all applicable LAFCO processing fees required in connection with the Annexation and shall pay any generally applicable City processing fees required for the Annexation. Developer shall reimburse City for its actual and reasonable costs incurred in the processing of this Agreement. Developer agrees to take all steps reasonably necessary to support annexation to the City, including voting in favor of annexation. Developer shall assist City in preparing the Plan of Services required by LAFCO. Developer agrees to covenant for themselves, their agents, employees, contractors, heirs, successors and assigns who obtain title to their individual properties (“Successors”), to not in any way object to, protest, delay, frustrate or otherwise impede any annexation proceedings concerning the annexation of the Property to the City. Developers and their Successors shall cooperate in every reasonable way with the requests of City, LAFCO or any other public agency in any proceedings to annex the Property to City.

5.10 Annexation-City’s Duty to Cooperate. City shall cooperate and assist in the processing of the Annexation before LAFCO by timely taking the following actions:
(i) Providing all information reasonably required or requested by LAFCO with respect to the Annexation including, without limitation, a Plan of Services providing information to LAFCO with respect to the provision of municipal services to the Annexation Property by the City; and (ii) Providing a written statement of support for the Annexation to LAFCO prior to the LAFCO public hearing on the Annexation. The City shall cooperate in every reasonable way with the requests of Developer, LAFCO, or any other public agency in proceedings to annex the Property to the City.

82108.00102\42947873.2
NRBI-60157\3148007.1 8

6. Park Development and Additional Obligations.

6.1 Park Development. Developer shall be obligated to comply with the City’s park land dediction ordinance adopted pursuant to the authority of Government Code Section 66477 ("Quimby Act"). Developer will satisfy this obligation as follows:

6.1.1 By dedicating, and improving as described in sections 6.2 and 6.5, approximately 1.1 net acres of land within the Project for parks and recreational purposes purposes, the Project fully satisfies the City’s parkland dedication requirement as set forth in Municipal Code section 16.02.330.

6.2 Timing of Dedications and Improvements of Parks. Prior to the approval of the first final map for the Project, Developer shall show the park dedication on said final map as described in Section 6.1 of this Development Agreement. Required, nonreimburseable park improvements are identified in this section 6.2 and reimbursable park improvements are identified in section 6.5 below.

Required, non-reimbursable park improvements include:
• Expanded basin with irrigation, turf, tree and shrub planting, including horozontal drain to eliminate nuisance water
• Concrete walking paths along the perimeter of the park • Split-face masonry walls adjacent to residences
• Covered picnic table area
• Basketball half-court (striped for basketball and pickle ball) with fence

6.3 Affordable Housing Obligation. Developer and City have entered into an Inclusionary Housing Agreement, attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit __. City acknowledges that Developer’s compliance with all the terms, conditions and requirements of this Inclusionary Housing Agreement shall fully satisfy Developer’s obligations to provide affordable housing or inclusionary housing or any related affordable housing fee or exaction associated with development of the Property.

6.4 Improvements. Site improvements, roads, utilities, etc., shall be provided consistent with the conditions of approval for tentative subdivision map approved by the City on ____________ by Resolution No. _______ attached hereto as Exhibit __.

6.5 Reimbursable Infrastructure Improvements. In addition to any other reimbursements the Developer is entitled to under applicable law, Developer shall be entitled to reimbursement and/or fee credits for the costs it incurs making the following improvements:
• Park improvements above the improvements consistent with a typical neighborhood park, are considered reimbursable infrastructure and serve a larger area than just the

82108.00102\42947873.2
NRBI-60157\3148007.1 9
project. These items are included in the City’ AB 1600 Fee Program, and as such, are subject to reimbursement of fee offsets, as appropriate. • Restroom facility (1 stall) in the park
• The existing storm basin discharge system shall be remodeled to remove the existing outfall structure, add a French drain discharge system, and install a flow meter to SSJID standards to measure the pump discharge to the SSJID facility. These costs shall be reimbursed to the developer at 62.7% of the actual cost, based on the prorated share of the existing 1.85-acre park and the proposed 1.10-acre addition. • Any reimbursements for oversized water lines are subject to the requirements in EMC

13.04.260. As provided for in the Conditions of Approval, Developer shall also be reimbursed for the costs to install a 4-inch sewer main and a 16-inch water main in Brennan Avenue, which will serve other developments.

Additional Obligations Following Annexation.

7.1 Funding for Project Infrastructure Maintenance and Public Services.

Developer is required to provide a source of funding for maintenance of Project Infrastructure and public services for the Project, the amount of such funding shall be determined by the fiscal analysis approved by the Finance Director. Developer is responsible for maintenance and public service costs including, but not limited to:

7.1.1. Public Safety, including public works, code enforcement and police personnel, equipment, and maintenance costs.

7.1.2. Public Services, including Library facilities and Community Center facilities. Developer shall be responsible for 100% of the total cost to maintain the park restroom facility.

7.1.3. Project Improvement maintenance, including water, drainage, park and park amenities, roads, sidewalks, mailboxes, sewer, lighting, landscaping, fences, walls, and street sweeping personnel, equipment, and maintenance costs.

7.2 Funding Mechanisms. Developer’s obligations under Section 7.1 may be satisfied in whole or in part through the formation of one or more funding mechanisms.

Developer may petition that the City initiate the formation of a Community Facilities District (“CFD”) formed pursuant to the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982 (Government Code section 53311 et seq.) or a Landscape and Lighting District (“LLD”) for the purpose of financing the maintenance and public services obligations of the Project. If a CFD or LLD is the selected funding mechanism for services, the trigger for special taxes to be levied with such a CFD shall be deferred until such time the City begins to incur such costs, as determined in the City’s sole discretion and as consistent with state law.

7.3 Timing. If the Developer seeks to provide financing for services and maintenance within the Project through a CFD, the formation of the CFD shall be complete by the date of the application for the first tentative small lot subdivision map for the Project. If the Developer seeks to provide financing for the services and maintenance within the project through another funding mechanism, such funding shall also be in place by the date of the application for the first final map for the Project.

82108.00102\42947873.2
NRBI-60157\3148007.1 10

7.4 Fiscal Analysis. The funding for public services, including maintenance of public improvements, for the Project shall be based on a fiscal analysis included in the CFD formation documents.

7.5 Obligation to Fund Cost of CFD Formation. Developer shall be responsible for payment of an amount up to but not exceeding $25,000 for the formation of the CFD or similar financing mechanism to provide maintenance of Project Infrastructure and public services as contemplated in this Agreement. Payment of the $25,000 is due to the City within prior to approval of the final map.

7.6 Contribution to Citywide Economic Development Strategic Plan.

Developer shall provide contribution for the cost of preparing a Citywide Economic Development Strategic Plan in an amount of $1,041.67 ($75,000 total upon Project buildout) for each Project home for which a building permit it issued. Payment of the per home contribution amount shall be due upon issuance of the first building permit for each Project home.

7.7 City Reservation of Discretion. It is expressly acknowledged, understood and agreed by the Parties that City shall act independently, reserving full and complete discretion with respect to formation of any CFD.

7.3 Developer’s Cooperation and Acknowledgement. If Developer requests and the City consents in the City's discretion, and a CFD or similar financing mechanism is utilized to fund the maintenance of Project Infrastructure and public services, Developer (i) will execute all necessary petitions and ballots and waive all election waiting and protest periods at City's request and prior to the issuance of any building permit on any phase of the Project, (ii) support City's adoption of local policies related to use of CFD financing, (iii) cooperate in the development of rate and method of apportionment or assessment formula, (iv) cooperate in formation of or annexation to, one or more such CFD’s or financing mechanisms or assessment districts for maintenance purposes, as chosen by the City (herein the “Services District(s)”), (v) consent herewith to the levy of such special taxes or assessments as are necessary to fund the maintenance obligations described in this Agreement, and (vi) for purposes of Article XIII D of the California Constitution, Developer acknowledges hereby that all the services described herein to be provided by such Services District(s) will provide a “special benefit” to the Property, as defined by said Article, and that the foregoing support and consent shall apply as to any claim that any portion of the services supported by the special tax does not provide special benefit to the Property.

7.4 Purpose of Services Districts. The Services District(s) shall provide City assured funding for the ongoing maintenance and operation of Project Infrastructure required herein or in the Entitlements as applicable and required for the Project, whether such facilities and improvements are located within or outside of the boundaries of the Project, including, but not limited to, public roads, public streets, bridges/culverts, traffic signals, traffic signs, striping and legends, ITS operation, street lights, public alleys and associated frontage improvements such as curb, gutter and sidewalks, intersection signals, and street signs; road special features (e.g. speed bumps, textured or painted surfaces, modified crosswalks, etc.); project monument signs; all public landscaping, including street frontage landscaping and road medians, including lanscaping; streetlights within the Property and upon the Property frontages and statuary, fountains or ornamental structures.

7.5 Payment Prior to Issuance of Bonds. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to preclude the payment by an owner of any of the parcels to be included within

82108.00102\42947873.2
NRBI-60157\3148007.1 11
the CFD of a cash amount equivalent to its proportionate share of costs for the improvements, or any portion thereof, prior to the issuance of bonds.

7.6 Private Financing. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to limit Developer option to install the Public Facilities, or other Project Infrastructure or improvements required by the Entitlements through the use of private financing.

7.7 Public Parcel Exclusion. Developer expressly agrees that any parcels conveyed or to be conveyed to the City will be excluded from any assessment to be imposed by the Services District.

7. Off-site Improvements (Acquisition). Developer may be required to perform offsite improvements to the extent required by the Entitlements and as consistent with state and federal law. If Developer is unable to secure sufficient title or interest for lands despite Developer’s best faith effort, nothing shall prohibit Developer from exercising any and all rights available to it pursuant to Government Code section 66462.5 prior to the filing of any final or parcel map for which such off-site improvement was conditioned.

8. Amendment or Cancellation.

8.1 Amendment by Mutual Consent, Minor Revisions. This Agreement may be amended in writing from time to time by mutual consent of the Parties hereto, and in accordance with the procedures of state law and the Municipal Code. Any amendment of this Agreement that does not constitute a Minor Revision as defined herein shall require amendment of this Agreement. Any such amendment that does not constitute a Minor Revision may be requested and made only as to a portion of the Property, in which case only the owner(s) of such portion of the Property subject thereto shall be required to apply for and sign such partial amendment of this Agreement. A Minor Revision shall mean any change to this Agreement which does not relate to the term (excluding automatic extensions), permitted uses, density or intensity of use, height or size of buildings, provisions for reservation or dedication of land, or monetary contributions by the Developer, or other similar or material provisions. The City Manager, with the consent of the Developer, has the discretion to approve Minor Revisions without the requirement for a public hearing or approval by the City Council.

9.2 Cancellation by Mutual Consent. Except as otherwise permitted herein, this Agreement may be canceled in whole or in part only by the mutual consent of the Parties or their successors in interest, in accordance with Municipal Code. Any fees paid pursuant to this Agreement and spent by City prior to the date of cancellation shall be retained by City.

9.3 Automatic Termination Upon Completion and Sale of Residential Unit. This Agreement shall automatically be terminated, without any further action by either party or need to record any additional document, with respect to any single-family residential lot for residential use, upon completion of construction and issuance by City of a final inspection for a dwelling unit upon such residential lot and conveyance of such improved residential lot by Developer to a bona-fide good faith purchaser thereof. In connection with its issuance of a final inspection for such improved lot, City shall confirm that: (i) all improvements which are required to serve the lot, as determined by City, have been accepted by City; and (ii) the lot is included within any financing districts or mechanisms required by Section 7 or other financing mechanism acceptable to City, to the extent required hereby. Termination of this Agreement for any such residential lot as provided for in this Section 9.3 shall not in any way be construed to

82108.00102\42947873.2
NRBI-60157\3148007.1 12
terminate or modify any assessment district or Mello-Roos Community Facilities District lien affecting such lot at the time of termination.

9.4 Termination upon Request. This Agreement may also be terminated, at the election of the then property owner, with respect to any legally subdivided parcel (other than parcels designated for public use) when receiving a certificate of occupancy or final inspection, whichever is applicable, by giving written notice to City of its election to terminate the Agreement for such parcel, provided that: (i) all improvements which are required to serve the parcel, as determined by City, have been accepted by City; (ii) the parcel is included within any financing districts or mechanisms required by Section 7, or other financing mechanisms acceptable to City, to the extent required hereby; (iii) all other financial obligations to City under this Agreement that are outstanding or may become outstanding upon subsequent development of the Property, or portion thereof subject to such termination, have been satisfied, including without limitation, satisfaction of all obligations under Sections 6 and 7 hereinabove that are then outstanding or may become payable upon further development of the Property or portion thereof subject to such termination; and (iv) the Developer of such portion of the Property is not in Default of this Agreement and no notice of Default has then been issued by City with respect to such portion of the Property. City shall cause any written notice of termination approved pursuant to this Section to be recorded with the San Joaquin County Recorder against the applicable parcel at Developer’s expense. Termination of this Agreement for any parcel as provided for in this Section 9.4 shall not in any way be construed to terminate or modify any assessment district or Mello-Roos Community Facilities District lien affecting such parcel at the time of termination.

9. Annual Review.

9.1 Annual Review. City shall annually monitor and review Developer’s good faith compliance with the terms of this Agreement and the Entitlements, as required by Government Code Section 65865.1.

9.2 Monitoring. City has discretion to monitor the continuing compliance of the terms of this Agreement and the Entitlements by updating decision-makers, conducting field inspections, implementing and interpreting requirements, monitoring any litigation relating to the Property, and taking any other actions City may find appropriate.

9.3 Annual Review Date. City intends to conduct an annual review each year during the term of this Agreement in September of each year after the Effective Date.

9.4 Initiation of Review. City’s Planning Director initiates the annual review by giving Developer written notice that City will conduct the annual review. The Planning Director’s written notice will include an estimate of the total costs City expects to incur in connection with the review. Within thirty (30) days of City’s notice, Developer must provide evidence to the Planning Director to demonstrate good faith compliance with this Development Agreement. The burden of proof, by substantial evidence of compliance, is upon the Developer.

City’s failure to timely initiate the annual review is not a waiver of the right to conduct a review at a later date or otherwise enforce the provisions of this Development Agreement. Developer is not in default under this Agreement by virtue of a failure by City to timely initiate review.

9.5 Staff Reports. City shall deposit in the mail to Developer a copy of all staff reports and related exhibits concerning contract performance at least twenty (20) days prior to any annual review. City shall also, to the extent practicable, make reasonable efforts to

82108.00102\42947873.2
NRBI-60157\3148007.1 13
provide simultaneous notice to Developer by e-mail or other then-available means of electronic technology.

9.6 Costs. Costs reasonably and directly incurred by City in connection with the annual review and monitoring shall be paid by Developer in accordance with the City’s schedule of fees and billing rates in effect at the time of review. The costs that Developer may be required to pay are not limited to the amount in the Planning Director’s estimate.

10. Violation of Entitlements. In addition to complying with all terms of this Agreement, Developer agrees to conform and comply with all applicable terms, conditions, and requirements set forth in the Entitlements. A failure by Developer to perform any applicable material term, condition, or requirement of the Entitlements or Subsequent Entitlements constitutes a violation of this Agreement.

11. Default and Opportunity to Cure. Subject to any applicable extension of time agreed to by the Parties in writing, failure by any Party to perform any term or provision of this Agreement required to be performed by such Party constitutes an event of default (“Event of Default”). For purposes of this Agreement, a Party claiming another Party is in default shall be referred to as the “Complaining Party,” and the Party alleged to be in default shall be referred to as the “Party in Default.” Except as provided in Section 9, a Complaining Party shall not exercise any of its remedies as the result of such Event of Default unless such Complaining Party first gives notice to the Party in Default as provided in Section 21, and the Party in Default fails to cure such Event of Default within the applicable cure period.

11.1 Notice of Default. If an Event of Default occurs, prior to exercising any remedies, the Complaining Party shall give the Party in Default written notice of such default. After City as the Complaining Party provides notice of an Event of Default by Developer, if such Event of Default is not cured within thirty (30) days after the Developer’s receipt of such notice, or as otherwise provided in Section 12.1.1 below, City may thereafter cease to issue any permit or approve any entitlement for which an application has been filed for any portion of the Property then owned or controlled by the Party in Default until the Default is cured pursuant to the procedures in this Section 12.

11.2 Cure. The Party in Default must cure the default within thirty (30) days from the Notice of Default. The Complaining Party may pursue all available remedies if the Party in Default fails to cure the default within the 30-day time period. If the nature of the alleged default is such that it cannot reasonably be cured within thirty (30) days, the 30-day time period will be tolled if: (a) the cure is commenced at the earliest practicable date following receipt of the notice; (b) the cure is diligently prosecuted to completion at all times thereafter; (c) at the earliest practicable date (in no event later than thirty (30) days after the Party in Default’s receipt of the notice), the Party in Default provides written notice to the Complaining Party that the cure cannot practicably be completed within such thirty- (30) day period; and (d) the cure is completed at the earliest practicable date. In no event shall Complaining Party be precluded from exercising remedies if a default is not cured within ninety (90) days after the first notice of default is given. If the Event of Default is discovered or determined in the course of the Annual Compliance Review, in addition to other remedies and potential cures, City shall have the statutory authority pursuant to Government Code section 65865.1 to decide to terminate or modify the Development Agreement following the opportunity to cure as provided in this Section 11.1.2.

82108.00102\42947873.2
NRBI-60157\3148007.1 14

11.3 Failure to Assert. Any failures or delays by a Complaining Party in asserting any of its rights and remedies as to any default shall not operate as a waiver of any default or of any such rights or remedies. Delays by a Complaining Party in asserting any of its rights and remedies shall not deprive the Complaining Party of its right to institute and maintain any actions or proceedings which it may deem necessary to protect, assert, or enforce any such rights or remedies.

11.4 Legal Proceedings. If the Party in Default fails to cure a default in accordance with the provisions of Section 12.1.2, the Complaining Party, at its option, may institute legal proceedings pursuant to this Development Agreement or terminate this Development Agreement. Upon the occurrence of an Event of Default, the Parties may pursue all other remedies at law or in equity, which are not otherwise provided for or prohibited by this Agreement or City’s regulations governing development agreements, expressly including the remedy of specific performance of this Development Agreement. In no event, except as provided in Sections 15 and 19 of this Agreement, will either Party be liable to the other Party for any monetary damage for claims arising out of this Agreement, and both Parties hereby expressly waive any such monetary damages. Notwithstanding the foregoing, City may immediately institute any legal proceedings relating to this Development Agreement without the notice and opportunity to cure required in the case of an emergency or immediate danger to public health, safety, or welfare.

12. Estoppel Certificate. Either Party may, at any time, and from time to time, deliver written notice to the other Party requesting that the other Party certify in writing that, to the knowledge of the certifying Party: (i) this Development Agreement is in full force and effect and a binding obligation of the Parties; (ii) this Development Agreement has not been amended or modified either orally or in writing, or if so amended, identifying the amendments; and, (iii) the requesting Party is not in default in the performance of its obligations under this Development Agreement, or if in default, describing therein the nature and amount of any such defaults. A Party receiving a request hereunder shall execute and return such estoppel certificate or give a written detailed response explaining why it will not do so, within thirty (30) days following the receipt of each such request. Each Party acknowledges that such an estoppel certificate may be relied upon by third parties acting in good faith. A certificate provided by City establishing the status of this Development Agreement with respect to the Property or any portion thereof shall be in recordable form and may be recorded at the expense of the recording Party.

13. Severability. If any part of this Agreement is for any reason held to be unenforceable, the rest of the Agreement remains fully enforceable. If, however, a provision of this Agreement is determined to be invalid or unenforceable and the effect is to deprive a Party of an essential benefit of this Agreement, then the Party so deprived will have the option to terminate this entire Agreement upon written notice to the other Party.

14. Applicable Law. California law applies to this Agreement without regard for any choice-of-law rules that might direct the application of the laws of any other jurisdiction.

15. Attorneys’ Fees and Costs in Legal Actions by Parties to the Agreement.

Should any legal action be brought by either Party for breach of this Development Agreement or to enforce any provisions herein, the prevailing party in the action is entitled to reasonable attorneys’ fees, court costs, and any other costs as may be fixed by the Court.

16. Agreement Runs with the Land. Except as otherwise provided for in this Development Agreement, all of the provisions, rights, terms, covenants, and obligations contained

82108.00102\42947873.2
NRBI-60157\3148007.1 15
in this Agreement are binding upon the Parties and their respective heirs, successors and assignees, representatives, lessees, and all other persons acquiring the Property, or any portion thereof, or any interest therein, whether by operation of law or in any manner whatsoever. All of the provisions of this Development Agreement are enforceable as equitable servitudes and constitute covenants running with the land pursuant to applicable laws, including but not limited to Section 1468 of the California Civil Code. Each covenant to do, or refrain from doing, some act on the Property, or with respect to any owned property: (i) is for the benefit of such properties and is a burden upon such properties; (ii) runs with such properties; and (iii) is binding upon each party and each successive owner during its ownership of such properties or any portion thereof, and shall be a benefit to and a burden upon each Party and its property hereunder and each other person succeeding to an interest in such properties.

17. Indemnification from Construction, Improvement, Operation, and Maintenance Claims. Developer agrees to indemnify, defend with counsel selected by City, and hold harmless City, and its elected and appointed councils, boards, commissions, officers, officials, agents, employees, and representatives, from any and all claims, costs (including legal fees and costs incurred by City or awarded to plaintiffs) and liability for any personal injury or property damage which may arise directly or indirectly as a result of any actions or inactions by Developer, or any actions or inactions of Developer’s contractors, subcontractors, agents, or employees in connection with the construction, improvement, operation, or maintenance of the Property or the Project. Developer has no indemnification obligation with respect to the gross negligence or willful misconduct of City, or its elected and appointed councils, boards, commissions, officers, officials, agents, employees, and representatives or with respect to the maintenance, use, or condition of any improvement after the time it has been dedicated to and accepted by City or another public entity (except as provided in an improvement agreement or maintenance bond). The provisions of this Section 18 shall survive the termination of this Agreement.

18. Cooperation and Indemnification of City in Event of Legal Challenge to This Agreement or Entitlements. In the event of any legal or equitable action or other proceeding instituted by any third party challenging the validity of any provisions of this Development Agreement or the Entitlements, or seeking to overturn or invalidate any approval granted pursuant to this Agreement:

18.1 The Parties agree to cooperate in defending against the action or proceeding;

18.2 The Developer is solely responsible for its own costs and any reasonable costs incurred by City for such defense;

18.3 Developer will indemnify, defend with counsel selected by City and hold harmless City, and its elected and appointed councils, boards, commissions, officers, officials, agents, employees, and representatives from any and all claims, costs (including legal fees and costs incurred by City or awarded to plaintiffs) and liability;

18.4 Neither Developer nor City shall settle any action or proceeding on grounds that include non-monetary relief or admissions of liability without written consent of the other Party. City agrees to not settle any action based upon monetary relief without the written consent of Developer, unless City is solely liable and agrees to pay such monetary relief.

82108.00102\42947873.2
NRBI-60157\3148007.1 16

18.5 The provisions of this Section 19 shall survive the termination of this Development Agreement.

21. Third Party Beneficiaries. This Development Agreement is made and entered into for the sole protection and benefit of Developer and City and their successors and assigns.

No other person shall have any right of action based upon any provision in this Agreement.

22. Notices. All notices and other communications required or permitted under this Agreement, the enabling legislation, or the procedure adopted pursuant to Government Code section 65865, must be in writing and must be delivered in person or sent by certified mail, postage prepaid, or by facsimile or electronic mail.

Notice required to be given to City shall be addressed as follows:

CITY OF ESCALON
City Manager
2060 McHenry Avenue
Escalon, CA 95320
Phone: _________________
Fax: ___________________
E-mail: _______________
Notice required to be given to Developer shall be addressed as follows:

NRB INVESTMENTS, LLC
Randeep Bling
1701 W. March Lane, Suite D
Stockton, CA 95207
Phone: 209-473-1106
Fax: 209-473-4086
E-mail: [email protected]
Either Party may change the address stated herein by giving notice in writing to the other Party, and thereafter notices shall be addressed and transmitted to the new address.

23. Assignment and Release. From and after recordation of this Agreement against the Property, Developer shall have the full right to assign this Agreement as to the Property, or any portion thereof, in connection with any sale, transfer or conveyance thereof, provided that (i) Developer has paid City any and all fees or amounts due at the time of assignment, to City arising out of this Agreement, the processing of the Entitlements, or the development of the portion of the Property to be assigned, and (ii) upon the receipt by City Planning Director, or designee, of the express written assignment by Developer and assumption by the assignee of such assignment in the form attached hereto as Exhibit B. Upon the payment of such fees or amounts due (which shall be acknowledged on the assignment by City Planning Director upon the request of Developer) and City’s receipt of the express written assignment by Developer, the assumption by the assignee of such assignment in the form attached hereto as Exhibit B, and the conveyance of Developer’s interest in the Property related thereto, Developer shall be released from further liability or obligation related to the portion of the Property so conveyed and the assignee will be considered the “Developer,” with all rights and obligations related thereto, with respect to such conveyed property (the “Assigned Property”).

82108.00102\42947873.2
NRBI-60157\3148007.1 17

24. Mortgagee Protection. The parties hereto agree that this Agreement shall not prevent or limit Developer, in any manner, at Developer’s sole discretion, from encumbering the Property or any portion thereof by any mortgage, deed of trust or other security device securing financing with respect to the Property. City acknowledges that lenders providing any such financing may require certain Agreement interpretations and modifications, and agrees upon request, from time to time, to meet with Developer and representatives of such lenders to negotiate in good faith any such request for interpretation or modification. City will not unreasonably withhold its consent to any such requested interpretation or modification, provided such interpretation or modification is consistent with the intent and purposes of this Agreement.

Any lender or other such entity (a “Mortgagee”) that obtains a mortgage or deed of trust against the Property shall be entitled to the following rights and privileges:
(a) Neither entering into this Agreement nor a breach of this Agreement shall defeat, render invalid, diminish or impair the lien of any mortgage on the Property made in good faith and for value, unless otherwise required by law. (b) The Mortgagee of any mortgage or deed of trust encumbering the Property, or any part thereof, for which Mortgagee has submitted a request in writing to City in the manner specified herein for giving notices, may request to receive written notification from City of any Event of Default by Developer in the performance of Developer’s obligations under this Agreement.
(c) If City receives a timely request from a Mortgagee requesting a copy of any notice of an Event of Default given to Developer under the terms of this Agreement, City shall provide a copy of that notice to the Mortgagee within ten (10) days of sending the notice of Event of Default to Developer. The Mortgagee shall have the right, but not the obligation, to cure the Event of Default during the remaining cure period allowed to Developer under this Agreement.
(d) Any Mortgagee who comes into possession of the Property, or any part thereof, by any means, whether pursuant to foreclosure of the mortgage, deed of trust, or deed in lieu of such foreclosure or otherwise, shall take the Property, or part thereof, subject to the terms of this Agreement; provided, however, notwithstanding anything to the contrary above, any Mortgagee, or successor or assign of such Mortgagee, who becomes an owner of the Property through foreclosure shall not be obligated to pay any fees or construct or complete the construction of any improvements, unless such owner desires to continue development of the Property consistent with this Agreement and the Entitlements, in which case the owner by foreclosure shall assume the obligations of Developer hereunder in a form acceptable to City.
(e) The foregoing limitation on Mortgagees and owners by foreclosure shall not restrict City’s ability pursuant to specifically enforce against such Mortgagees or owners any dedication requirements under this Agreement or under any conditions of the Entitlements.

25. Priority of Enactment. In the event of conflict between this Development Agreement and the Entitlements, this Development Agreement is controlling and the Parties will meet and confer in good faith to amend the Entitlements accordingly.

26. Form of Agreement; Recordation; Exhibits. City will record this Agreement and any subsequent amendment to this Agreement, with the County Recorder within ten (10)

82108.00102\42947873.2
NRBI-60157\3148007.1 18
days of the Effective Date. City will also record any termination of any parts or provisions of this Agreement, except when this Development Agreement automatically terminates due to the expiration of the Term of this Agreement. Any amendment or termination of this Development Agreement that affects less than all of the Property must describe the portion of the property that is the subject of the amendment or termination. This Agreement is executed in three duplicate originals, each of which is deemed to be an original. This Agreement consists of __ pages and __ exhibits, which constitute the entire understanding and agreement of the Parties.

27. City Manager Authorization. The City of Escalon, a municipal corporation, has authorized this Development Agreement to be executed in duplicate by its City Manager and attested to by its City Clerk under the authority of Ordinance No. __________ adopted by the Council of the City on the _____ day of _________, 20__, and has caused this Agreement to be executed.
“CITY”

CITY OF ESCALON,
a municipal corporation
By: _________________________________
Name:

Its: City Manager
Date: _______________________________
“DEVELOPER”

NRB INVESTMENTS, LLC,
a California limited liability company
By: ___________________________
Name: Randeep Bling
Its: Manager
Date: _______________________________
ATTEST:
__________________________________
, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________________
Frank A. Splendorio
City Attorney
Date: ____________________________
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________________
Travis A. Brooks
Miller Starr Regalia
Attorney for Developer
Date: ____________________________

82108.00102 NRBI-60157\3148007.1 \42947873.2

EXHIBIT LIST
Exhibit A-1: Legal Description of the Property
Exhibit A-2: Map of the Property
Exhibit B: Form of Assignment

82108.00102 NRBI-60157\3148007.1 \42947873.2
Exhibit A-1
Legal Description of the Property

82108.00102 NRBI-60157\3148007.1 \42947873.2
Exhibit A-2
Map of the Property

82108.00102 NRBI-60157\3148007.1 \42947873.2
Exhibit B
Form of Assignment
(Exhibit Forthcoming. Available for Council Meeting)

Ord.XXX PD Zone – NRB Investments, LLC. (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 THE MURPHY RANCH RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION, PARCEL NUMBERS: 225-040-280 AND 225-040-290
Applicant: NRB Investments, LLC., Florsheim Homes
Location: SE Corner of Intersection of State Route 120 and Brennan Avenue WHEREAS, the Escalon City Council, at its duly noticed public hearing on August 3, 2026, considered approval of a Prezone for the Murphy Ranch Annexation Project; and WHEREAS, the Escalon City Council adopted this Ordinance approving the Prezone for the Murphy Ranch Annexation Project at its duly noticed public hearing on August 10, 2026; and WHEREAS, the Project encompasses the annexation of approximately 17.98 acres of unincorporated land in San Joaquin County into the City of Escalon. The Project also includes the pre-zoning of all the approximate 17.98 acres, a Tentative Subdivision Map, a Specific Plan, a Planned Development (PD-4), an Inclusionary Housing Agreement, and a Development Agreement for the Tentative Subdivision Map; and
WHEREAS, the Escalon Planning Commission, at its duly noticed Public Hearing of October 14, 2025, adopted Resolution 2025-01, recommending that the City Council approve the Annexation and Prezone for the Project’s 17.98 acres and the Specific Plan as the regulatory document governing future land use, development standards, and public improvements within the annexation area; and
WHEREAS, the Escalon Planning Commission is a recommending body to the Escalon City Council for all components of the Project, and the Escalon City Council may, at their discretion approve or deny the project; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with Section 17.61.030 of the Escalon Municipal Code, whenever land is proposed for annexation to the city, the map of such land, which accompanies the proposal, shall include proposed precise zoning for all such land. Prior to annexation of any property to the city, the property shall be prezoned to a district that is compatible with the general plan designation of the property; and
WHEREAS, the proposed Project is comprised of 17.98 acres of property which includes a development area made up of APNs: 225-040-280 and 225-040-290; and WHEREAS, the proposed prezoning designations of the development area parcels APNs 225-040-280 and 225-040-290 (PD) Planned Development, which is shown on the prezoning map included as Exhibit A; and Attachment 3

Ord.XXX PD Zone – NRB Investments, LLC. (Adopted xx/xx/2026) Page 2 WHEREAS, the prezoning designations are consistent with the Escalon General Plan and will ensure that future development within the annexation area is compatible with the City’s adopted land use policies; 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, an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) (SCH# 2025091127) that includes a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program was prepared for the Project pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Pub. Resources Code, § 21000 et seq.), and CEQA Guidelines; and
WHEREAS, the Escalon City Council has considered all information related to this matter, as presented at the public meeting of the City Council identified herein, including supporting reports by City Staff and public comment and on XXXXXX XX, 2025 the City Council adopted this Ordinance approving the Prezone for the Murphy Ranch Annexation Project.

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 designations for the Project area which includes a development area made up of APNs: 225-040-280 and 225-040-290, in accordance with Escalon Municipal Code Sections 17.61.040 contained in the Planning Commission Staff Report (dated October 14, 2025) and supporting documents, which is hereby incorporated by reference into this Ordinance.

SECTION 2: CEQA. The City Council adopted a resolution 2026-__ making the necessary findings and certifying the Murphy Ranch Project IS/MND (SCH # 2025091127), and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, prepared for the Murphy Ranch Annexation Project encompassing an application for an Annexation, Prezone, Planned Development, Tentative Subdivision Map, Specific Plan, Inclusionary Housing Agreement, and Development Agreement.

SECTION 3: Amendment. The Zoning Map is hereby amended to allow for the Prezoning designation of the development area parcels APNs 225-040-280 and 225-040-290 to Planned Development (PD-4), as depicted in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein.

SECTION 4: Adoption of Specific Plan. The City Council hereby adopts the Specific Plan for APN 225-020-110-000, attached hereto as Exhibit B and incorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein. The Specific Plan shall serve as the regulatory document governing permitted uses, development standards, infrastructure requirements, and implementation

Ord.XXX PD Zone – NRB Investments, LLC. (Adopted xx/xx/2026) Page 3 procedures for the annexation area. All future development shall comply with the adopted Specific Plan.

SECTION 5: Severability. If any section, sub-section, subdivision, paragraph, clause or phrase in this Ordinance, or any part thereof, is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining sections or portions of this Ordinance or any part thereof. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed each section, sub-section, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, sub-sections, subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences, clauses or phrases may be declared invalid or unconstitutional.

SECTION 6: 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 7. Publication. This Ordinance shall be published in accordance with the provisions of Government Code Section 36933.

SECTION 8: 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:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
____________________________
ANDREW HAGAN, Mayor
ATTEST:

Ord.XXX PD Zone – NRB Investments, LLC. (Adopted xx/xx/2026) Page 4 ____________________________
DIANA TREJO, Deputy City Clerk

EXHIBIT A

PREZONING MAP

Ord.XXX PD Zone – NRB Investments, LLC. (Adopted xx/xx/2026) Page 5

HOGAN PARK

SANCHEZ

BRENTWOOD PARK

SUNRISE PARK

SWANSON PARK
REED

SHADOWOOD
MAIN
LATTA

FARINELLI PARKWAY

DINOSAUR

CROSSROADS

STREET PARK

MANOR PARK
PARK
BASIN
PARK
PARK
PARK

ESCALON HIGH SCHOOL

DENT ELEMENTARY SCHOOL

EL PORTAL MIDDLE SCHOOL

USD YARD
1140

ESCALON

FIRST ST

MCHENRY AVE

MAIN ST

YOSEMITE AVE

COLEY AVE

VINE AVE

ULLREY AVE

ESCALON AVE

IRWIN AVE

CALIFORNIA ST
YOSEMITE AVE (SR 120)

CLOUGH RD

MISSION ST

STANISLAUS ST

M TI CHELL AVE

JUSTIN DR

NONI AVE

SOPHIE LN

ULLREY AVE

MCHENRY AVE

SANCHEZ WY

JAMES ST

MILLER AVE

R EI SLING WY
JACKSON AVE (SR 120)

EDMART ST

BRENNAN AVE

WALNUT AVE

ARTHUR RD

COUNTRYWOOD LN

PARK AVE

EL ZI ABETH AVE

BRAYTON AVE

DAV DI DR

JILL AVE

LA MESA ST

JONES AVE

ST CLAIR ST

OKLAHOMA AVE

DEBORAH CT

R EI SL NI G WY

FISK AVE

AUTUMN LN

SPRING DR

ROSINA ST

CATHERINE WY

SULTANA WY

CAR GI NANE WY

KERN ST

DANIELLE ST

CAMPBELL AVE
JUDITH
WY

DENT ST

NARCISSUS WY

JESSICA CIR
THIRD
ST

WEISS WY
MAIN ST (SR 120)

REILE AVE

DEBORAH CIR
FOURTH
ST

ROOSEVELT AVE

CARDINAL DR

S EI RRA DR

ZINFANDEL DR

PLAZA AVE

CHIANTI CT

NORTH ST

BONDS CT

THADDEOUS DR

ADRIANA WY

MATTHEW LN

JERRY AVE

LYDIA ST

MICHELLE
WY

BURGUNDY DR

FARINELLI PKWY NORTH

FARINELLI PKWY SOUTH

JORDANOLO ST

BAKER AVE

CAROLYN AVE

BROOK ST

DAN EI LS AVE

SAN MIGUEL ST

NORTHWOOD ST

LIBBY DR

TOKAY AVE

VALDEPENA WY

DIAS ST

OAKWOOD DR

FRANKLIN ST
CALIFORNIA ST (SR 120)

BLIXT ST

COUGAR WY

VIKING ST

SAN JOAQUIN ST
FIR CT

JENN FI ER DR

THOMPSON WY

SACRAMENTO ST

CHARDONNAY CT

CARIGNANE WY

TAMARA CT

JONATHON DR

CRESTWOOD DR

CROCE DR

ARROYA ST

EDGEWOOD AVE

VERNON DR

BRIARWOOD AVE

RIBIER DR

FIFTH ST

ASHWOOD DR

CHABLIS DR

HARVEST LN

CHALANE ST

VALDEPENA CT

TIFFANY CT

MOSSWOOD AVE

TRACEY LN

PIONEER ST
ELM ST

BARBERA CT

WESTBROOK LN

GWENDOLYN ST

EDGETOWN ST

LILLIAN AVE

CHENIN BLANC AVE

MUSCAT CT

AUTUMNWOOD CT

GENEVIEVE DR

GLENWOOD CT

LANITA CT

ALBERTO LN

NATHANIEL DR

SILVERWOOD ST

JONATHON CT

FALLBROOK CT

CENTER ST

PALOMINO CT

CABERNET CT

COLOMBARD CT

MATTHEW CT

LYDIA CT

ST JOHN AVE

WINTERBROOK ST

ALICANTE CT

THOMPSON CT
SELMA
CT

ALLISON CT
JUDITH
CT

MISSION
CT
ARLENE
CT

CEL VI O

WY EMPEROR CT

CONCORD CT

SANTA FE AVE
BYRAN
AVE

YOSEMITE AVE

NATHANIEL DR

CAMPBELL AVE

MISSION ST

JOHN ST

CALIFORNIA ST

COUNTRYWOOD LN

DAN EI LS AVE

CALIFORNIA ST

PIONEER ST

CHELESTINA LN

PROSPECT ST

GRENACHE

IRWIN AVE
WY

STANISLAUS ST

YOSEMITE AVE

YOSEMITE AVE

COLEY AVE

COLEY AVE

AUTUMN LN

ARROYA ST

VINE AVE

MAIN ST

MAIN ST

MAIN ST
YOSEMITE AVE (SR 120)

JACKSON AVE
(SR 120) JUDITH WY

DEBORAH CIR

COUNTRYWOOD LN

SOPHIE LN

SWANSON DR

MCHENRY AVE

MCHENRY AVE

MCHENRY AVE
O

JAMES ST

KLAHOMA AVE

RI WIN AVE

RHINE CT

SANCHEZ WY

FIRST ST FIRST ST

CALIFORNIA ST

WALNUT AVE

NATHANIEL CT THADDEOUS CT

ESCALON AVE ESCALON AVE

FIRST ST
SECOND
ST

FIRST ST

MEL SI SA WY MELISSA CT
GIN
C
A
T

CALIFORNIA ST

JONES AVE

CATHERINE WY
1483

CITY OF ESCALON
³
Legend
City Boundry
Parcels
Zoning
C2
CM
M1
M2
OS
PD
PF
R1
R2
R3
City of Escalon
Community Development Department
1/2017
ZONING
4 2
1 3

MURPHY RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN
CITY OF ESCALON | CA
SEPTEMBER 2025

2 Murphy Ranch Specific Plan | City of Escalon, CA

ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Prepared For:

NRB Investments, LLC
1701 W. AugustLane, Suite D
Stockton, CA 95207
209-473-1106
Contact:

John Pronoitis
209-595-1703
[email protected]
Prepared By:

WHA, Inc
680 Newport Center Drive, Suite 300
Newport Beach, CA 92660
949-250-0607
Contact:

Julia Malisos
949-622-8772
[email protected]

Murphy Ranch Specific Plan | City of Escalon, CA 3

TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER 1 — INTRODUCTION

1. 1 OVERVIEW.............................................................................................5

1. 2 PURPOSE ...............................................................................................6

1. 3 AUTHORITY ..........................................................................................6

1. 4 GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY..........................................6

1. 5 CEQA COMPLIANCE...................................................................... 7

1. 6 GOALS AND OBJECTIVES.......................................................... 7 CHAPTER 2 — EXISTING CONDITIONS

2. 1 PROJECT LOCATION......................................................................9

2. 2 EXISTING CONDITIONS.............................................................11

2. 3 EXISTING GENERAL PLAN.....................................................17

2. 4 EXISTING ZONING .......................................................................18

2. 5 FARMLAND.........................................................................................19

2. 6 EXISTING UTILITIES ....................................................................20 CHAPTER 3 — THE SPECIFIC PLAN

3. 1 LAND USE...........................................................................................23

3. 2 PROPOSED ZONING .................................................................24

3. 3 CIRCULATION..................................................................................26

3. 4 INFRASTRUCTURE.......................................................................28 CHAPTER 4 — DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS

4. 1 PERMITTED USE............................................................................33

4. 2 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS .............................................34

4. 3 PROJECTIONS (EMC SECTION 17.41.120).....................35

4. 4 ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS .......................................36 CHAPTER 5 — DESIGN GUIDELINES

5. 1 ARCHITECTURAL STYLES......................................................37

5. 2 LANDSCAPE .....................................................................................42

5. 3 MONUMENTS, WALLS, AND FENCES...........................47 CHAPTER 6 — IMPLEMENTATION

6. 1 METHODS AND INTERPRETATION ................................49

6. 2 APPLICABILITY ...............................................................................50

6. 3 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT ............................................50

6. 4 ANNEXATION & PRE-ZONE ..................................................50

6. 5 MODIFICATIONS AND AMENDMENTS.........................50

6. 6 APPROVAL PROCESS.................................................................51

6. 7 APPEAL PROCESS .......................................................................52

CHAPTER 1 — INTRODUCTION
4 Murphy Ranch Specific Plan | City of Escalon, CA
Page Intentionally Left Blank

CHAPTER 1 — INTRODUCTION
Murphy Ranch Specific Plan | City of Escalon, CA 5

1. 1 OVERVIEW
Nestled in San Joaquin Valley and north of Stanislaus River, City of Escalon is a tranquil town that brings agricultural heritage, natural open space, and close-knit community
together. With its picturesque farmlands, quaint downtown area, safe neighborhood, and strong sense of community, It embodies the spirit of small-town living.

The Murphy Ranch Specific Plan is a 18-acre site located in an unincorporated area west of City of Escalon. It is bounded on three sides by the city’s jurisdictional boundary. The land will be designated as Low Density Residential with a density range of 2-10 du/ac. The Specific Plan will include 72 conventional single-family detached homes ranging in size from 1,562 square feet to 3,068 square feet. The site also includes a 1.10 acre open space, adjacent to Shadowood Park, used as a stormwater retention basin.

Chapter 1 —

INTRODUCTION

CHAPTER 1 — INTRODUCTION
6 Murphy Ranch Specific Plan | City of Escalon, CA

1. 2 PURPOSE
The Murphy Ranch Specific Plan provides the City of Escalon with a planning document to direct the orderly development of the Specific Plan Area. It provides a comprehensive
description of land use, circulation, infrastructure, design guidelines, development standards and implementation
processes to guide future development of this area, ensuring that it is developed in a manner consistent with the goals, objectives, principles, and policies of the City’s General Plan.

Upon approval, the Specific Plan and the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) will provide the necessary regulations and environmental documentation so that subsequent
development applications may be processed and approved
by the City as a coordinated planning document, subject to City ordinances and any other regulations or policies that may be applicable.

This document serves as a direct link between the policies of the Escalon General Plan and the Murphy Ranch project proposal, and assures that future development will remain consistent with the General Plan.

1. 3 AUTHORITY
California state law authorizes a local government to prepare a Specific Plan to implement its General Plan.

According to State law, a Specific Plan includes detailed text and diagrams that specify all of the following:
• Existing and proposed land uses;
• The location of transportation, infrastructure (such as sewage, water, drainage) and other essential facilities proposed to be located within the area;
• Standards and criteria by which development will
proceed;
• Programs and financing measures necessary to
implement the new development.

Once the Plan is adopted, all development shall be governed by the Specific Plan. Where the regulations of a Specific Plan are silent or not specifically referenced, the comparable regulations of the Escalon Zoning Ordinance shall apply, unless otherwise declared by the Planning Commission.

1. 4 GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY
Per California State law (Section 65450- 65457), Specific Plans must be internally consistent with the jurisdiction’s General Plan. Specific Plans must demonstrate consistency in regulations, guidelines and programs with the goals and policies set forth in the General Plan.

The Murphy Ranch Specific Plan is consistent with the goals and planning principles identified in the General Plan, most specifically, in the Land Use Element, Housing Element, Noise Element, and Community Design Element.

The Murphy Ranch Specific Plan will be concurrently adopted as an amendment to the City of Escalon’s General Plan and establishes goals, planning principles and a land use plan through the General Plan Amendment approval and the MND process.

CHAPTER 1 — INTRODUCTION
Murphy Ranch Specific Plan | City of Escalon, CA 7

1. 5 CEQA COMPLIANCE
An MND was prepared and certified by the City of Escalon for this Specific Plan in accordance with CEQA that addressed potential impacts associated with development under the Specific Plan.

All subsequent approvals to develop the property must be consistent with the Specific Plan and associated environmental documents.

1. 6 GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
• Enhance and maintain the suburban/rural identity of
the community.
• Provide high quality housing that includes a variety of floor plans and architectural styles creating a traditional neighborhood with an interesting street scene.
• Establish development regulations to ensure that
this residential neighborhood is compatible with the
surrounding area.

8 Murphy Ranch Specific Plan | City of Escalon, CA
CHAPTER 2 — EXISTING CONDITIONS
Page Intentionally Left Blank

Murphy Ranch Specific Plan | City of Escalon, CA 9
CHAPTER 2 — EXISTING CONDITIONS
Chapter 2 —

EXISTING CONDITIONS

2. 1 PROJECT LOCATION
The Murphy Ranch Specific Plan is located in the unincorporated area of the City of Escalon, a city of approximately 7,600 residents rested in the southeast corner of the San Joaquin Valley and just north of the City of Modesto (Refer to Figure 1).

As shown inFigure 2,the site is bordered by California State Route 120 (Yosemite Avenue) and the Union Pacific railway to the north, Edgewood Drive to the east, California Avenue to the south and Brennan Avenue to the west. The major access to the site is via SR -120 (Yosemite Avenue) and Brennan Avenue.

10 Murphy Ranch Specific Plan | City of Escalon, CA
CHAPTER 2 — EXISTING CONDITIONS
Figure 1. Regional Context
San Joaquin
County Boundary
Escalon
Stockton
Lodi
Modesto
Manteca
Tracy
SITE

Murphy Ranch Specific Plan | City of Escalon, CA 11
CHAPTER 2 — EXISTING CONDITIONS

2. 2 EXISTING CONDITIONS
The Specific Plan Area encompasses 2 parcels (APN 22504280 and APN 22504290) with a total of approximately 18.0 acres (Refer to Figure 3). The site consists mainly of Prime Farmland with a small amount of Farmland of Local Importance, and is currently used for grazing. The site is surrounded by a railroad and State Route 120 on the north side, existing residential housing to the east and south, and agricultural uses to the west across Brennan Road. The location of the site makes any intensive farming impractical. There are two existing homes Figure 2. Surrounding Context
located at the southwest corner of the site. The remainder of the site is currently used for grazing and agriculture.

North of the site is Highway 120 (Yosemite Avenue), railroad tracks, agricultural farmland and row crops. East of the site is an existing single-family residential subdivision featuring standard sized lots and community park space. South of
the site is California Avenue and single-family residential subdivisions which have recently been constructed. West of the site are several orchards and a few rural home sites (Refer to Figure 2 and the site photos on the following pages).

FARMLAND

RAILROAD

FARMLAND

FARMLAND /

ORCHARDS SINGLE FAMILY

RESIDENTIAL
SITE
City Boundary

12 Murphy Ranch Specific Plan | City of Escalon, CA
CHAPTER 2 — EXISTING CONDITIONS

Murphy Ranch Specific Plan | City of Escalon, CA 13
CHAPTER 2 — EXISTING CONDITIONS

14 Murphy Ranch Specific Plan | City of Escalon, CA
CHAPTER 2 — EXISTING CONDITIONS

Murphy Ranch Specific Plan | City of Escalon, CA 15
CHAPTER 2 — EXISTING CONDITIONS

16 Murphy Ranch Specific Plan | City of Escalon, CA
CHAPTER 2 — EXISTING CONDITIONS
Figure 3. Parcel Map
Shadowood
Park
APN #: 22504280

1.86 ACRE APN #: 22504290

16.11 ACRE
City Boundary

Murphy Ranch Specific Plan | City of Escalon, CA 17
CHAPTER 2 — EXISTING CONDITIONS

2. 3 EXISTING GENERAL PLAN
Although the site is located in unincorporated land outside of the City’s limit, it has been included in the City of Escalon General Plan (adopted in 2006) as a proposed growth area for future expansion.

The General Plan identifies this area as Low Density Residential with up to 21 persons/acre or 2 to 10 dwelling units net acre.

The Specific Plan is consistent with the General Plan on the land use and density. Figure 4 illustrates the General Plan Land Use Designations.

Figure 4. City of Escalon General Plan (2006)
General Plan Land Use
Low Density Residential
Commercial
Light Industrial
Open Space / Park
Project Boundary
City Limit

18 Murphy Ranch Specific Plan | City of Escalon, CA
CHAPTER 2 — EXISTING CONDITIONS

2. 4 EXISTING ZONING
The current zone designation is Agriculture-Urban Reserve (AU-20) shown on the San Joaquin County Zoning Map. This zone is intended to remain for agriculture, but planned for future urban development in order to facilitate compact, orderly growth, and to assure the proper timing and economical provision of services and utilities. The minimum parcel size within the AU zone is 20 acres. Refer to Figure 5 which illustrates the 2010 San Joaquin County Zoning Designation.

Upon the approval of the Specific Plan, the site will change to a Planned Development (PD) zone under the City of Escalon. The approval of the Specific Plan will also be required for the annexation process in the future.

Figure 5. San Joaquin County Zoning (2010)
Zoning
Au-20 (Agriculture-Urban Reserve)
City Limit
Ag-40 (General Agriculture)
Project Boundary

Murphy Ranch Specific Plan | City of Escalon, CA 19
CHAPTER 2 — EXISTING CONDITIONS

2. 5 FARMLAND
The California Department of Conservation Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (DOC FMMP) uses eight classifications to identify the importance of the state farmland based on the location, soil quality, water supply, and productions. The top four which are Prime Farmland, Farmland of Statewide Importance, Unique Farmland, Farmland of Local Importance are regarded as “Important Farmland.“
The site consists mainly of Prime Farmland with a small amount of Farmland of Local Importance. Given the geolocation of the site and that it is already within the City’s SOI, this farmland will be converted to urban. Refer to Figure 5.

Figure 6. Important Farmland (2018)
R
F
State Important Farmland
Prime Farmland
Statewide Importance
Local Importance
Urban

20 Murphy Ranch Specific Plan | City of Escalon, CA
CHAPTER 2 — EXISTING CONDITIONS

2. 6 EXISTING UTILITIES
The irrigation district of the site is South San Joaquin Irrigation District (SSJID). The fire district is Escalon Fire District. The school District is Escalon Unified.

A water and sewer impact report was prepared for the project to determine demand on existing City services. The results of the report indicate adequate supply of water and sewer capacity to serve the proposed Plan.

Domestic Water
A 10” water main line exists in California Street, directly south of the project site; a 16” water main line exists in Brennan Avenue, directly east of the project site; and a 12” water main line exists in First Street south of California Street. These water lines will remain in place and provide connections for new water lines to serve the project site.

Sanitary Sewer
Existing sanitary sewer lines run north and south from the project site via Celivo Way and Riesling Way. These lines are 8” and run directly to the existing sanitary sewer lift station located in First Street, halfway between Walnut Avenue and Carignane Way. These lines will remain in place and provide connections for new sanitary sewer lines to serve the project.

Storm Water Drainage
A storm drain basin that was constructed for the Farinelli Ranch project exists at the intersection of California Street and Edgewood Avenue just southeast of the project site with the development of the Farinelli Ranch project an 18” storm drain line stub in Riesling Way will be utilized as part of Murphy Ranch storm drain system. This basin measures approximately

3.26 acres and was designed to handle a 10 year storm event.

Murphy Ranch will be expanding the existing basin capacity to accommodate the 10-year storm drain event for Murphy Ranch .

Refer to Figure 8 for existing wet utilities.

Murphy Ranch Specific Plan | City of Escalon, CA 21
CHAPTER 2 — EXISTING CONDITIONS
Figure 7. Existing Irrigation

CALIFORNIA STREET
YOSEMITE AVENUE / HWY 120
B
R
ENN
A
N
A
V
E
NUE

PROJECT AREA

EXISTING IRRIGATION

EXISTING

DETENTION STORM

DRAIN BASIN

22 Murphy Ranch Specific Plan | City of Escalon, CA
CHAPTER 2 — EXISTING CONDITIONS
Figure 8. Existing Wet Utilities

CALIFORNIA STREET
YOSEMITE AVENUE / HWY 120
B
R
ENN
A
N
A
V
E
NUE

PROJECT AREA

EXISTING WET UTILITIES

EXISTING

DETENTION STORM

DRAIN BASIN

Murphy Ranch Specific Plan | City of Escalon, CA 23
CHAPTER 3 — THE SPECIFIC PLAN
Chapter 3 —

THE SPECIFIC PLAN

3. 1 LAND USE
The Murphy Ranch Specific Plan aims to maintain its small town atmosphere and create a unique and attractive community identity. The plan consists of 72 detached single family homes with a diverse mix of architectural styles on lots averaging approximately 7,200 square feet. A 1.10 acre park/basin will be preserved at the south east corner. The project will meet the City’s affordable housing requirement per Escalon Municipal Code, Chapter 17.50 Affordable Housing.

The proposed site plan is shown in Figure 10.

24 Murphy Ranch Specific Plan | City of Escalon, CA
CHAPTER 2 — EXISTING CONDITIONS
Figure 9. Proposed Zoning
Zoning
(PD) Planned Development
City Limit
AG-40 (General Agriculture)
Project Boundary

3. 2 PROPOSED ZONING
Upon approval of a pre-zone request, the parcel will be zoned PD, Planned Development. The approval of the Specific Plan will also be required for the annexation process in the future. The single-family residential land use is allowed by right in the low density residential and Planned Development land uses.

Murphy Ranch Specific Plan | City of Escalon, CA 25
CHAPTER 3 — THE SPECIFIC PLAN
Figure 10. Proposed Site Plan

26 Murphy Ranch Specific Plan | City of Escalon, CA
CHAPTER 3 — THE SPECIFIC PLAN

CALIFORNIA STREET
YOSEMITE AVENUE / HWY 120
B
R
ENN
A
N
A
V
E
NUE

CIRCULATION DIAGRAM

EXISTING

PARK/BASIN

PARK/BASIN

EXPANSION

3. 3 CIRCULATION
The site will be accessed from the south using two existing streets Celivo Way and Riesling Way. The proposed circulation inside the project consist of two loop roads. The loop roads have a 50-foot right-of-way with 36 feet curb-to-curb that includes onstreet parkings on both sides, except for the section along the railroad where parking will be provided only on the residential side. 5’ Sidewalks, separated from the curb by a 4’ landscape, will be located within a 2’ street easement on both side of the street.

The project will also include improvement of Brennan Avenue on the project side. The improvement includes a 11-foot frontage road separated by a future 6-foot landscape island and a 8-foot trail inside a 22-foot parkway. The proposed circulation and street sections are shown in Figure 11 and Figure 12.

Figure 11. Proposed Circulation Plan

Murphy Ranch Specific Plan | City of Escalon, CA 27
CHAPTER 3 — THE SPECIFIC PLAN

LOCAL RESIDENTIAL STREET

BRENNAN AVENUE

ENTRY RESIDENTIAL STREET

SECTION D

SECTION A SECTION B

PARKWAY RESIDENTIAL STREET

SECTION C

LOCAL RESIDENTIAL STREET

BRENNAN AVENUE

ENTRY RESIDENTIAL STREET

SECTION D

SECTION A SECTION B

PARKWAY RESIDENTIAL STREET

SECTION C

LOCAL RESIDENTIAL STREET

BRENNAN AVENUE

ENTRY RESIDENTIAL STREET

SECTION D

SECTION A SECTION B

PARKWAY RESIDENTIAL STREET

SECTION C

LOCAL RESIDENTIAL STREET

BRENNAN AVENUE

ENTRY RESIDENTIAL STREET

SECTION D

SECTION A SECTION B

PARKWAY RESIDENTIAL STREET

SECTION C
Figure 12. Proposed Street Sections

28 Murphy Ranch Specific Plan | City of Escalon, CA
CHAPTER 3 — THE SPECIFIC PLAN

3. 4 INFRASTRUCTURE
Infrastructure and public utilities are essential to the successful development of Murphy Ranch. Utility providers and local agencies will supply clean water, sanitary sewer service, storm drainage, public safety, and solid waste collection. All required infrastructure and utility connections will be in place to meet the project’s anticipated demand.

The City of Escalon MSR and Sphere of Influence water and sewer impact reports confirm that there is sufficient water and sewer capacity to support the proposed development.

These reports were approved and adopted on March 9, 2023 (Resolution 23-1514 and 23-1515).

3.4.1 Water
The project is located within boundary of the South San Joaquin Irrigation District (SSJID) and within the sphere of influence of the City of Escalon. The Specific Plan area is currently undeveloped land used for agriculture. SSJID currently does not provide domestic water service to the Specific Plan area.

However, domestic water lines exist on adjacent streets. A 10” water main line exists in California Street, directly south of the project site; a 16” water main line exists in Brennan Avenue, directly east of the project site; and a 12” water main line exists in First Street south of California Street.

An 8-inch water line is planned for the future streets, except along the extension of Reisling Way, where a 10-inch main will be installed. The existing water lines will remain in place and provide connections for new water lines to serve the project site. The existing 16” water line in Brennan Avenue will be extended northward to the end of the project frontage. Refer to Figure 13 for the proposed water line layout.

3.4.2 Sewer
Existing sanitary sewer lines run north and south from the project site via Celivo Way and Riesling Way. These lines are 8” and run directly to the existing sanitary sewer lift station located in First Street, halfway between Walnut Avenue and Carignane Way. These lines will remain in place and provide connections for new sanitary sewer lines to serve the project.

Because the area is undeveloped and used for agricultural purposes, there are currently no sewers located in the Specific Plan area. The area is shown to be part of the City of Escalon Sewer System. A 4” sewer force main will be installed as a dryline for future use by the City along the project frontage on Brennan Avenue. Refer to Figure 13 for the proposed sewer line layout.

3.4.3 Stormwater
A 12” storm drain line with a terminal catch basin at the designed low point shall be installed in Brennan Avenue.

Project proposed streets will connect to the existing
storm drain stubs at Riesling Way and Celivo Way and
utilize the existing outfall structure that will be modified to accommodate a French drain system to minimize nuisance
water accumulation in the basin.

An existing storm drain basin, constructed as part of the Farinelli Ranch project, is located at the intersection of California Street and Edgewood Avenue, just southeast of the project site. This basin encompasses approximately 3.26 acres and was originally designed to accommodate a 10-year storm event. Murphy Ranch will expand this basin to meet additional capacity needs. Refer to Figure 15 for the proposed drainage layout.

Murphy Ranch Specific Plan | City of Escalon, CA 29
CHAPTER 3 — THE SPECIFIC PLAN

CALIFORNIA STREET
YOSEMITE AVENUE / HWY 120
B
R
ENN
A
N
A
V
E
NUE

WATER SYSTEM

EXISTING

PARK/BASIN

PARK/BASIN

POINT OF CONNECTION
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W

STUB FOR FUTURE
Figure 13. Proposed Domestic Water System

30 Murphy Ranch Specific Plan | City of Escalon, CA
CHAPTER 3 — THE SPECIFIC PLAN

CALIFORNIA STREET
YOSEMITE AVENUE / HWY 120
B
R
ENN
A
N
A
V
E
NUE

WASTEWATER SYSTEM

EXISTING

PARK/BASIN

PARK/BASIN

POINT OF CONNECTION
S S
S
S
S S S
S
S
S
S

STUB FOR FUTURE

STUB FOR FUTURE
Figure 14. Proposed Sewer System

Murphy Ranch Specific Plan | City of Escalon, CA 31
CHAPTER 3 — THE SPECIFIC PLAN

CALIFORNIA STREET
YOSEMITE AVENUE / HWY 120
B
R
ENN
A
N
A
V
E
NUE

STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEM

EXISTING

PARK/BASIN

PARK/BASIN

EXPANSION
SD
Figure 15. Proposed Storm Drainage System

Page Intentionally Left Blank

Murphy Ranch Specific Plan | City of Escalon, CA 33
CHAPTER 4 — DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Chapter 4 —

DEVELOPMENT

STANDARDS

4. 1 PERMITTED USE
The Specific Plan will be using the standards under R-1 Low Density Residential in the Escalon Zoning standards.

34 Murphy Ranch Specific Plan | City of Escalon, CA
CHAPTER 4 — DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Table 1. Permitted Use
Uses C – Requires approval of a
conditional use permit
P – Permitted (other
planning approvals may
be required)
T – Temporary use land
permit required
N – Entry in a column
means that the listed use
is not permitted
Accessory buildings and uses P
Home occupation/business/
office
P
Accessory dwelling unit P
Single-family dwelling P
Two-family dwelling on corner
lot where entrances front on
opposite streets
P
Model home centers C
Garage sales P
Employee housing P
Park, playground P
Residential care facility, small P
Temporary structures for use
during construction
P

4. 2 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Any development in the Specific Plan Area should follow the regulations in Escalon Municipal Code Section 17.14.040.

A. Minimum Lot Area: 6,000 square feet for an interior lot and 7,000 for a corner lot, except as provided for in EMC 17.12.060.

B. Density Standard: Minimum of two/maximum of six dwelling units per net acre. In a PD, seven to 10 units.

C. Maximum Building Lot Coverage: 65 percent.

D. Minimum Lot Width: 60 feet.

E. Minimum Lot Frontage:

Interior lot: 60 feet.

Corner lot: 70 feet.

Cul-de-sac lot: 30 feet.

F. Minimum Lot Depth: 90 feet.

G. Maximum Height: Two stories, but not exceeding 35 feet.

H. Minimum Setbacks:

Front: 15 feet when a front porch is provided; 20 feet when no porch is provided, and the minimum depth of a front
porch shall be six feet and a minimum of 60 square feet.

When the garage door is facing the street, the garage shall be set back a minimum of 20 feet from the front property line, and a minimum of five feet back from the closest
front wall of the structure to the front property line, or as otherwise approved by the approving authority.

Murphy Ranch Specific Plan | City of Escalon, CA 35
CHAPTER 4 — DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Side: Five feet. A corner lot shall have a side yard abutting a street of not less than 10 feet. If the side yard not abutting a street is to be used for driveway purposes, the minimum width shall be 12 feet.

Rear: 20 feet. .

I. Minimum Floor Area:
• Studio units: 450 square feet.
• One-bedroom units: 650 square feet.
• Two-bedroom units: 800 square feet.
• Three-bedroom units: 900 square feet.
• Four-bedroom units: 1,000 square feet.

4. 3 PROJECTIONS (EMC SECTION 17.41.120)
A. Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, required yards are to be unobstructed by any building structure or other improvement constructed on, over, or under the ground. No part of a yard required by this title shall be included as part of a yard required for any other lot.

B. Cornices, eaves, sills, canopies, bay windows, chimneys or other similar architectural features may extend or project into a required side yard not more than 24 inches and may extend or project into a required front or rear yard not more than 30 inches.

C. Uncovered porches or stairways, fire escapes or landing places may extend into any required front or rear yard a distance not exceeding six feet and into any required side yard a distance not exceeding one-half the width of the required side yard
D. Decks and patios structurally supported entirely by earth at no higher than finished grade, then natural grade, may extend into a side or rear yard to within one foot of any property line.

E. Open, unenclosed balconies, not covered by a roof or canopy may project into a front or rear yard up to six feet.

F. If building permits are not required, small storage/utility buildings 120 square feet or less in floor area and less than nine feet in total height may be allowed in the required rear and side yard setbacks.

G. Trellises, arbors and gazebos shall be allowed in rear and side yards if more than three feet away from any property line.

Swimming pools and spas must be a minimum of three feet to water’s edge from the property line.

H. Private driveways that do not provide necessary access to any other lot shall be permitted within setbacks.

I. Ramps for access by handicapped persons from grade
to a raised ground floor structural entry shall be allowed in setbacks.

J. Mechanical equipment such as air condition compressors or equipment, swimming pool pumps and filters, and similar items shall not be located in any required front or side yard.

36 Murphy Ranch Specific Plan | City of Escalon, CA
CHAPTER 4 — DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS

4. 4 ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS
The Site allows Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units (JADUs) in compliance with
California Government Code Sections 65852.2 and 65852.22.

The regulations shall follow the State requirement and Escalon Municipal Code Section 17.41.140.

Murphy Ranch Specific Plan | City of Escalon, CA 37
CHAPTER 5 — DESIGN GUIDELINES
Chapter 5 —

DESIGN GUIDELINES
The following design guidelines are intended to assist the project designers in understanding the goals and objectives of the Specific Plan. The guidelines will be utilized during the City’s design review process to encourage the highest level of design quality while at the same time providing the flexibility necessary to encourage creativity on the part of project designers.

5. 1 ARCHITECTURAL STYLES
The building design, materials, colors, and textures establish its theme and character. Architecture shall be compatible with the adjacent residential and maintain cohesive neighborhood identity.

38 Murphy Ranch Specific Plan | City of Escalon, CA
CHAPTER 5 — DESIGN GUIDELINES
Starting with the authentic and transforming to a progressive version of the base style is acceptable. Traditional styles tend to have defining features that should be consistently implemented across the product offering. Moving to a
more contemporary version of traditional styles should still embrace defining features so that the style is recognizable but understood to be a contemporary interpretation.

Key provisions of the architectural styles include:

1. Ensure scale, massing, fenestration, materials, and colors are consistent with the building’s architectural style and compatible with the overall design in the Specific Plan area.

2. Avoid blank walls by providing articulation on building elevations visible from a public right-of-way through
elements such as cornices, parapets, expression lines, and changes in materials and/or colors.

3. Provide the greatest level of articulation on the front facades that are visible from the public rights-of-way and at the main entrances.

4. Corner lot homes shall feature extended front elevation designs that wrap around the side façade, continuing
along any portion visible from public view.

5. Two-story homes backing onto Brennan Avenue shall
incorporate enhanced rear elevation treatments to improve visual appeal from the public right-of-way.

6. Design entry features as a significant aspect of a
building’s overall composition through massing, detailing, architectural treatments, and/or special materials and
colors.

7. Employ recessed or covered building entrances to provide shade and visual relief.

8. Employ a minimum of three different colors, materials, and/or textures on each building.

9. Avoid terminating a change in material or color at a building edge; instead, select a logical termination point in relation to the architectural features or massing.

10. Paint exposed downspouts, service doors, and mechanical screens the same color as the adjacent wall.

ORANGE COUNTY . LOS ANG
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.

MURPHY RANCH

ESCALON, CA
Note: Floorplans and elevations are conceptual and subject to updates per code & market
PLAN 2X ENHANCED LEFT ELEV
B | Ranch
A | Vineyard
Architectural Detail Area. Furred Wall & Horizontal Sidin Visible from street on corner lot conditions.

P4 A | Vineyard
Architectural Detail Area. Vertical Siding
Visible on lots backing to Brennan Ave.

MURPHY RANCH

ESCALONCA
Note: Floorplans and elevations are conceptual and subject to updates PLAN 3X ENHANCED REAR ELEVATIONS
B | Ranch C | Boutique
A | Vineyard
Architectural Detail Area. Furred Wall & Horizontal Siding.

Visible on lots backing to Brennan Ave.

Architectural Detail Area. Furred Wall & Vertical Siding.

Visible on lots backing to Brennan Ave.

Enhanced rear elevations with sideing, furred
wall or trim on lots backing onto Brennan.

Wraparound elevations on corner lots are visible
from the street.

Murphy Ranch Specific Plan | City of Escalon, CA 39
CHAPTER 5 — DESIGN GUIDELINES
Boutique
The Boutique style is bold and elegant. It’s contemporary but with a warmth and richness of form and material, as opposed to other modern interpretations. The use of wall veneers and hip roofs give a progressive feel to traditional homes.

Inspired by warmly lit architecture, the Boutique style utilizes asymmetrical compositions of multiple finishes in a balanced presentation of horizontal and vertical.

Table 2. Boutique Menu of Common Features
Element Feature
Roof Low roof pitch (hips are typical)
3:12 to 5:12 roof pitch
Flat concrete tiles
Walls Stucco
Horizontal siding, brick, or stone accents
Windows Vertically proportioned or horizontal windows
Grouped windows with belt course
Details Horizontal banding or belt course
Accent material
Simple stucco columns at entry
Trim elements emphasizing the horizontal
Doors Paneled front doors (glass panels permitted)
Horizontally paneled garage door (windows
optional; solid panels permitted)

40 Murphy Ranch Specific Plan | City of Escalon, CA
CHAPTER 5 — DESIGN GUIDELINES
Ranch
The Ranch House was the primary focus of the large ranches developed by the early Californians in the late 1800s when cattle raising was the principal occupation. In the mid1930s Designer, Cliff May, began adapting the ranch house design and layout to fit the needs of family living. Design considerations maintained much of the authentic character of the early “ranchos,” but started using contemporary materials.

Additionally, Ranch homes typically show an asymmetric form and prominent single-story elements.

Table 3. Ranch Menu of Common Features
Element Feature
Roof Hip and gable roofs
4:12 to 5:12 roof pitch
Dormers
Flat concrete tiles or tiles with shingled
appearance
Walls Stucco
Horizontal siding, brick, or stone accents
Windows Vertically proportioned
With or without divided lites
Details Gable end details
Accent material
Simple stucco columns at entry
Trim elements emphasizing the horizontal
Doors Paneled front doors (glass panels permitted)
Doors with side lites
‘Ranch’ garage door (windows optional; solid
panels permitted)

Murphy Ranch Specific Plan | City of Escalon, CA 41
CHAPTER 5 — DESIGN GUIDELINES
Vineyard
The Vineyard style captures the spirit of the California agrarian living. Homes reflect an airy connection to the outdoors with simple forms and vertical windows. The style uses a play of materials from light to earthy stone colors and a mix of old traditional and new progressive materials. The style is based on familiar farm house shapes that suggest the home grew with a vineyard. Gable and cross gable roof forms are accented by shed dormers. Use of materials connect the style to the agricultural past with stucco, stone and siding materials and metal roof accents.

Table 4. Vineyard Menu of Common Features
Element Feature
Roof Steep roof pitch (gable is typical)
4:12 to 6:12 roof pitch
Front facing gables, dormers
Flat concrete tiles or tiles with shingled
appearance
Metal roof accents
Walls Stucco
Board and batt, horizontal siding, brick, or
stone accents
Windows Vertically proportioned
Details Material accents
Trimmed windows
Simple posts if porch is applied
Doors Paneled front doors (glass panels permitted)
Paneled or planked garage door (windows
optional; solid panels permitted)

42 Murphy Ranch Specific Plan | City of Escalon, CA
CHAPTER 5 — DESIGN GUIDELINES

5. 2 LANDSCAPE
Landscape design plays a vital role in shaping the visual character and enhancing the overall livability of the
neighborhood. This section outlines guidelines for streetscape, park/basin, and front yards, ensuring consistency, sustainability, and community identity throughout the Specific Plan.

Figure 16. Conceptual Landscape Plan, Figure 17. Conceptual Park Plan, and Figure 18. Conceptual Streetscape Plan illustrate the landscape design concept envisioned in the Specific Plan. Figure 19 highlights preliminary concepts for front yard landscaping and layout.

Streetscape
• Use climate-appropriate, drought-tolerant plants to
reduce maintenance and water use.
• Avoid obstructing sightlines at intersections, driveways, and pedestrian crossings.
• Plant material and streetscape design shall comply with city’s standards.
• Incorporate sustainable features into streetscape
design, such as mulchand groundcover, efficient
irrigation system.
• Ensure consistency in plant species and lighting
fixtures.
• Ensure continuity and harmony in landscaping.

Basin/Park
• Ensure the basin meets local stormwater detention
requirements.
• Maintain gentle slopes to ensure safety and
accessibility.
• Incorporate shade trees along pathways and gathering
areas.
• Select materials and plantings that require minimal
maintenance and resist vandalism.

Front Yard
• All front yards and yards abutting streets must be
landscaped.
• Landscaping must be continuous except for driveways
and pedestrian access.
• Avoid large expanses of turf; encourage native,
drought-tolerant plantings and permeable surfaces.
• Use layered planting to add depth and visual interest. • Install low-level, downward-facing lighting to illuminate pathways and entryways without creating glare.
• Avoid tall, opaque barriers that isolate the home from the street.
• Use sustainable irrigation methods like smart systems or drip lines to conserve water.
• Harmonized with building’s facade and neighborhood
context.

Murphy Ranch Specific Plan | City of Escalon, CA 43
CHAPTER 6 — IMPLEMENTATION
Figure 16. Conceptual Landscape Plan

44 Murphy Ranch Specific Plan | City of Escalon, CA
CHAPTER 6 — IMPLEMENTATION
Figure 17. Conceptual Park Plan

Murphy Ranch Specific Plan | City of Escalon, CA 45
CHAPTER 6 — IMPLEMENTATION
Figure 18. Conceptual Street Streetscape Plan

46 Murphy Ranch Specific Plan | City of Escalon, CA
CHAPTER 6 — IMPLEMENTATION
Figure 19. Front Yard Design Concepts
10 3
odellengineering.com
of
1165 Scenic Drive, Suite A
Modesto, CA 95350
10 4
odellengineering.com
of
1165 Scenic Drive, Suite A
Modesto, CA 95350
10 6
odellengineering.com
of
1165 Scenic Drive, Suite A
Modesto, CA 95350

Murphy Ranch Specific Plan | City of Escalon, CA 47
CHAPTER 6 — IMPLEMENTATION

5. 3 MONUMENTS, WALLS, AND FENCES
Monuments, walls, and fences serve not only functional
purposes but also play a vital role in establishing a sense of place. Entry features can be simple and attractive, but should reflect the overall identity of the neighborhood. Project icons, thematic pilasters, and specialty landscaping can be incorporated to create strong entry statements that reinforce neighborhood character.
• Use trees, shrubs, or vines to soften the visual impact of walls and fencing.
• Entry features should be located at primary
neighborhood entry points, and may include
monuments, groupings of trees, or pilaste and wall
details.
• Monuments and signage, if proposed, should be
consistent with and reflect the overall character of the neighborhood.
• All walls and fences must adhere to Escalon Municipal Code Section 17.41.030 – Fences, Hedges, and Walls.
• Solid barriers (walls, fences, hedges) exceeding three feet in height are prohibited within the front setback
area.
• Perimeter fencing shall be considered a part of the
overall development and allows for ingress and egress
from the development.
• Wall and fencing shall not block access to fire hydrants or water connections used by emergency services.
• Acceptable wall materials include CMU block, wood,
simulated wood, vinyl (for good neighbor fencing),
tubular steel, wrought-iron, brick.
• Prohibited materials are chain link, corrugated metal, and barb-wire.

See Figure 20, Conceptual Wall Plan for proposed wall types and locations.
odellengineering.com
1165 Scenic Drive, Suite A
Modesto, CA 95350
1 DECORATIVE FENCING
2 LOT FENCING
10 2
of
odellengineering.com
1165 Scenic Drive, Suite A
Modesto, CA 95350
1 DECORATIVE FENCING
2 LOT FENCING
10 2
of

48 Murphy Ranch Specific Plan | City of Escalon, CA
CHAPTER 6 — IMPLEMENTATION
3 2
4 4
1 Figure 20. Conceptual Wall Plan

Murphy Ranch Specific Plan | City of Escalon, CA 49
CHAPTER 6 — IMPLEMENTATION
Chapter 6 —

IMPLEMENTATION

6. 1 METHODS AND INTERPRETATION
The California Government Code (Title 7, Division 1, Chapter 3, Article 8, Sections 65450 et seq.) grants authority to cities to adopt Specific Plans for purposes of implementing the goals and policies of the City’s General Plan. The purpose of this chapter is to provide an outline of the steps necessary to implement the Murphy Ranch Specific Plan.

Following the approval by the City of Escalon, the Murphy Ranch Specific Plan will serve as the implementation tool for the City’s General Plan as well as the zoning for the Specific Plan area. Concurrently with the adoption of the Specific Plan, the City Planning Commission will also approve tentative tract

50 Murphy Ranch Specific Plan | City of Escalon, CA
CHAPTER 6 — IMPLEMENTATION
maps establishing legal residential lots within the Murphy Ranch Specific Plan area.

Development within the Specific Plan area shall be
implemented through the approval by the City of final tract maps and through a Development Plan Review process as
established in the City’s Municipal Code. The implementation process described below provides the mechanisms for review and approval of development projects within the Murphy
Ranch Specific Plan area.

6. 2 APPLICABILITY
All development within the Specific Plan shall comply with the requirements and standards established in this Specific Plan and will be subject to the implementation procedures established herein. Wherever a conflict exist between this Specific Plan and the City’s Municipal Code, the provisions of the Murphy Ranch Specific Plan shall take precedence.

Where the Specific Plan is silent, the Zoning Code regulations and all adopted ordinances of the City shall apply, as deemed appropriate by the Director of the Planning Department.

6. 3 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
The City Council, upon recommendation of the Planning
Commission, may grant annexation into the City if the Council finds that granting of such annexation will not adversely affect properties in the vicinity and will not be contrary to the public interest, and that the proposal land use and overall development plan is consistent with the approved Specific Plan and development agreement.

6. 4 ANNEXATION & PRE-ZONE
City of Escalon requires that any project site over 5 acres shall gain approval of a Specific Plan prior to annexation to the City.

As a condition of approval, the applicant shall enter into a development agreement with the city.

Unincorporated lands for the Specific Plan will require the approval of an annexation application through the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO). All of Murphy
Ranch is currently outside the corporate limits of the City and will require adjustment of the city limit line.

6. 5 MODIFICATIONS AND AMENDMENTS
The Murphy Ranch Specific Plan is intended to be flexible in order to respond to changing conditions and expectations during the course of its implementation. To address this intent, the Specifc Plan provides for both Minor and Major Specific Plan Amendments. The City Planner may authorize a Minor Specific Plan Amendment administratively.

A Major Specific Plan Amendment shall be reviewed by
the Planning Commission and adopted by the City Council.

The City Planner shall determine whether a proposed
Specific Plan Amendment is minor or major. Any proposed amendment may, at the sole discretion of the City Planner, be referred to the Planning Commission and City Council for action. Determinations and actions by the City Planner may be appealed to the Planning Commission.

Murphy Ranch Specific Plan | City of Escalon, CA 51
CHAPTER 6 — IMPLEMENTATION
Minor Specific Plan Amendment
A Minor Specific Plan Amendment may be processed at staff level if determined by the City Planner to be in substantial conformance with:
• The overall intent of the Specific Plan
• The applicable Specific Plan development agreement(s) • The City of Escalon General Plan
• The Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report
Examples of Minor Specific Plan Amendments include, but are not limited to:
• The addition of new or updated information that does
not substantively change the Specific Plan.
• Minor adjustments to land use boundaries and street
alignments where the general land use pattern is
maintained.
• Variation in permitted use types and development
standards if such variations do not substantively change the character of the Specific Plan.
• Changes to the provision of public infrastructure and facilities that do not impact the level of service provided or affect the development capacity in the Plan Area.
• Changes to phasing boundaries that do not impact
infrastructure sizing, financing districts or the provision of adequate services to associated development.
• Modifications to the Design Standards, such as
revisions to design treatments or changes in specified
plant materials, if it is determined that such changes
achieve the design intent of the Specific Plan.
• Minor architectural plan revisions.
• Setback variances
Major Specific Plan Amendment
If the City Planner determines that a proposed amendment does not meet the criteria of a Minor Specific Plan Amendment, a Major Specific Plan Amendment shall be required. A Major Specific Plan Amendment shall be processed and reviewed in the same manner as the initial Specific Plan adoption.

6. 6 APPROVAL PROCESS
In order to create a distinct vision for Murphy Ranch, a development approval process was created to help guide
the project through build out. This system is centered on flexibility to respond to an ever changing housing market, cost limitations, and housing types and designs. In the following sections, each item in the process is examined and explained to provide a general framework of the approval process.

Tentative Maps
A tentative map shall be submitted for all residential areas within Murphy Ranch. These maps divide land for the purpose of sale, lease or financing. All tentative maps submitted on behalf of Murphy Ranch will be subject to the City’s Subdivision Ordinance and the California Subdivision Map Act.

Conditional Use Permits (CUP)
Once approval is granted on tentative maps, special uses not

52 Murphy Ranch Specific Plan | City of Escalon, CA
CHAPTER 6 — IMPLEMENTATION
necessarily classified in the Specific Plan may be approved by securing a CUP. A CUP requires a public hearing and approval by the Planning Commission.

Variances
A variance shall only be granted if a geographical limitation exists on a parcel and no other approval mechanism qualifies.

The Planning Commission must approve a request for a
variance after certain findings have been made and a public hearing has been held.

Revocation and Cancellation
CUP and variances may be revoked and/or cancelled should any of the following apply:
• The approval was obtained fraudulently.
• The use for which an approval was granted does not exist or is not being conducted in an appropriate manner.
• The approval is not being administered using conditions of approval set forth by the governing body
The project approval is detrimental to the public safety, health and welfare or creates a nuisance. An administrative approval or amendment of any kind may be revoked by the City Planner as he or she sees fit. The Planning Commission has the
authority to revoke or cancel a CUP or variance as it sees fit upon the completion of a public hearing.

6. 7 APPEAL PROCESS
Any decision by an authorized staff member may be appealed to the Planning Commission subject to the appeals process outlined in the City’s Zoning Ordinance. Any decision made by the Planning Commission may be appealed to the City
Council subject to the same zoning ordinance section.

CITY COUNCIL
RESOLUTION NO. 2026-XX

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ESCALON MAKING THE

NECESSARY FINDINGS AND CERTIFYING THE MURPHY RANCH INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION (SCH # 2025091127) AND ADOPTING

A MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM FOR THE MURPHY

RANCH ANNEXATION PROJECT
The City Council of the City of Escalon does hereby find, order and resolve as follows:

WHEREAS, a development application was filed by NRB Investment, LLC, Florsheim Homes 1701 W. March Lane, Ste. D, Stockton, CA 95207, for an Annexation, Prezone, Tentative Subdivision, Specific Plan, Planned Development, Inclusionary Housing Agreement, and Development Agreement for the Murphy Ranch Annexation Project (the “Project”); and WHEREAS, the Project encompasses the annexation of approximately 17.98 acres of unincorporated land in San Joaquin County into the City of Escalon. The Project includes the prezoning of all the approximate 17.98 acres, a Tentative Subdivision Map encompassing all of the approximate 17.98 acre of the annexation area; and
WHEREAS, the City completed a preliminary review of the Project consistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15060 and determined that an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (hereafter “IS/MND”) was the appropriate environmental analysis for the project in order to analyze the impacts associated with the Project; and
WHEREAS, Basecamp Environmental assisted the Applicant and City with the preparation of the IS/MND for the Project pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Pub.

Res. Code, § 21000 et seq.), and CEQA Guidelines; and
WHEREAS, a Notice of Intent to make recommendations on an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Project was circulated on September 24, 2025, to the State Clearinghouse, other public agencies, organizations and interested parties; and WHEREAS, the IS/MND was made available for a 20-day public review on September 24, 2025, inviting the public, agencies, organizations, and other interested parties to review and comment on the IS/MND from September 24, 2025, through October 13, 2025; and WHEREAS, the City received two comment letters regarding the IS/MND; and WHEREAS, the IS/MND and supporting documents have been made available for public review on the City of Escalon website; and
WHEREAS, the IS/MND reflects the City's independent judgment and analysis on the potential for environmental impacts and constitute the environmental analysis for the Project; and, WHEREAS, a staff report and the IS/MND for the Project were presented to the Planning Commission and made available to members of the public prior to the public hearing; and Attachment 4

WHEREAS, at the duly noticed public hearing on October 14, 2025, the Escalon Planning Commission reviewed the IS/MND, received public testimony, and recommended that the City Council certify the IS/MND and adopt the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program; and WHEREAS, the Project would have significant effects on the environment, all of which can be substantially reduced through mitigation measures; therefore, approval of the Project must include a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) attached hereto as Exhibit A, and incorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein; and WHEREAS, the IS/MND is a bound document, incorporated herein by reference, and pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 and California Code of Regulations, title 14, Section 15091, under the custodial of the Development Service Department located at 2060 McHenry Avenue, Escalon, CA 95320; and
WHEREAS, the Escalon City Council considered the IS/MND and MMRP at its duly noticed public hearing on August 3, 2026, and subsequently certified the IS/MND and adopted the MMRP at its duly noticed public hearing on August 10, 2026; and WHEREAS, all legal prerequisites to adopt the foregoing resolution have occurred.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Escalon City Council hereby certifies the Murphy Ranch Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (SCH #2025091127) and adopts the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Murphy Ranch Annexation Project.

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

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

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

PUBLICE REVIEW DRAFT
INITIAL STUDY/
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION

FOR THE
SEPTEMBER 2025
Prepared for:

City of Escalon
2060 McHenry Avenue
Escalon, CA 95320
BaseCamp Environmental, Inc.

PUBILC REVIEW DRAFT
INITIAL STUDY/
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION

FOR THE
MURPHY RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN
Escalon, CA
SEPTEMBER 2025
Prepared for:

CITY OF ESCALON
2060 McHenry Avenue
Escalon, CA 95320
209-691-7430
Prepared by:

BASECAMP ENVIRONMENTAL, INC.
802 W. Lodi Avenue
Lodi, CA 95240
209-224-8213
www.basecampenv.com

City of Escalon
2060 McHenry Ave
Escalon, Ca. 95320

NOTICE OF INTENT TO RECOMMEND ADOPTION OF A MITIGATED

NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING
Notice is hereby given that the City of Escalon has prepared an Initial Study (IS) of environmental effects and intends to recommend adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) and Mitigation Monitoring/ Reporting Plan (MMRP) for the Murphy Ranch project.

The City of Escalon is the Lead Agency for this project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

The project includes an Annexation, Pre-Zoning, Specific Plan, Tentative Subdivision Map, Planned Development, CEQA Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration, and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan for the development of two parcels totaling 17.98 acres, which are proposed to be subdivided into 73 lots with one and two-story single-family residential units, including underground utilities, street improvements, sound wall, landscape improvements, and park expansion.

The IS/MND analyzes the potential environmental effects of the project in the environmental issue areas specified in the State CEQA Guidelines.

Based on this analysis, the Public Review Draft IS/MND finds that the project will not involve any significant environmental effects, provided that the mitigation measures described in the IS/MND are implemented. The project proponent has agreed to the mitigation measures, and these measures are included in a MMRP to be adopted by the City of Escalon in conjunction with the IS/MND and approval of the project. There are no sites identified under Section 65962.5 of the Government Code located on or near the project site.

Copies of the IS/MND are available for public review at the City of Escalon Planning Department at the address shown above and at the City’s website:
https://www.cityofescalon.org/government/departments/development_services/planning The City will accept public and agency comments on the IS/MND during a 20-day review period that will begin on September 24, 2025 and end on October 13, 2025. Comments may be submitted by mail or e-mail to the City at the address shown below:

City of Escalon Planning Department, 2060 McHenry Ave., Escalon, Ca. 95320 or [email protected]
At the conclusion of the 20-day public review period, the document will be submitted to the City of Escalon Planning Commission for review and recommendation to the City Council on adoption. The Planning Commission will hold a public hearing in the Council Chambers, City Hall, 2060 McHenry Ave, Escalon, California, on Tuesday, October 14, 2025 at 6:30 PM to consider recommendations of adoption of the IS/MND, MMRP, and the project.

ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Notice of Intent i
Mitigated Negative Declaration vii
Chapter 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1-1

1.1 Project Brief 1-1

1.2 Purpose of Initial Study 1-1

1.3 Project Background 1-2

1.4 Environmental Evaluation Checklist Terminology 1-3

1.5 Summary of Environmental Effects and Mitigation Measures 1-4 Chapter 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2-1

2.1 Project Location 2-1

2.2 Project Details 2-1

2.3 Permits and Approvals 2-4
Chapter 3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 3-1

3.1 Aesthetics 3-1

3.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources 3-3

3.3 Air Quality 3-6

3.4 Biological Resources 3-11

3.5 Cultural Resources 3-16

3.6 Energy 3-19

3.7 Geology and Soils 3-20

3.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions 3-27

3.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials 3-31

3.10 Hydrology and Water Quality 3-35

3.11 Land Use and Planning 3-40

3.12 Mineral Resources 3-43

3.13 Noise 3-43

3.14 Population and Housing 3-49

3.15 Public Services 3-51

3.16 Recreation 3-54

3.17 Transportation 3-55

iii

3.18 Tribal Cultural Resources 3-59

3.19 Utilities and Service Systems 3-61

3.20 Wildfire 3-64

3.21 Mandatory Findings of Significance 3-66
Chapter 4.0 REFERENCES 4-1

4.1. Document Preparers 4-1

4.2 Documents Cited 4-1

4.3 Persons Consulted 4-5
Chapter 5.0 Notes Related to Evaluations of Environmental Impacts 5-1

APPENDICES
A. Air Quality Modeling Results
B. Biological Resource Materials
C. Central California Information Center Letter
D. Geotechnical Report
E. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
F. Noise Report
G. Traffic Technical Memorandum
H. Tribal Consultation Resources

iv

LIST OF FIGURES
1-1 Regional Location Map 1-5
1-2 Street Map 1-6
1-3 USGS Map 1-7
1-4 Aerial Photo 1-8
1-5 Assessor Parcel Map 1-9
2-1 Proposed Tentative Subdivision Map 2-6
2-2 Circulation Plan 2-7
2-3 Street Sections 2-8
2-4 Overall Landscape Plan 2-9
3-1 Soil Types 3-23
3-2 General Plan Map 3-41
3-3 Recommended Noise Mitigation Measures 3-46

LIST OF TABLES
1-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures 1-10 3-1 San Joaquin Valley Air Basin Attainment Status 3-7
3-2 SJVAPCD Significance Thresholds and Project Air Pollutant Emissions 3-9 3-3 GHG Emissions from Project 3-30
3-4 Construction Equipment Noise 3-47
3-5 Groundborne Vibration Thresholds 3-48

v

LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS USED IN THIS DOCUMENT AB Assembly Bill
ADU Accessory Dwelling Unit
APN Assessor’s Parcel Number
ARB California Air Resources Board
BMP Best Management Practice
CalEEMod California Emissions Estimator Model
Cal Fire California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection CALGreen California Green Building Standards Code
Caltrans California Department of Transportation
CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CNDDB California Natural Diversity Data Base
CNEL Community Noise Equivalent Level
CO carbon monoxide
CO2e carbon dioxide equivalent
dB decibel
dBA decibel, A-weighted
DTSC California Department of Toxic Substances Control
EIR Environmental Impact Report
EPA U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
ESA Environmental Site Assessment
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
GAMAQI Guide for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts GHG greenhouse gas
gpm gallons per minute
HCD California Department of Housing and Community Development IS/MND Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
JADU Junior Accessory Dwelling Unit
LAFCo Local Agency Formation Commission
Ldn Day-Night Average Sound Level
LID Low Impact Development
LOS Level of Service
mgd million gallons per day
MS4 Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System
NESHAP National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants NOx nitrogen oxides
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
PG&E Pacific Gas and Electric Company

vi
PM10 particulate matter 10 micrometers or less in diameter PM2.5 particulate matter 2.5 micrometers or less in diameter RHNA Regional Housing Needs Allocation
ROG reactive organic gases
RTP Regional Transportation Plan
RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board
SB Senate Bill
SJCOG San Joaquin Council of Governments
SJMSCP San Joaquin County Multi-Species Open Space and Habitat Conservation Plan
SJVAPCD San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District SSJID South San Joaquin Irrigation District
STC Sound Transmission Class
SWMP Storm Water Management Program
SWPPP Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
SWRCB State Water Resources Control Board
TAC toxic air contaminant
USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
VERA Voluntary Emission Reduction Agreement
VMT vehicle miles traveled

vii
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
A. General Project Information
Project Title: Murphy Ranch Specific Plan
Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Escalon
2060 McHenry Avenue
Escalon, CA 95320
Contact Person and Phone Number: Diana Trejo, Assistant Planner 209-691-7422
Project Location: Southeast of intersection of State Route 120 and Brennan Avenue west of Escalon; APNs 225-040-
28 and 225-040-29.

Project Sponsor Name and Address: Florsheim Homes
1701 W. March Lane, Suite D
Stockton, CA 95207
General Plan Designation: Low Density Residential (City) Low Density Residential (County)
Zoning: AU-20: Agriculture-Urban Reserve, 20-acre
minimum (County)
Project Description: The project proposes City approval of a Specific Plan to guide the development of two parcels
totaling 18.00 acres, which are proposed to be
subdivided into 72 lots for single-family residential
development. Approximately 1.10 acres would be
set aside in the southeastern corner of the project
site for a combined park and drainage basin. To
implement the Specific Plan, the project also
includes a Tentative Subdivision Map that would
subdivide the two parcels in accordance with the
proposed Specific Plan. The project would require
annexation of the two parcels to the City of Escalon
along with pre-zoning by the City, which would
pre-zone the project site as PD, Planned
Development.

Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: The project site is in unincorporated San Joaquin County adjacent to the western city limits of

viii
Escalon. Existing single-family residential
development is located east and south of the project
site. Agricultural lands with associated buildings
and scattered rural residential development are
located west and north of the site. These nearby
lands are designated for commercial development
in the Escalon General Plan. Railroad tracks owned
by the Union Pacific Railroad run along the
northern boundary of the project site. Adjacent to
and north of these tracks is State Route 120.

Other Public Agencies Whose
Approval is Required: San Joaquin Local Agency Formation Commission (annexation)
Have California Native American Requesting tribes have been notified; no tribes traditionally and culturally consultation has been requested by the tribes. affiliated with the project area
requested consultation pursuant to
Public Resources Code Section
21080.3.1? If so, has consultation
begun?
B. Environmental Factors Potentially Affected
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a “Potentially Significant Impact” prior to mitigation, as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
!" Aesthetics !" Agriculture/Forestry
Resources
!" Air Quality
Biological Resources Cultural Resources !" Energy
Geology/Soils !" Greenhouse Gas Emissions Hazards/Hazardous Materials
!" Hydrology/Water Quality !" Land Use !" Mineral Resources Noise !" Population/Housing !" Public Services
!" Recreation !" Transportation Tribal Cultural Resources !" Utilities/Service Systems Wildfire !" Mandatory Findings of Significance

ix
C. Lead Agency Determination
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
⬜ I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. 🔳 I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
⬜ I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
⬜ I find that the proposed project MAY have a “potentially significant impact” or “potentially significant unless mitigated” impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. ⬜ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.

CITY OF ESCALON

Jaylen French, City Manager Date
■
■
■
■
■

Murphy Ranch Specific Plan IS/MND 1-1 September 2025

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Project Brief
This document is an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) for the Murphy Ranch Specific Plan Project (project) which is adjacent to and west of Escalon, California. The 18.00-acre project site is located near the southeast corner of the intersection of Brennan Avenue and State Route 120 (Figures 1-1 to 1-5). The project applicant is Florsheim Homes. This IS/MND has been prepared in compliance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). For the purposes of CEQA, the City of Escalon (City) is the Lead Agency for the project.

The project proposes a Specific Plan to guide development of two adjacent parcels into 72 lots on which single-family residences would be constructed. A park/retention basin would be installed in the southeast corner of the site. Access to the proposed development would be from extensions of Celivo Way and Riesling Way north of California Street. Water, sewer, and storm drainage services would be provided by the City of Escalon upon anticipated annexation to the City. A Tentative Subdivision Map is proposed to permit the proposed residential development of the two parcels in accordance with the Specific Plan.

The project would require Specific Plan and Tentative Subdivision Map approval from the City Council with a recommendation from the Planning Commission, along with annexation approval by the San Joaquin Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo) with pre-zoning by the City. The applicant would enter into a Development Agreement with the City.

1.2 Purpose of Initial Study
CEQA requires that public agencies consider and document the potential environmental effects of the agency’s actions that meet CEQA’s definition of a “project.” Briefly summarized, a “project” is an action that has the potential to result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment. A project includes the agency’s direct activities as well as activities that involve public agency approvals or funding. Guidelines for an agency’s implementation of CEQA are found in the CEQA Guidelines (Title 14, Chapter 3 of the California Code of Regulations).

Provided that a project is not exempt from CEQA, the first step in the agency’s consideration of its potential environmental effects is the preparation of an Initial Study.

The purpose of an Initial Study is to determine whether the project would involve “significant” environmental effects as defined by CEQA and to describe feasible mitigation measures that would avoid significant effects or reduce them to a level that would be less than significant. If the Initial Study does not identify significant effects, or if it identifies mitigation measures that would reduce all the significant effects of the project to a lessthan-significant level, then the agency prepares a Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration. If the project would involve significant effects that cannot be readily

Murphy Ranch Specific Plan IS/MND 1-2 September 2025
mitigated, then the agency must prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR). The agency may also decide to proceed directly with the preparation of an EIR without preparation of an Initial Study.

The Murphy Ranch project is a “project” as defined by CEQA and is not exempt from CEQA consideration. The City has determined that the project involves the potential for significant environmental effects and requires preparation of this Initial Study. The Initial Study describes the proposed project and its environmental setting, it discusses the potentially significant environmental effects of the project, and it identifies feasible mitigation measures that would avoid the potentially significant environmental effects of the project or reduce them to a level that would be less than significant. The Initial Study considers the project’s potential for significant environmental effects in the following subject areas:
● Aesthetics
● Agricultural Resources
● Air Quality
● Biological Resources
● Cultural Resources
● Energy
● Geology and Soils
● Greenhouse Gas Emissions
● Hazards and Hazardous
Materials
● Hydrology and Water Quality
● Land Use and Planning
● Mineral Resources
● Noise
● Population and Housing
● Public Services
● Recreation
● Transportation/Traffic
● Tribal Cultural Resources
● Utilities and Service Systems
● Wildfire
● Mandatory Findings of
Significance
The Initial Study concludes that the project would have significant environmental effects, but that recommended mitigation measures would reduce all these effects to a level that would be less than significant. As a result, the City has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration and notified the public of the City’s intent to adopt the IS/MND. A copy of the City’s Notice of Intent is shown just inside the cover of this document. As of the distribution of the IS/MND for public review, the applicant has accepted all the recommended mitigation measures. The time available for comment on the IS/MND is shown in the Notice of Intent prepared for the project.

1.3 Project Background
The project site is in unincorporated San Joaquin County adjacent to a developed area of western Escalon. The property is comprised of two contiguous parcels. The smaller parcel, occupying the northwest corner of the property, contains a residence (18092 Brennan Avenue) in the northeast corner of the parcel and several dilapidated sheds and shade structures that surround the residence. A second residence (18112 Brennan Avenue) is in the southwest portion of the larger parcel. An animal barn of concrete masonry unit construction is also located in the southwest portion of the property, southeast of the southern residence near the southern property boundary. The remainder of the project site

Murphy Ranch Specific Plan IS/MND 1-3 September 2025
is vacant and is predominantly in use for livestock pasture. The project site has been used for agricultural production but appears to have been fallow since 1993 (Baez Geotechnical Group 2023a).

Single-family residential development has occurred east and south of the project site.

Adjacent to and north of the project site are State Route 120 and railroad tracks operated by the Union Pacific Railroad. Beyond the tracks and the highway are agricultural fields and limited residential and commercial development. Agricultural land is also located west of the project site, across Brennan Avenue.

The Escalon General Plan, adopted in 2005 and updated in 2010 and 2019, has designated the project site for Low Density Residential use. However, the project site is currently unincorporated under the planning jurisdiction of San Joaquin County. However, the San Joaquin County General Plan, adopted in 2016, also designates the site for Low Density Residential development. The existing zoning for the project site is AU-20, AgricultureUrban Reserve, 20-acre minimum parcel size. The Agriculture-Urban Reserve zone is intended to retain in agriculture those areas planned for future urban development in order to facilitate compact, orderly urban development and to assure the proper timing and economical provision of services and utilities.

The Escalon General Plan Housing Element, an element of the Escalon General Plan, was adopted in 2019. Escalon was allocated a new construction need of 425 housing units in the San Joaquin County Regional Housing Needs Plan, prepared by the San Joaquin Council of Governments (SJCOG), for the 2014 to 2023 planning period. Of the allocated housing units, 192 are for above moderate-income households, while the remainder is allotted to housing for moderate- and lower-income households. As of adoption of the Housing Element, 7 moderate-income and 37 above moderate-income units have been constructed, with an additional 6 above moderate-income units under construction and 9 moderate-income units entitled (City of Escalon 2019a).

In 2022, the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) approved the Regional Housing Needs Plan submitted by SJCOG for the 6th Cycle Housing Element, 2023-2031. Under this new plan, Escalon was allocated a new construction need of 367 housing units. Of these allocated housing units, 90 are identified for very low-income households, 56 for low-income households, 66 for moderate-income households, and 155 for above moderate-income households (SJCOG 2022c). It is expected that the Housing Element will be updated accordingly.

1.4 Environmental Evaluation Checklist Terminology
The project’s potential environmental effects are evaluated in the Environmental Evaluation Checklist shown in Chapter 3.0. The checklist includes a list of environmental considerations against which the project is evaluated. For each question, the City determines whether the project would involve: 1) a Potentially Significant Impact, 2) a Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated, 3) a Less Than Significant Impact, or 4) No Impact.

Murphy Ranch Specific Plan IS/MND 1-4 September 2025
A Potentially Significant Impact occurs when there is substantial evidence that the project could involve a substantial adverse change to the physical environment; i.e., that the environmental effect may be significant, and mitigation measures have not been defined that would reduce the impact to a less than significant level. If there is at least one Potentially Significant Impact identified in the Initial Study, an EIR is required unless mitigation can be applied.

An environmental effect that is Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated is a Potentially Significant Impact that can be avoided or reduced to a level that is less than significant with the application of mitigation measures.

A Less Than Significant Impact occurs when the project would involve effects on an area of environmental concern, but the project would not involve a substantial adverse change to the physical environment and no mitigation measures are required.

A determination of No Impact is self-explanatory.

There are certain existing regulatory requirements that have been established by the City and other agencies with jurisdiction, which are routinely implemented in conjunction with new development; these measures have a mitigating effect that would have the potential to reduce or avoid the potential environmental impacts of a project. These requirements are described in this IS/MND as a part of the existing regulatory setting. If these requirements are not considered adequate to reduce or avoid an environmental impact, this IS/MND identifies additional mitigation measures needed to address the impact. These mitigation measures are described in the appropriate technical section of Chapter 3.0 and are summarized in Table 1-1. All mitigation measures described in this IS/MND are considered feasible and would reduce potentially significant environmental effects of the project to a level that would be less than significant. As of the publication of the Notice of Intent, these mitigation measures have been accepted by the project applicant.

1.5 Summary of Environmental Effects and Mitigation Measures The pages following the figures contain Table 1-1, Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures. The table summarizes the results of the Environmental Checklist Form and associated narrative discussion of the project’s potential environmental effects in Chapter

3.0. The potential environmental impacts of the proposed project are summarized in the left-most column of this table. The projected level of significance of each impact without mitigation is indicated in the second column. Mitigation measures proposed to minimize significant environmental effects are shown in the third column, and the significance of the impact, after mitigation measures are applied, is shown in the fourth column.

BaseCamp
BaseCamp Environmental
San Diego Imperial
Orange
Riverside
San Bernardino
Ventura Los Angeles
Santa Barbara
Kern San Luis
Obispo
Inyo
Tulare
Kings Monterey
Fresno
San
Benito
Mono
Madera
Mariposa
Tuolumne
Calaveras
Amador
El Dorado
Sacramento
Alpine
Santa
Clara
San
Joaquin
Contra
Costa
Merced
Marin
Napa
Yolo
Solano
Sutter
Sonoma
Stanislaus Alameda
Santa Cruz
San Mateo
San Francisco
www.csac.counties.org
Figure 1-1

REGIONAL LOCATION MAP
Figure 1-1

REGIONAL LOCATION MAP

CITY OF ESCALON

PROJECT SITE
~! ................. ,,.,.!
lj. ••••••• ~
....... :
............. -. -
-...
' ~.:
;,. ........ :..

BaseCamp
Figure 1-2
BaseCamp Environmental STREET MAP

PROJECT SITE
SOURCE: Google Maps
, .. ,••••••• .. ·••••••• .. •• .. ••• .. u••••••• .. ••••• .. •• .. •• .. •••••••••• ................. -.J. : California St Callfo,_.,.
n ~~
d:,
iii
;
::r
~
m
f Farinel[I Pkwi,
Ci!
1stSl
Sultana Way
1st St
:a:, 0......... 11t•••••••••••••••flt•••••••••••••••••• ........... ~1•1t111-.•••'". . ...
a
Ill
g
...
u
Gh1.:Jreh of Ct
:E Northwood St Ot
Chablis Dr
-:a t.
'!.
i
,..
l
1\1
Yoga Liz!:
&Goa
~ 1StS1.
n
m
:::?.

IC
::JI
i;p.
~
Ill
::
l'okay Ave ~
El

BaseCamp
Figure 1-3
BaseCamp Environmental USGS MAP

PROJECT SITE
SOURCE: USGS Quadrangle Map, Avena CA , 2021
c:::s r-,, - ]:-
!E
:!Ji
~
r'\ 0,
irr, :,;j, 11"1'1 i:::i,
31 ::I:,
;.t)
0 ~--ESCALO
S1 ~
::,.,
-.:i:;
~
~ - ...
~ •
6 ULL.REY AVE

CLOUG, AVE

BaseCamp
Figure 1-4
BaseCamp Environmental AERIAL PHOTO

PROJECT SITE
SOURCE: Google Earth

Figure 1-5
BaseCamp Environmental ASSESSOR PARCEL MAP
PROJECT SITE 31
6 ...
(Bk\
~
I
I
'
~
FAR/NEi
~;(( sl ~(Ni'IN.;:::;::::;:::'.ri
Tm4 JJ.L_ WAY
·1~ - 25
~---
(_) - ~. CT.
11-----.&--~,,,;:,,_,,;:;,.---'-.J...."-t---r,

I '-'--'---'
I
h,
II
I
I
I
I I .

3. I ~ ~I" i 1 ~,.·
l
I~ ... l ~

1. illl,l.f'
+-lJAHLIN Ai-£
TfllS MAP IS FOR
ASSfSSMfN:r US£ ONLY 225-04
POR. SECTION 5, T.2S. R.9£., M.D.B.&M.
·"'-
,,
( !
~
~ -.:
18 11
JrHr.t::$
PARC{I 2
AVENU[
.f:i'JE
:Ii~ © t1~ '"'
~,~·
II~.,,,,,_ (v '°""' """'r /Qll'f"""
"'..,..

MX.1'-
S.WJJ'I.. ~· ,,.,..
iii
~
8 I~
1l;
Iii
"' fl
6 l; '
11 @
IAE.CM.fi.S: nn'OF N' ,/Z(#;l'c! 1/<ft;f' ~
- P. ;,. Bk. 25 Pq. 155 _ - f' M, 8k. 2!> Pg, I~
C - R. S. !Ile. Zl Pg. f.50
E' - R. S. Bk. 1f Pg. f.5.J
A - P. "'- 111<-05 Pg. ftl2
NO'JE: A8-!h:3,ssor's P<N-<:61 Hamb&ni SQo,..n #t C;rohJ& As:sitS!iO("s 9",'od N.umt:ie,rs Sf'iOW/1 iD ipet:18..

HOtES'T ,V.M. I.SEO
"'E.t.=t P~R.. ~ P.t-.R.. I, ~"'-~ .,.., ,, 87-88
p-,., " " f'f--11 ,, t.f-J~ "
Assessor's Map Bk.225 Pg. 04
County of San Joaquin, Calif.

TABLE 1-1

SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Murphy Ranch Specific Plan IS/MND 1-10 September 2025
Potential Impact
Significance
Before Mitigation
Measures Mitigation Measures
Significance
After Mitigation
Measures

3.1 AESTHETICS
a) Scenic Vistas LS None required -
b) Scenic Resources LS None required -
c) Visual Character and Quality LS None required -
d) Light and Glare LS None required -

3.2 AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES
a) Agricultural Land Conversion LS None required -
b) Agricultural Zoning and Williamson Act LS None required - c, d) Forest Land Conversion and Zoning NI None required - e) Indirect Conversion of Farmland of Forest Land NI None required -

3.3 AIR QUALITY
a) Air Quality Plan Consistency LS None required -
b) Cumulative Emissions LS None required -
c) Exposure of Sensitive Receptors to Pollutants LS None required - d) Odors and Other Emissions NI None required

3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
a) Special-Status Species LS None required -
b) Riparian and Other Sensitive Habitats NI None required - c) State and Federal Jurisdictional Wetlands LS None required -

TABLE 1-1

SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Murphy Ranch Specific Plan IS/MND 1-11 September 2025
Potential Impact
Significance
Before Mitigation
Measures Mitigation Measures
Significance
After Mitigation
Measures
d) Fish and Wildlife Movement LS None required -
e) Local Biological Requirements NI None required -
f) Conflict with Habitat Conservation Plans NI None required -

3.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES
a) Historical Resources PS CULT-1: Prior to final site plan approval, a qualified architectural historian shall review the two existing structures on the project site and provide a report on their historical significance. If one or both structures are determined to be a significant historical resource, then the architectural historian shall provide in the report recommendations on the disposition of the identified resource, which shall be incorporated within the final site plans or made conditions of approval for the project.

LS
b) Archaeological Resources PS CULT-2: If any subsurface cultural resources are encountered during project construction, all construction activities within 50 feet of the encounter shall be halted until a qualified archaeologist can examine these materials, determine their significance, and, if significant, recommend mitigation measures that would reduce potential effects to a level that is less than significant. Recommended measures could include, but are not limited to, 1) preservation in place, or 2) excavation, recovery, and curation by qualified professionals. The City of Escalon Community
Development Department shall be notified, and the project developer shall be responsible for retaining qualified professionals, implementing recommended mitigation
measures, and documenting mitigation efforts in a written report to the City’s Community Development Department,
consistent with the requirements of the CEQA Guidelines. If burial resources or tribal cultural resources are discovered, the City shall notify the appropriate tribal representative, LS

TABLE 1-1

SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Murphy Ranch Specific Plan IS/MND 1-12 September 2025
Potential Impact
Significance
Before Mitigation
Measures Mitigation Measures
Significance
After Mitigation
Measures
who may examine the materials with the archaeologist and advise the City as to their significance and disposition. c) Human Burials LS None required -

3.6 ENERGY
a) Project Energy Consumption LS None required -
b) Consistency with Energy Plans. LS None required -

3.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
a-i) Fault Rupture Hazards NI None required -
a-ii, iii) Seismic Hazards LS None required -
a-iv) Landslides NI None required -
b) Soil Erosion PS GEO-1: Prior to commencement of construction activity, the developer shall prepare and implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for the project and file a Notice of Intent with the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) in compliance with the Construction General Permit and City of Escalon storm water
requirements. The SWPPP shall be available on the construction site at all times. The developer shall incorporate an Erosion Control Plan consistent with all applicable provisions of the SWPPP within the site improvement and building plans. The developer also shall submit the SWRCB Waste Discharger’s Identification Number to the City prior to approval of development or grading plans.

LS
c) Geologic Instability PS GEO-2: The project shall incorporate into its design and construction the recommendations of the geotechnical LS

TABLE 1-1

SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Murphy Ranch Specific Plan IS/MND 1-13 September 2025
Potential Impact
Significance
Before Mitigation
Measures Mitigation Measures
Significance
After Mitigation
Measures
report Geotechnical Investigation, Murphy Ranch
Residential Subdivision, 18092 & 18112 Brennan Road, Escalon, California, prepared by Baez Geotechnical Group on August 31, 2023, or a comparable study. The design and construction plans shall be reviewed by the City for consistency with the recommendations in the geotechnical report and shall be approved prior to final subdivision map approval.
d) Expansive Soils NI None required -
e) Adequacy of Soils for Wastewater Disposal NI None required - f) Paleontological Resources and Unique Geological
Features
PS GEO-3: If any subsurface paleontological resources are encountered during construction of the project, all construction activities within 50 feet of the encounter shall be halted until a qualified paleontologist can examine these materials, determine their significance and, if significant, recommend further mitigation measures that would
reduce potential effects to a level that is less than significant. Recommended measures may include, but are
not limited to, 1) preservation in place, or 2) excavation, recovery, and curation by qualified professionals. The City of Escalon Community Development Department shall be
notified, and the project developer shall be responsible for retaining qualified professionals, implementing
recommended mitigation measures, and documenting
mitigation efforts in a written report to the City’s Community Development Department, consistent with the
requirements of the CEQA Guidelines.

LS

3.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
a, b) Project GHG Emissions and Consistency with
GHG Reduction Plans
LS None required -

TABLE 1-1

SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Murphy Ranch Specific Plan IS/MND 1-14 September 2025
Potential Impact
Significance
Before Mitigation
Measures Mitigation Measures
Significance
After Mitigation
Measures

3.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
a) Hazardous Material Transport, Use, and Storage LS None required - b) Release of Hazardous Materials PS HAZ-1: Prior to the start of demolition of the residences and the barn, the contractor shall screen for the presence of asbestos-containing building materials in and around these structures. If asbestos-containing building materials are found, then a demolition permit from the City shall include a Demolition Permit Release Form from the SJVAPCD prior to its issuance. The Demolition Permit Release Form certifies that the proposed demolition complies with the requirements of the National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP), which govern asbestos removal, and with SJVAPCD Rule 4002. All of the regulated asbestos abatement shall be completed by a state-certified asbestos abatement contractor prior to the start of demolition.

HAZ-2: Prior to the start of demolition of the residences and the barn, the contractor shall screen for the presence of lead-based paints in and around these structures. If leadbased paints are found, then they shall be removed in accordance with the California Code of Regulations, Title 17, Division 1, Chapter 8, Sections 35001-36100. This requires that work on any structure built before January 1, 1978 must use lead-safe work practices, including containment and cleaning the work area after the project is completed. The regulations also cover accreditation of training providers and certification of individuals to perform lead abatement and set work practice standards for lead hazard evaluations and the abatement of lead hazards. The lead-based paint abatement shall be
completed prior to the start of demolition.

LS

TABLE 1-1

SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Murphy Ranch Specific Plan IS/MND 1-15 September 2025
Potential Impact
Significance
Before Mitigation
Measures Mitigation Measures
Significance
After Mitigation
Measures
c) Hazardous Materials Releases near Schools NI None required - d) Hazardous Materials Sites LS None required -
e) Public Airport Operations NI None required -
f) Emergency Response and Evacuations PS HAZ-3: Prior to the start of project construction, the developer shall prepare and implement a Traffic Control Plan, which shall include such items as traffic control requirements, resident notification of access closure, and daily access restoration. The contractor shall specify dates and times of road closures or restrictions, if any, and shall ensure that adequate access will be provided for emergency vehicles. The Traffic Control Plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City Department of Public Works and shall be coordinated with the Escalon Police Department and the Escalon Consolidated Fire Protection District if construction will require road closures or lane restrictions.

LS
g) Wildland Fire Hazards NI None required -

3.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
a) Surface Water Quality LS None required _
b) Groundwater Supplies and Recharge LS None required - c-i, ii, iii) Drainage Patterns and Runoff LS None required - c-iv) Flood Flows NI None required -
d) Other Flooding Hazards LS None required -
e) Conflict with Water Quality or Groundwater
Plans
NI None required -

TABLE 1-1

SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Murphy Ranch Specific Plan IS/MND 1-16 September 2025
Potential Impact
Significance
Before Mitigation
Measures Mitigation Measures
Significance
After Mitigation
Measures

3.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING
a) Division of Established Communities NI None required - b) Conflicts with Plans, Policies and Regulations Mitigating Environmental Effects
LS None required -

3.12 MINERAL RESOURCES
a, b) Availability of Mineral Resources NI None required -

3.13 NOISE
a) Exposure to Noise Exceeding Local Standards PS NOISE-1: The project shall install a noise barrier at the locations identified in Figure 2 in the report Environmental Noise Assessment, Murphy Ranch Residential Development Escalon, California, prepared by Bollard Acoustical Consultants September 8, 2023. The noise barriers could take the form of masonry wall, earthen berm, or a combination of the two. A wood or wood composite fence
would also be a sufficient noise barrier, provided that the fence slats overlap by a minimum of two inches and are screwed to the framing rather than nailed.

NOISE-2: For the lots identified in green in Figure 2 in the Bollard Acoustical report, the project shall install window and door assembly upgrades of Sound Transmission Class
(STC) 32 for any upper floors of residences. At the firstfloor building facades and at second-floor building facades further removed from roadway and railroad without an annotated STC rating recommendation on Figure 2,
standard STC 27 window and door assemblies would be adequate.

NOISE-3: All equipment used on the construction site during all project phases shall be fitted with mufflers in LS

TABLE 1-1

SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Murphy Ranch Specific Plan IS/MND 1-17 September 2025
Potential Impact
Significance
Before Mitigation
Measures Mitigation Measures
Significance
After Mitigation
Measures
accordance with manufacturers’ specifications. Mufflers shall be installed on construction equipment at all times on the construction site.
b) Exposure to Groundborne Vibration or Noise LS None required - c) Public Airport and Private Airstrip Noise NI None required -

3.14 POPULATION AND HOUSING
a) Unplanned Population Growth LS None required -
b) Displacement of Housing or People LS None required -

3.15 PUBLIC SERVICES
a) Fire Protection LS None required -
b) Police Protection LS None required -
c) Schools LS None required -
d, e) Parks and Other Public Facilities LS None required -

3.16 RECREATION
a, b) Recreational Facilities LS None required -

3.17 TRANSPORTATION
a) Conflict with Transportation Plans, Ordinances
and Policies
LS None required -

TABLE 1-1

SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Murphy Ranch Specific Plan IS/MND 1-18 September 2025
Potential Impact
Significance
Before Mitigation
Measures Mitigation Measures
Significance
After Mitigation
Measures
b) Conflict with CEQA Guidelines Section
15064.3(b)
LS None required -
c) Traffic Hazards LS None required -
d) Emergency Access LS None required -

3.18 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
a, b) Tribal Cultural Resources PS Mitigation Measure CULT-1. LS

3.19 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
a) Relocation or Construction of New Facilities LS None required - b) Water Systems and Supply LS None required -
c) Wastewater Treatment Capacity LS None required -
d, e) Solid Waste Services LS None required -

3.20 WILDFIRE
a) Emergency Response Plans and Emergency
Evacuation Plans
PS Mitigation Measure HAZ-1. LS
b) Exposure of Project Occupants to Wildfire
Hazards
NI None required -
c) Installation and Maintenance of Infrastructure NI None required - d) Risks from Runoff, Post-Fire Slope Instability, or
Drainage Changes
NI None required -

3.21 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE

TABLE 1-1

SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Murphy Ranch Specific Plan IS/MND 1-19 September 2025
Potential Impact
Significance
Before Mitigation
Measures Mitigation Measures
Significance
After Mitigation
Measures
a) Findings on Biological and Cultural Resources PS Mitigation measures in Sections 3.4 and 3.5. LS b) Findings on Individually Limited but
Cumulatively Considerable Impacts
LS None required -
c) Findings on Adverse Effects on Human Beings LS None required - Notes: NI = No Impact; LS = Less Than Significant; PS = Potentially Significant

Murphy Ranch Specific Plan IS/MND 2-1 September 2025

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

2.1 Project Location
The project site is located immediately west of the City of Escalon, near the southeastern corner of the intersection of State Route 120 and Brennan Avenue (see Figures 1-1 to 1-5).

The 18.00-acre project site is on two adjacent parcels identified as Assessor's Parcel Number (APN) 225-040-28 and APN 225-040-29. The site is shown on the U.S.

Geological Survey’s Avena, California, 7.5-minute quadrangle map as within Section 5, Township 2 South, Range 9 East, Mt. Diablo Base and Meridian. The approximate latitude and longitude of the project site is 37º 47' 52" North and 121º 42' 00" West, respectively.

2.2 Project Details
The project proposes City approval of a Specific Plan that would guide the development of the identified two parcels, currently located in unincorporated San Joaquin County and totaling 18.00 acres. For the purposes of this CEQA document, the project site is the Specific Plan area.

The Specific Plan proposes the subdivision of the two parcels into 72 lots that would allow for the subsequent development of detached single-family homes (Figure 2-1). The homes would have a diverse mix of architectural styles and would be constructed on lots ranging in size from 6,048 square feet to 10,172 square feet. The Specific Plan adheres to the development standards listed for the R-1, Low Density Residential District as set forth in the Escalon Zoning Ordinance Section 17.14.040, including:
• Minimum lot area 6,000 square feet for interior lots and 7,000 square feet for corner lots.
• Minimum density of two/maximum density of six dwelling units per net acre. • Maximum building lot coverage 65 percent.
• Minimum lot frontage 60 feet for interior lots, 70 feet for corner lots, 30 feet for cul-de-sac lots.
• Minimum lot depth 90 feet.
• Maximum height two stories, not exceeding 35 feet.

The Specific Plan also defines various setback requirements depending on residence layout, and minimum floor areas depending on number of bedrooms per unit. The Specific Plan allows Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units (JADUs) in compliance with California Government Code Sections 65852.2 and 65852.22.

The Specific Plan contains design guidelines that would apply to residential development.

Three housing styles would be allowed: Boutique, Ranch, and Vineyard. Elements of each style are defined in the Specific Plan, along with design standards for other features such as walls and fences. In accordance with City requirements, a wood fence approximately

Murphy Ranch Specific Plan IS/MND 2-2 September 2025
seven feet in height would be installed along the southern and eastern boundaries of the project site that are adjacent to existing residences outside the site.

Approximately 1.10 acres in the southeastern corner of the Specific Plan area have been designated as a park site, adjacent to the existing Shadowood Park managed by the City of Escalon. The park acreage meets the minimum required park land as set forth in Escalon Municipal Code Section 16.02.330. The park site would serve dual uses as a park and a storm drainage basin to collect and detain drainage anticipated to be generated by project development. The park site would expand the existing Shadowood Park and enlarge the existing storm drainage basin to accommodate runoff from the proposed development. A split-face masonry wall, approximately six feet in height, would be placed along the western, northern, and eastern boundaries of the park.

Access
Access to the Specific Plan area is proposed from extensions of existing Celivo Way and Riesling Way, both of which currently end just north of California Street (Figure 2-2). All new streets would have curb, gutter, and sidewalk installed in accordance with City specifications and with Escalon Municipal Code Chapter 12.04.

An internal street loop connecting to these street extensions would provide access to each lot. For the portion of the loop adjacent to the Union Pacific railroad tracks, a “parkway street” would be developed (Figure 2-3). The parkway street, to be constructed within a 50-foot right-of-way, would consist of two travel lanes: one 10 feet wide, and the other 14 feet wide. North of the travel lanes would be an 11-foot-wide parkway, which would be landscaped. A portion of this landscaped area would be set aside for future use as a bore pit for the future installation of water and sewer lines beneath SR 120. The date of this installation has not been determined. A masonry wall, approximately eight feet tall, would separate the parkway from the tracks. On the south side of the parkway street, an on-street space approximately eight feet wide would be available for parking, and a sidewalk approximately 5.5 feet wide would be installed next to the parking area.

The remaining loop would be constructed as a local residential street. This portion of the loop would also be constructed within a 50-foot right-of-way, but the two travel lanes would each be 10 feet wide. An on-street area for parking, approximately eight feet wide, would be available on both sides, along with a sidewalk approximately 5.5 feet wide.

The Celivo Way extension to the project site would be constructed within a 50-foot rightof-way. The extension would consist of two travel lanes, each 12 feet wide. On each side of the travel lane area, a four-foot-wide shoulder, a four-foot-wide parkway, and a fivefoot-wide sidewalk would be installed. The Riesling Way extension would be constructed within a 54-foot right-of-way. Like the Celivo Way extension, there would be two travel lanes 12 feet in width. Each side of the travel lane area would have a shoulder, parkway, and sidewalk of the same width as the Celivo Way extension, except the parkways associated with the Riesling Way extension would be six feet in width.

The proposed improvements by the project along its Brennan Avenue frontage would occur within an existing 78-foot right-of-way. They would consist of a 12-footwide travel lane,

Murphy Ranch Specific Plan IS/MND 2-3 September 2025
a seven-foot landscape strip, an 8-foot-wide pedestrian/bicycle trail, and another landscape strip seven feet in width. A masonry wall, approximately six feet in height, would be placed adjacent to this landscape strip, thus separating the Brennan Avenue frontage from the remainder of the project site. A raised median that would eventually be expanded to 10 feet in width is proposed in the center of Brennan Avenue. The Brennan Avenue frontage would have curb, gutter, and sidewalk installed in accordance with City specifications and with Escalon Municipal Code Chapter 12.04.

Utilities
All public utilities would be installed underground within 10-foot-wide easements, provided along public street frontages, and in accordance with City of Escalon standards.

Water and sewer services would be provided to the project by the City of Escalon. The project would connect to existing City water and sewer lines beneath California Street, Riesling Way, and Celivo Way. These connections would be contingent on the annexation of the project site to the City, which would be pursued in a separate action following City Specific Plan and Tentative Map approvals. An 8-inch diameter looped water line would be installed in the future planned streets. New sewer lines, also installed in the streets, would connect to existing 8-inch diameter sewer lines. water and sewer lines would be constructed in conformance with the City’s Water System and Sewer System Master Plans, respectively.

Storm drainage would be collected from the project by on-site drainage lines that would ultimately connect to the proposed detention basin. The new basin would expand the capacity of the existing and adjacent Shadowood Park basin. The storm drainage system would be designed and constructed in accordance with City standards and with the City’s Storm Drainage Ordinance (Escalon Municipal Code Chapter 13.15).

The project would connect to existing electrical and natural gas lines provided by Modesto Irrigation District and Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E), respectively. Street lighting would be installed in accordance with City standards.

Other Project Features
The project proposes the installation of landscaping on the residential lots and along the internal street and the Brennan Avenue project site frontage (Figure 2-4). Landscaping would be installed in the front of the residential lots, with shrubs that provide screening.

Street landscaping would consist mainly of street trees planted at specific intervals along both sides of the streets. The parkway area in the north is proposed to be planted with shrubs and low groundcover along with trees. The Brennan Avenue frontage would have a variety of trees, grasses, and low groundcover. Landscape design will be required to comply with the landscape standards set forth in the Escalon Municipal Code.

The park/basin area would consist of mostly grass turf, with smaller trees planted along the proposed loop and larger shade trees within the site. A concrete path and a picnic table area would be installed. A hard court is proposed for installation in the northeast corner of the park.

Murphy Ranch Specific Plan IS/MND 2-4 September 2025
Tentative Subdivision Map
As part of implementation of the Specific Plan, the project proposes a Tentative Subdivision Map that would subdivide the two parcels into the 72 proposed single-family residential lots and the lot for the park/basin (see Figure 2-1). The map would dedicate nine feet of roadway right-of-way along the Brennan Avenue frontage of the project site for road widening, so that the improved street matches the existing Brennan Avenue roadway configuration south of the project site.

All improvements proposed in the Tentative Subdivision Map will conform to the City of Escalon Improvement Standards. Public utilities would be installed underground in easements. Proposed street lighting will be installed in accordance with City standards.

Project Construction
It is anticipated that project construction would generally be conducted in three stages. The first stage would include the demolition of the existing on-site structures, grading, excavation and site preparation, and installation of utilities. The first stage would be followed by installation of streets, sidewalks, and landscaping. Installation of improvements would be followed by new home construction on individual lots. Types of construction equipment expected to be used at the site include dozers, backhoes, loaders, forklifts, cranes, haul trucks, and graders.

Existing buildings, structures, wells, and septic tanks shall be removed in accordance with the standards of San Joaquin County and the City of Escalon. All encroachment of structures, including fencing, berms, irrigation lines, and power lines, shall be removed unless otherwise conditioned by the City. An existing electrical building owned by the Union Pacific Railroad that is in the northwestern corner of the project site would be relocated within the railroad right-of-way.

2.3 Permits and Approvals
The Specific Plan requires the approval of the Escalon City Council upon recommendation by the Escalon Planning Commission. In accordance with Escalon Municipal Code Section

17.49.080, public hearings on the Specific Plan will be held by both the Planning Commission and the City Council. Should it be approved, the Specific Plan will serve as the implementation tool for the City’s General Plan as well as City zoning for the Specific Plan area.

Like the Specific Plan, the Tentative Subdivision Map would be submitted to the Escalon Planning Commission for its review and recommendation to City Council. In accordance with Escalon Municipal Code Section 16.04.080(E), the Planning Commission must find that the proposed subdivision is consistent with the Escalon General Plan, that the site is suitable for the proposed type and density of development, and that the subdivision design and proposed improvements would not substantially damage the environment or cause serious public health issues, among other findings. Also, in accordance with Municipal Code Section 16.04.080(F), a Tentative Subdivision Map shall not be recommended for approval unless the Planning Commission finds that the proposed subdivision complies

Murphy Ranch Specific Plan IS/MND 2-5 September 2025
with Municipal Code Section 16.02.300, which requires the design of a subdivision to provide, to the extent feasible, for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities within the subdivision. Final approval of the map would come from the Escalon City Council.

As noted, the project site is within the unincorporated area of San Joaquin County. For the City to provide services, the project site must be annexed to the City of Escalon. Proposed annexations are submitted to the San Joaquin LAFCo, which must review and decide upon the annexation request including its consistency with state and local LAFCo policies and standards. In determining the appropriateness of a proposed annexation, LAFCo considers whether the project would constitute a logical expansion of a city boundary and whether a proposed annexation area would be provided with public utilities and services in an efficient manner. LAFCo’s policies with respect to proposed annexations are specified in its Change of Organization Policies and Procedures, adopted in 2007 and subsequently amended (San Joaquin LAFCo 2012).

As part of the annexation application, the City shall be required to pre-zone the project site.

It is expected that the City would pre-zone the project site as PD, Planned Development.

The use of this zone would be consistent with Escalon Municipal Code Section

17.24.060(C), which requires all new residential projects over one acre to have a PD zone.

The City of Escalon requires that any project site over five acres shall gain approval of a Specific Plan prior to annexation to the City. As a condition of approval, the applicant is required to enter into a Development Agreement with the city. Also, in accordance with Escalon Municipal Code Chapter 17.50, the project applicant shall enter into an Inclusionary Housing Agreement with the City to provide affordable housing. Section 3.14, Population and Housing, discusses affordable housing requirements in more detail.

Figure 2-1
BaseCamp Environmental PROPOSED TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP lfUl!Mll!l!ln"",P,-._~ -- ., ... l'J.:...i:o=-~~
~ ... ...... ~ ..... 1111-&ll'l.ila ... ~
• Al"W,ru:.i CD'I~ .,. ....,. .,._
...
..

Figure 2-2
BaseCamp Environmental CIRCULATION PLAN
YOSEMITE AVENUE/ HWY l2:0

IA STREET

PAIRK/IRASI N
IEXIP·ANSION
EXISTIIING L_

IP'ARK/BASIN
~
~

Figure 2-3
BaseCamp Environmental STREET SECTIONS
:,,

1.5' 15,:5,' b' 1,0 1 ~o• &1 "-"' 1.!J.t
~ ~11!1 tNI! -UH! _,Mo ~

SECTIOIN A-A
T'fP [ GA!- !!IO ' S"TREET ~-n ON

LOCAL RESIDENTIAL STREET
(c;;nY OF"~ &'IV. ~1'l!L. ie)
c:RI~ QJ;i!l!!li ""l'Y'P.

FRa£1i't "1ilJ' I
SJ I!>' I 10' I~•• I IP
91'1 -U~-.il.LHE -.il.LNE
2!1' ~ 25' - 50

SECTION C-C
1"'1'Plc:;AI. !jC' $~ $cc:;TlON

PARKWAY RESIDENTIAL STREET
2•--wu.

Nl"1H-i-RME
'Jl?Tl lflldHT ~• 1"H.I.

RA.TL'DIO
IC,l,L~nP. Kri PRlKIR'I" :E!NTR'I' HtD
6lllE'l'HiP LOT OH:.'I'

SECTION B-B
T'fl"[ GAi- !!IO' ~1'R!E!T SSG-TlON
ENTRY RESIDENnAL STREET
11 1 1• ..,,
IVin..A!~-- ~UM! LS 11111; l!follfl LS
ISHO f---n,--l---;i;i--,----1
SECTION 0-0

BRENNAN AVENUE

Figure 2-4
BaseCamp Environmental OVERALL LANDSCAPE PLAN
MU:RPHY RANCH
~ allmlD'IDlllill.
--
a&llU
EX1$;'11NG IIIMS
IiillBJ!ll
-- IIE--
-IIM,
11i1111lU

Murphy Ranch Specific Plan IS/MND 3-1 September 2025

3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
The following environmental evaluation considers the potential environmental effects of City approval of the proposed project, as described in Chapter 2.0, Project Description. The format of this evaluation is based on the Environmental Checklist presented in CEQA Guidelines Appendix G.

3.1 AESTHETICS
Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section 21099, would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? !" !" !" b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
!" !" !"
c) In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage points.) If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality?
!" !" !"
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect daytime or nighttime views in the area?
!" !" !"
Environmental Setting
The project site is mostly vacant, but a single-family residence and other structures are on the site. Vegetation, including trees, is found along the Brennan Avenue frontage. As described in Chapter 1.0, Introduction, residential development that is part of the City is east and south of the project site, while agricultural lands are to the north and west. Lands to the north are separated from the project site by State Route 120 and the railroad tracks.

Existing lighting in the project vicinity consists of street lighting along nearby residential streets and outdoor lighting from nearby residences.

The recently revised Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines mentions California Public Resources Code Section 21099, which states that the aesthetic and parking impacts of residential, mixed-use residential, or employment center projects on an infill site within a transit priority area shall not be considered significant effects under CEQA. While the project proposes residential development, it is not considered an infill project and is not in a transit priority area. Therefore, Public Resources Code Section 21099 does not apply. v
v

Murphy Ranch Specific Plan IS/MND 3-2 September 2025
Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures
a) Scenic Vistas.

Scenic vistas have been defined as vantage points with a broad and expansive view of a significant landscape feature, such as a mountain range or coastline. The project proposes residential development, structures associated with which have the potential to partially obstruct distance views. However, given their location, they would not substantially obstruct views of mountain ranges to the west and east. Project impacts on scenic vistas would be less than significant.
b) Scenic Resources.

The project site is mostly a grazing field. It has no trees or other outstanding scenic resources. According to the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) list of designated scenic highways under the California Scenic Highway Program, there are only two officially designated state scenic highways within San Joaquin County: Interstate 5 from the Stanislaus County line to Interstate 580, and Interstate 580 from Interstate 5 to the Alameda County line (Caltrans 2019). The project site is not on either of these State Scenic Highways. Neither the San Joaquin County General Plan nor the Escalon General Plan has designated any roadways in the project vicinity as scenic. Project impacts on scenic resources would be less than significant.
c) Visual Character and Quality.

As viewed from public streets and highways near the project site - Brennan Avenue and State Route 120 - the current visual quality of the project site is generally poor. The site contains mostly grasses and weeds, with some structures in the western portion. There are trees and shrubs near the western boundary of the project site with some scenic value; however, this vegetation is ornamental and not unique to the area. The project would allow for the development of new single-family residences with landscaping and a park area. The overall result may be considered a visual improvement of the project site as viewed from the nearby streets and highways.

Development on the project site would be required to comply with the design standards of the Specific Plan, which incorporates applicable provisions of Escalon Municipal Code Chapter 17.41. As discussed in Chapter 2.0, Project Description, the proposed Specific Plan sets forth general requirements for development, including building heights; fences, hedges, and walls; lighting; and landscapes. Compliance with the design guidelines of the Specific Plan would ensure that proposed development would be consistent in height and design with the existing residential development to the south and east. Project impacts on visual quality would be less than significant.

Murphy Ranch Specific Plan IS/MND 3-3 September 2025
d) Light and Glare.

The project would add lighting to a site that currently has no lights, except for limited lighting from the existing residence. As noted, there is existing street lighting and security lighting from surrounding development. Lighting associated with proposed development would be similar to that of existing residential development in the area. However, project lighting would result in substantial changes in ground level night views for residences along the project site.

Escalon Municipal Code Section 17.41.065 provides guidelines on lighting. These guidelines include that lighting fixtures located on any property in or adjacent to any residential zone shall be arranged and shielded so that the light will not shine directly on land in such residential zone, nor shall the light shine on the public roadway. Compliance with Section 17.41.065 would reduce project impacts on light and glare to a level that would be less than significant.

3.2 AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES
Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to nonagricultural use? !" !" !"
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract?
!" !" !"
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code Section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code Section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code Section 51104(g))?
!" !" !"
d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
!" !" !"
e) Involve other changes in the existing environment, which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use, or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
!" !" !"
Environmental Setting
According to topographic maps and aerial photographs, the project site was predominantly in agricultural use for vineyard, orchard tree, and row crop farming prior to 1993. Row crop farming appeared to begin prior to 1937 and continued until sometime between 1968 and 1975. Orchard tree farming appeared to begin prior to 1957 and continued until the v
v

Murphy Ranch Specific Plan IS/MND 3-4 September 2025
mid-1990s (Baez Geotechnical Group 2023a). The undeveloped portion of the project site is currently being used for cattle grazing.

As noted, agricultural fields are located north and west of the project site. However, the project site is surrounded by urban development to the south and east. Also, as noted, the project site is separated from agricultural land to the north by State Route 120 and the railroad tracks, and from agricultural lands to the west by Brennan Avenue.

The Important Farmland Maps, prepared by the California Department of Conservation as part of its Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program, designate the viability of lands for farmland use, based on the physical and chemical properties of the soils and other factors.

The maps categorize farmland, in decreasing order of soil quality, as "Prime Farmland," "Unique Farmland," and "Farmland of Statewide Importance." Collectively, these categories are referred to as “Farmland” in the CEQA Checklist in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines and in this document. There are also designations for grazing land and for urban/built-up areas, among others. According to the 2018 Important Farmland Map of San Joaquin County, the most recent map available, the project site is designated mostly as Prime Farmland, with a small portion designated as Farmland of Statewide Importance (California Department of Conservation FMMP 2018).

In processing annexation applications, the LAFCo evaluates potential impacts on prime agricultural land as defined in the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Act, which sets forth procedures for annexations. The Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Act provides several definitions of “prime agricultural land”, including land that qualifies for 80 through 100 Storie Index rating and land that qualifies, if irrigated, for rating as class I or class II in the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service land use capability classification. Under these criteria, two soil types on the project would qualify as prime agricultural land: Honcut sandy loam and Veritas fine sandy loam (see Section 3.7, Geology and Soils). These two soil types cover approximately 95% of the project site.

Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures
a) Farmland Conversion.

As noted, the project site has land designated as Prime Farmland and Farmland of Statewide Importance, both of which are Farmland as defined by CEQA Guidelines Appendix G definition of Farmland. Development of the project site would convert this Farmland to non-agricultural use. In addition, the project would convert a project site that consists mostly of prime agricultural land, as defined by the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Act, to a non-agricultural use.

The Escalon General Plan EIR analyzed potential environmental impacts of development under the General Plan. This analysis encompassed the Planning Area of the General Plan, which included the project site. The General Plan EIR concluded that conversion of Farmland was a significant and unavoidable impact of General Plan implementation, and no feasible mitigation to reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level was identified (City of Escalon 2005). A Statement of Overriding Considerations for this impact was adopted by the Escalon City Council in conjunction with adoption of the General Plan.