Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Residential Annexation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Neighbors push back on Murray Ranch subdivision; council continues annexation to address Hall Avenue access
Summary
Residents of Hall Avenue urged the council to delay action on the 217‑lot Murray Ranch annexation, citing narrow county roads, limited emergency access and underestimated traffic projections. The developer committed to construction‑traffic restrictions and speed humps; council continued the item to July 29 for staff‑community follow‑up.
The Stockton City Council on July 15 continued a proposed annexation and pre‑zoning for a 217‑lot single‑family subdivision called Murray Ranch at 2560 Hall Avenue after sustained neighborhood opposition over traffic and access.
Stephanie Ocasio, director of community development, told the council the 37.4‑acre site is designated low‑density residential in the general plan and qualifies for CEQA exemption under Public Resources Code section 15183 (consistency with a general‑plan EIR). The developer’s tentative map and environmental paperwork were recommended for approval by the Planning Commission.
But many residents who live on Hall Avenue — a narrow county pocket road with ditches, no sidewalks and limited sightlines at Mariposa Road — told the council the project’s traffic assumptions underestimate likely impacts. Tim Mora, a Hall Avenue resident, asked how a consultant could estimate only about 62 additional cars per day when the proposed development would add 217 homes and potentially double when a future phase is built.
Developer Tim Lewis Communities (representative Mike O’Hara) said the subdivision has multiple access points (Juliet, Brigham and Madrid) and that the project team will not allow construction traffic on Hall Avenue; the developer proposed installing up to three speed humps on Hall Avenue as a traffic‑calming measure and committed to building promised neighborhood parks with the subdivision.
Councilmembers pressed for clearer plans showing ingress/egress, construction access routes and community outreach; several raised emergency‑access and drainage questions. Planning staff noted that any change to the tentative map would require returning to the Planning Commission.
Council voted to continue the public hearing to July 29 to give staff, the developer and residents more time to work on access and traffic‑calming solutions.
What’s next: Staff will return with updated exhibits and any agreed conditions, and the developer said it would consider conditional design changes that preserve emergency access while limiting Hall Avenue’s role as a primary route.
