CC Resolution 8574
. . \.. ..
RESOLUTION NO. 8574
BEING A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CAMPBELL ADOPTING THE SAN TOMAS AREA
NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN
WHEREAS, since 1979 there has been a strong concern expressed by
residents of the San Tomas Area to preserve the rural, low-density residential
character of the area.
WHEREAS, the City recognizes the San Tomas Area as unique in terms
of its rural character and since 1980 has main~ained a policy of:
1. Maintaining the area as low-density residential
2. Encouraging larger-than-minimum lot sizes
3. Encouraging the planting of trees, shrubs, greenery, and other
landscaping materials in new developments
4. Preserving existing trees and shrubs
5. Considering alternate street improvements in appropriate areas
WHEREAS, the City Council in 1982 took further action to preserve the
area by reducing the residential densities in many areas, as indicated on the
Land Use Element Map of the General Plan.
WHEREAS, the City Council authorized the San Tomas Study in
November 1991 to develop land use and transportation standards to
implement the general plan policies for the San Tomas Area.
WHEREAS, for the purposes of the San Tomas Study, the area was
divided into four neighborhoods and a Neighborhood Work Group
comprised of residents in each neighborhood developed goals and policies for
their neighborhood.
WHEREAS, the San Tomas Study Task Force reconciled the various
goals and policies and developed by each Neighborhood Work Group and
drafted the San Tomas Area Neighborhood Plan.
WHEREAS, the San Tomas Area Neighborhood Plan implements the
existing general plan policies for the San Tomas Area.
WHEREAS, the land use policies contained within the plan are
consistent with general plan policies for the San Tomas Area which promote
maintaining the low density characteristics of the neighborhood.
L ..
Resolution No.
Page -2-
WHEREAS, the transportation policies and alternative street designs
contained within the Plan implement the general plan policy of encouraging
alternative street improvements to reinforce the rural character of the area.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City
of Campbell does hereby adopt the San Tomas Are Neighborhood Plan.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City
of Campbell, duly held on the 2nd day of November, 1993 by the
following roll call vote:
AYES:
Councilmembers Burr, Watson, Ashworth, Dougherty, Conant
NOES:
Council members None
ABSENT:
Councilmembers: None
ABSTAIN:
Councilmembers: None
APPROVE~td4'lLL iJ.~( d-ILi::
Barbara D. Conant, Mayor
ATTEST:
,..--)
/
(h4U k~
Anne Bybee, City Clerk
~ 1
. City of Campbell
. .~. Department of Planning
SAN TOMAS AREA
NEIGHBORHOOD PIAN
Campbell City HaD
70 North Fust Strest
Campbell, CA 95008
408.8662140
" .
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
City Council
Barbara Conant, Mayor
Jeanette Watson, Vice-Mayor
John Ashworth
Donald Burr
Robert Dougherty
Planning Commission
I. Bud Alne, Chairperson
Jay Perrine
Jane-Meyer Kennedy
Mel Lindstrom
Lee Akridge
San Tomas Study Task Force
Patty Heintz
Pat McCullough
Jim Mackay
Dawn Vadbunker
John Ashworth
I. Bud Alne
Karl Lucas
Susanne Waher
Rich Taborek
Pam Warren
Donald Burr
Jane Meyer-Kennedy
City Staff
Campbell Community Development Department .
Steven Piasecki, AICP, Community Development Director
Randal Tsuda, AICP, Senior Planner
Curtis Banks, AICP, Planner II, Project Manager
Campbell Public Works Department
Joan Bollier, P.E., City Engineer
Michelle Quinney, P.E., Senior Civil Engineer
Gary Kruger, P.E., Traffic Engineer
Consultants
Mark R. Srebnik, Architect, AIA, Design Criteria
Saw Yu Wai, Transportaion Graphics
Jeff Berberich, Land Use Graphics
, .
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
INTRO D U CTI ON ........ ....... ........ ...................... ............. ........... ........................ ............. 1
LAND US E ISSUES .... ......... ............................ ........... .......................... ............... .......... 4
GOAL STATEMENT ................................................................................................ 4
OBJECTIVES ........ ....... .... ... .... ........... ...... ....... ............. ............. .... ..... ...... ... .......... ...... 4
LAND USE POLICIES ....... ................. ................ ...... .......................... ........... .......... 4
Relationship to Municipal Code ...................................................................... 4
Setbacks ................. ........... ....... .... ......... .... .... ........................................ .... ............ 4
Front Yard Setbacks .. ........... ..... ...... ............. ..... ...... ......... ............. ............... 4
Side Yard Setbacks ................. ....... ........... ............. ............... ............. ........... 5
Rear Yard Setbacks ..................... ....... ........................................... ............... 6
Building Coverage/Floor Area Ratio ............................................................... 6
Exceptions of Legal Non-Conforming Lots .................................................... 7
Extensions along Existing Building Lines ....................................................... 8
Maximum Building Height ... ............... ................. ........................ .................... 8
Minimum Lot Width ........................... ........... ........................ ............... ............. 9
Front Yard Paving ..................... ......... ...... ............... ..... ...... ............. ................... 9
Accessory Buildings ........... ................... ......... ...... ..... .... ....... ............... ............... 9
Landscaping ................................... ................. ........... .................. ........ ....... ........ 10
Site and Architectural Review.......................................................................... 10
General Plan/Zoning Amendments ................................................................ 16
Planned Development Zones ............................................................................ 17
TRANSPORTATION ISSUES ..................................................................................... 20
GOAL STATEMENT ................................................................................................ 20
OBJECTIVES ..................................... ............................................................. ............ 20
TRANSPORT A TION roLICIES ............................................................................. 20
Street Classification .. ..... ......... ............. ........... .... .... ......... ..... ....... ...... ..... ...... ... .... 20
Street Design Standards Implementation Policies ........................................ 22
New Streets ................ ...... ............. ...................... ............. ............. ................ 22
Exis ting Streets ............................. ............. ................................................... 22
Co nstrained Right-Of-Way..... ............. ................. ...................................... 23
Deferred Improvement Agreements ......................................................... 24
Removal of Existing Improvements .......................................................... 25
Return Excess Right-Of-Way...................................................................... 25
Existing Deferred Street Improvements ................................................... 25
Acceptance of Conditions Associated ....................................................... 25
with Unimproved Streets
Exceptions .............. ................................................ ................... ........... ......... 26
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A - SAN TOMAS STREET CLASSIFICATIONS
APPENDIX B -- SAN TOMAS STREET DESIGN STANDARDS
, .
,. / r' '\
> n ~. ... ~
. ....J Lt 1(\'-.: A. lt~rl
~~ I ;. If) I 1 ' "',' I: [ :; I tL rl
4..) . .
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of the San Tomas Area Neighborhood Plan is to provide a coherent
framework for development in the San Tomas Area. This document establishes land use
and transportation policies for use in the San Tomas Area. The Plan serves several
purposes. Most importantly it establishes specific policies to preserve the unique
character of the San Tomas Area and enhance the quality of life for its residents. In
addition, the Plan serves as an educational resource to guide building or remodeling in
the San Tomas Area.
The San Tomas Area is an approximately 1-1/2 square mile residential neighborhood
located in the southwest portion of the City. The area is unique in that it retains a more
informal character than other parts of Campbell, in part due to the large, often irregular
lots and to the lack of standard curbs, gutters, and sidewalks along its streets.
o
c
"5
:[
gj
E
F!-
"100_00
Hamilton
.c
Cl
a;
...J
~
a.
)(
w
gj
E
F!- Campbell
,":
,.... I
I
____I
.
I
.
\
.
\
.
l'
N
1000 2000
1 I
FEET
_00_00 CampbeD
City Limit
San Tomas
Area
City of Campbell
Page -1-
, .
. .
" / I' \
" ....,~ t' I.,.,
~ , "'. ! !... I [ I "', ~. .'i. J C 1".1
''\ > .. I I c' 0 : "c {I 0 I ' "
t~ 1 J.) I, I I, I \ !....I..., t t1 l.l
Since 1980, the City has recognized the San Tomas Area as unique in terms of its rural
character and has maintained a policy of:
1. Maintaining the area as low-density residential
2. Encouraging larger-than-minimum lot sizes
3. Encouraging the planting of trees, shrubs, greenery, and other landscaping
materials in new developments
4. Preserving existing trees and shrubs
5. Considering alternate street improvements in appropriate areas
In 1991 the Campbell City Council authorized the San Tomas Study to review land use
and transportation policies for the San Tomas Area. The Study was initiated in response
to concerns raised by residents of the San Tomas Area over recent projects considered
out of character with the area and concerns about increasing traffic in the neighborhood.
The San Tomas Area Neighborhood Plan is the result of the San Tomas Study.
The Plan was developed after extensive public participation. Approximately 30
meetings were held in the nine month period between January 1993 and September
1993. The land use and transportation policies contained in the Plan were developed
by residents of the San Tomas Area and City representatives through a series of
neighborhood workshops.
The San Tomas Study began in January 1993 with a kick-off meeting which all residents
and property owners of the San Tomas Area were invited to attend. At the kick-off
meeting, the San Tomas Area was divided into four neighborhoods. Residents in each
area selected seven representatives to serve on a neighborhood work group.
Work group members represented their neighborhood in meetings with staff to
develop goals and suggested policies for their neighborhood. Meetings were held with
residents in each neighborhood to allow them an opportunity to comment on the
recommendations made by their neighborhood work group.
The goals developed by each neighborhood work group were then forwarded to the San
Tomas Study Task Force which reconciled the various neighborhood policies and
drafted the San Tomas Neighborhood Plan. The Task Force was comprised of the
following members:
. Two members from each neighborhood work group
. Two members of the City Council
. Two members of the Planning Commission
. The City's Architectural Advisor
Page -2-
, .
, .
':; I / I' . I' ~ \ l' .
~ F....I I !' .... '" , .... 1 . 1'"1
'" ' .- I I ~ .. I) , .
," I /., j 1) I, ' I, I, j l"'l tl
Upon completion of the draft plan, Task Force held an area-wide meeting where the
plan was presented and discussed. Based on input from the area- wide meeting, the
plan was modified and sent to the Planning Commission and City Council for public
hearings.
In addition to extensive public participation, the Plan is noteworthy as it is Campbell's
first neighborhood plan. The Plan recognizes the unique qualities of the San Tomas
Area and serves as a blueprint for the concrete steps to be taken to preserve the
neighborhood. As such, the San Tomas Area Neighborhood Plan may serve as model
for other areas of the City.
Page -3-
I ,
I .
C' , r' \
~ ..., I~ ~ I -''''
'.1 tl I I, [I"'"." /1. !,.'t..
'''-: ' I I I I I" I
\ ~,l i~ I 1.1 ~. 1 l t. L [l . ""!
LAND USE ISSUES
Goal Statement
These policies are intended to preserve the unique qualities of the San Tomas Area.
New development and additions should respect and enhance the best aspects of the
area. The San Tomas Area should remain a primarily low-density single family
residential area.
Objectives
1. Insure that the size of homes are in proportion to lot size.
2. New developments and additions to exiting homes should be integrated with
homes in the surrounding area.
3. Ensure that projects in planned developments zones are compatible with the
surrounding area.
4. Use landscaping to enhance the rural characteristics of the area.
5. Establish criteria to determine larger than minimum lot size.
Land Use Policies
A. Relationship to Municipal Code
1. Development standards stated in Title 21 of the Campbell Municipal
Code that are not specified in this section shall remain applicable. In the
case of conflict between the San Tomas Neighborhood Plan and Title 21
of the Campbell Municipal Code, the standards contained herein shall
prevail.
2. All projects submitted and deemed complete prior to the date that the San
Tomas Neighborhood Plan becomes effective shall be exempt from the
standards contained within this document.
B. Setbacks
1. Front Yard Setbacks
The minimum front yard setback shall be as shown on page 5, except that
the entrance to a garage or carport shall be no closer than 25' to any public
right-of-way.
Page -4-
, .
Z' 'r' '\
\ ~ " ~ .J> \." <, .... .
, "..., I ~I t [ I ..' ^] L t'..l
'~, '" Ii" I, ,. ,I [') l~ '
. '-, It) I 1) L l !...!..,. l . ,,;,I II
Zoning District
R-1-6
R-1-8
R-1-9
R-I-I0
R-1-16
2. Side Yard Setbacks
Zoning District
R-1-6
R-1-8,9,10,16
PlJeL.IC ~a:-T
SlOE: YA~O eET~CI<..
Setback
Setback
20'
20'
20'
25'
25'
~I
"-v
_- HOUee
~
\..lNe
~"""
~~
~
PLle>l-IC ~
FP-OHT YA~D eeTMC~
The greater of five feet, or one-half the height
of the building wall adjacent to the property
line.
a.
b.
51t1li"
euu..01I-rr
tteT~
J..lt-le
L.Jt.le c.
~
\..lHe
At least one side yard shall be the
greater oJ 10' or sixty percent of the
height of the building wall adjacent to
the property line.
The other side yard shall be the greater
of eight feet or sixty percent of the
height of the building wall adjacent to
the property line.
The side yard setbacks for legally cre-
ated lots with a lot width less than 60'
may be the greater of five feet or one-
half the height of the building wall
adjacent to the property line.
Page -5-
, ,
,~~ .... t I / [\., )"1 I ...... S ,.' \ T 1', ~'.
'''< ' ,- "1 'I "I 1-) i, '
. 1. ~ I J.., ..lJ ~, l !.., .. t l .~.. ,
3. Rear Yard Setbacks
Zoning District
Setback
R-1-6
a.
b.
20'
10' where the useable rear yard area =
20 x Lot width. (For the purposes of
this section, the useable rear yard area
shall be defined as that area bounded
by the rear building lines extended to
the side lot lines and rear property
line.
R-1-8
R-1-9
R-l-l0
R-1-16
20'
25'
25'
25'
~et..e
FeAJr. YAAP
~
5lOf:
~
UJ.>>
~
elo;i'
~
Ut-lE
~
~
I-INe
~
l-1Ne-
1'Ue>t...\ c... '5"'~"
POeI.-lC ~T
~~~ YARt:> ee"~CK
U6,A.J;L.~ r<E'AR YARD ~A-
C. Building Coverage/Floor Area Ratio (FAR)
The maximum building coverage and FAR for a residential building with all its
accessory buildings including private garages and carports shall be as shown
Page -6-
. .
{' 'r' \
\ "'. ~ 'I..; ," .
~"' ....1 t I L t [ I f. >> ....] L"'J
'''\ - -- I I "I ,'- ('I I) ;.. "
, ! l,' ~) L , L , ). l
below. Building coverage and FAR calculations shall be of the net lot area,
excluding private streets or common areas:
Zoning District
Building Coverage
Floor Area Ratio
R-1-6
R-1-8
R-1-9
R-I-IO
R-1-16
40%
35%
35%
35%
35%
.45
.45
.45
.45
.45
G6.f2AGe-, C&.~~T
~~D
t..OT Cfj~
E:GlllAL. ~. 1ltE eGUAIU::
R:X:rT~ OF TH::
t'O:7rf'RIHT OF.au. ~t-AAY
AHO ~ e.uU_OING'-:l
CNIDE:O et( 1l1e: NET \..OT ~
f'L,O:lft ~ AATIO (F......~)
~~ -nE ~ Of- ML.
t"\..OOR ~j ~ AHO
~O~~
HiO ~ejl(~
0IVItJEt) Eff -me t-leT LOT ~
~O A..ClCft ~
~~T R.CI:::lR ,I,R~
LOT COVeRAGS - FL..OO~ AReA AA"T\O
D. Exceptions for Legal Non-Conforming Lots
1. The property owner of a legally created lot that does not meet the
minimum lot size requirement for the district in which it is located (e.g.
a 6,000 square foot lot located in a R-I-IO zoning district) is permitted an
exception, as provided below, to the side and rear setbacks and lot
coverage requirements.
2. The side and rear setbacks and lot coverage requirements for legal
nonconforming lots shall be based on the standards of the zoning district
in which the lot would be conforming (e.g. the setback and lot coverage
requirement for a 6,000 square foot lot in a R-I-IO zoning district would
based on the standards for the R-1-6 zoning district).
Page -7-
, .
-, / r' \
~ CO" _
\ ';, ;, ~ I I.. I : I ....J '; A l I .....
,,,. , .- I I '" 11 ,_ I I:' I
,''- t 'i.J I 11 L I,.!.. I, I.... 'j
E. Extension Along Existing Building Lines
Additions to legally existing structures may be extended along the first floor of
existing building lines even when the existing first floor setbacks do not meet the
setback requirements for the San Tomas Area.
1. Extensions only apply to first story additions that are not detrimental to
the public heal th, safety or general welfare of persons residing or working
in the neighborhood (i.e. an addition in the front yard area along an
existing building wall may not be placed in a manner that impairs
pedestrian or vehicular safety).
2. The extension may maintain existing setbacks but shall not further
encroach into any required setback area.
3. All second story additions must comply with the standards for the San
Tomas Area.
~-1
I I
,
I
I
I ~e-ntiGr I,
I HOIJ'Oeo
I I.
~~;J'
UNe-
-.
~"TP.E:-'ET
Wl;aW
At7OITIOH
~I~
e)(TeN5\Ot'i ~G
te'xeTIr--e e,UIL..t:>lN€r U~
F. Maximum Building Height
The maximum height of a building shall be 28 feet and shall not exceed 2-1/2
stories.
Page -8-
. .
(' /[' '\
". . ~ ~ .., ~
~ ~.. I !.. ~ II t. c, A l l~",
'"" ,. i""!,,. I I') I
\ t j I, II j,) L I Ii L L {L l l~. r j
G. Minimum Lot Width
1. The minimum width of all newly created parcels, except parcels on cul-
de-sac bulbs, shall be as follows:
Zoning District
Minimum Lot Width
R-1-6
R-1-8
R-1-9
R-1-10
R-1-16
60'
70'
70'
80'
80'
2. The minimum lot width for all newly created parcels on the bulb of a cul-
de-sac shall be 60'.
H. Front Yard Paving
A minimum of 50% of the required front yard setback area must remain
unpaved. Increases in the amount of allowable paving may be approved by the
Community Development Director if necessary to provide safe ingress and
egress from the site.
1. Accessory Buildings
Accessory buildings and detached private garages and carports, not exceeding
one story nor 14 feet in height may be allowed as follows:
1. Setbacks for accessory buildings, including private garages and carports
shall be fi ve feet for buildings with a wall height of eight feet or less. The
height may be increased by one foot for each additional 1-1/2 feet of
setback up to a maximum of 14', as described in the table below.
f~
I
t
I
I
I
I i
I
I
Wall Height
8' to 9'
9' to 10'
10' to 11'
11' to 12'
12' to 13'
13' to 14'
14'
~cc~.,..
eull-OIN<>-
FINISH
~oe
'. ..... .,'
....
~
Setback
5.0'
6.5'
8.0'
9.5'
11. 0'
12.5'
14.0'
Page -9-
. .
o .
(' '[' '\
' " ... !' t~ ... \' , I' ....
~ . I, .' I I I .1 " A J~./ ...
'" 'j 'l~)
.. ,. Ii: l j .1 L - ! 1 t) 1:; [. . ! r~ ! I
2. Other than the standards specified in this Section, accessory buildings
shall be developed in accordance with the requirements specified in
Section 21.08.020.D of the Campbell Municipal Code.
J. Landscaping
1. All new developments shall be required to provide a minimum of one tree
per 2,000 square feet of net lot area. Existing trees within the net lot area
shall be included in the total. All new trees shall be planted within the net
lot area.
2. All new development shall comply with the Water Efficient Landscape
Guidelines, as adopted by the City Council, for retention of existing plant
materials.
K. Site and Architectural Review
1. Construction of a building or structure on an undeveloped lot in an R-l-
8, R-1-9, R-1-10, and R-1-16 Zoning District shall be permitted only after
the project receives site and architectural approval by the Planning
Commission. The requirements for site and architectural approval are set
forth in Chapter 21.42 of the Campbell Municipal Code.
2. Construction of a building or structure on an undeveloped lot in an R-l-
6 Zoning District and additions to existing structures in all single family
residential zoning districts shall be permitted only after the project
receives si te and architectural approval by the Community Development
Director.
3. All applications for new construction shall include photographs of the
subject site and properties on both sides of the street.
4. The following design criteria shall be used by applicants, City staff, the
Planning Commission, and the City Council to evaluate proposed new
developments and additions to existing developments in the San Tomas
Area.
Intent
The San Tomas Area has a distinct character from the rest of Campbell.
The criteria contained in this section have been developed to protect and
reinforce the desirable characteristics of this area. The criteria are in-
Page -10-
., / I' \
.'-~ "", t ~: t ... ~ ,( r. t: ~j
''\ ._ I I. _ 0 I - "I I) l .
, ! '(J t I l.f t. I ,1 " L ! t 1",.1 } l
tended to provide guidance to applicants and consistency in design
review.
The criteria apply basic design principles which are general in nature and
reflect the major concerns of neighborhood compatibility and site plan-
ning, including the relationship of a home to its neighbors. In an existing
neighborhood, such as the San Tomas Area, new development and
additions to existing homes should have their own design integrity while
incorporating some design elements and materials found in the neighbor-
hood. These criteria are not intended to prescribe a specific style or
design.
Compatibility
1. New homes and additions to existing homes should incorporate
representative architectural features of homes in the San Tomas
Area such as, shape, form, roof pitch, and materials. Architectural
design features historically found in the San Tomas Area, are
described on page 10. New projects should avoid abrupt changes
that result from introducing radically different designs or sizes of
structures.
Some projects have utilized design features that are not commonly
found in the area and are out of scale with surrounding homes.
Special care must be used when introducing design features not
commonly found in the area to ensure they are architecturally
compatible with the surrounding neighborhood.
Architectural features historically found in the San Tomas Area
include the following:
· Simple rectangular shaped forms
. Simple rooflines: gabled or hipped
· Shallow window fenestration
. Visually light roof materials (composition, shingles)
· Wood siding or stucco exteriors
. One or two car garages (detached and attached)
Features not commonly found in the area include:
· Complex shapes
· Complex rooflines
· Tall two story entry ways or heavy columns
· Complex window fenestration
. Stucco with heavy moldings
Page -11-
. .
" 'I' \
'1 . - ~ J -., ~
, ~ ~. II J.. !! ( 'tj. ~. ,.., L, 'to
:'\;' I I i~: L l:I' :. t: t, d l-) I1"J r l
2. Use exterior materials compatible with homes in the San Tomas
Area.
3. New homes and additions to existing homes should not be "walled-
off" from adjacent homes as viewed from the street.
4. Front yard landscape similar to the adjacent homes is encouraged.
Scale & Mass
Building scale refers to the proportional relationship of a structure in
relation to objects next to it, such as other buildings or people. Building
mass is the size of a structure.
1. The perceived scale and mass of new homes should be compatible
with homes in the surrounding area. Minimize the use of design
features that accentuates the size of new houses so that they do not
appear significantly larger than the adjacent homes. This can be
accomplished by minimizing the use of two story vertical design
elements such as turrets and two story entry ways. Where possible,
use one and a half story designs with dormers or partial two story
designs.
Not Desirable
ill m
ffi m ((ffi
VO"HL.~I tJe,sjjn G"1'h,of14.si$
~~ ~!J7tr d( n~
Desirable
HtJri2..tmtd! [;)e!;11] (f'J11pl;;,si~
/t~"~ widf!, tf /l4nfe
Page -12-
. .
(' , I' \
-.,' ~ ,.., ~ ~ I J""
\ , ....1 j I L t I l ~. " A J ~;:1'..
'~- '--' f, ,. 1 I. ,. ,. 1 I) : > 1
, \ I l. J .. ~ I ~ ~ j ,. !
2. The perceived scale and mass of a proposed addition to an existing
home should be of a similar shape and form as those in the original
house. The perceived scale and mass should also be compatible
with homes in the surrounding area.
3. Architectural elements within the design of new homes and addi-
tions to existing homes should be in proportion to the overall home
design.
Surface Articulation (Changes within wall and roof planes)
1. The amount of wall and roof plane articulation should be similar
to adjacent homes. Most of the homes in the area have simple
geometric shapes and forms. The homes are usually comprised
either of one or more rectangular shapes with gable or hipped roofs
or with intersecting pitched roofs.
2. Design of homes should avoid long unarticulated wall and roof
planes especially, on two story elevations.
a.
Changes within the wall and roof planes can be accom-
plished when one of the forms is setback several feet or
when a gable end fronts the street, and through the use of
porches that run across the front of the house.
Changes within the wall and roof planes can also be accom-
plished through the textural use of materials. This is seen in
the use of horizontal wood lap siding, wood trim around
windows and doors, and shi~gle textures on the roofs.
b.
No' De.'r"'''
De.'r.."
~ lJurtica{~ ~sSi'!J
Arficu.I4M ~~
Page -13-
. .
,-' '[' '\
,,\. ,."" ~ I J .....~'
~ I ~. I I U t [ l (J " A ] L..,.
'~, : ,- I, I., f' ", 11 " " [I f) l" I'
, , l. J' ~ -.. ~.~. l ~ 1 l
Building Orientation
1. New homes and additions to existing homes should be located on
the lot in a similar manner as adjacent homes within the current
setback requirements.
2. Garages should not dominate the front facade. To limit the
prominence of garages, projects shall incorporate at least one of the
measures below. This section shall apply to new garages and
additions to existing garages.
a. Garages placed in front of the house should not exceed 50%
of the linear front elevation with the remainder of the
elevation devoted to living area or porch.
b. Garages exceeding 50% of the linear front elevation shall
ei ther :
(1). Recess the garage from the front wall of the house a mini-
mum of five feet.
(2). Provide an entry porch or trellis extending in front of the
face of the garage.
c. Orient the entry to the garage away from the street.
d. Other similar features as approved by the Community
Development Director.
3. Houses shall have visible front entry ways oriented toward the
public street. Rear property lines shall not be oriented toward
public streets (except corner lots and homes along streets classified
as arterials).
Exterior Design Variation
1. Exterior elevations should be significantly varied within a project.
To accomplish this:
a. No two identical elevations should be adjacent to one
another nor directly across the street from one another,
including mirror image elevations.
b. No more than 25% of the homes on a block should have the
same elevation.
Page -14-
. .
., 'f' \
,....) ~ . I: 1"1 I ...; ~ ,,,,t 1,) r: ?"L
'~- .-' : "0 I "..' 1-:, I ,
I l.J' , ~_l '. I L I, !. [1 tl I I
2. Significant varied exterior elevations means substantial changes in
the shape, mass, roofline, front entry treatment, window usage,
and materials that can be seen in the designs.
t
~ 1~
_ . -~B-B fErn~ B88~
Vsr;~fibYJs on desiJ1s ($4141'- f~r p/:a;lj
Grading
:t
fBrd
Mostof the homes in the San Tomas Area have pad heights close to natural
grade. To avoid accentuating the height of buildings and to ensure the
privacy of existing adjacent homes, grading should be limited to the
minimum amount necessary to provide adequate drainage.
Privacy Impacts
1. Most privacy impacts are due to the number, placement, and size
of second floor windows. To minimize adverse impacts on neigh-
boring properties carefully place windows (by studying sightlines)
to avoid privacy impacts on neighboring backyards. Methods to
accomplish this include, but are not limited to the following:
a. Use smaller windows help minimize the perception of
privacy invasion.
b. Place sills up as high as possible in conformance with
building codes).
2. If large windows are desired, plant non-deciduous trees in the
sightline corridor to obscure views.
Page -15-
. .
\\) f', t / I J t: t'"\ t ....1 :; /. \ TJ r: ~'1
'~- . -- I l '" I -''' I I) I t
.. l j I, ...)!,., 1 ILL' l l'j . j
3. Second floor decks oriented toward the side and rear yards can be
a source of privacy invasion to the backyards of adjacent homes. To
avoid this:
a. Minimize the size of decks.
b. Use a solid wall instead of an open railing (especially
towards the sideyards).
Integration of Additions with the Existing Home
1. Exterior materials of a proposed addition should match the exist-
ing home, unless the entire exterior is being replaced to match the
new addition.
2. Integrate second story additions into the overall design of the
house in order to avoid a "tacked on" appearance.
3. The design of the addition should be consistent with the original
home. This means that materials and architectural elements are
used in a consistent manner. The design of the home should also
be visually compatible with the adjacent homes.
4. The rooflines of the addition including roof slope should be
consis tent with the existing house, unless a steeper slope is needed
to accommodate a one and a half story design.
5. New windows should either match the style, material, and color of
the original windows or the original windows should be replaced
to match the ones used on the addition.
6. New window treatments should also be in keeping with the styles
found in the adjacent homes.
L. General Plan/Zoning Amendments
The criteria below should be applied to amendments to change the General Plan
and/ or the Zoning Designation of parcel(s) in the San Tomas Area.
1. The proposed general plan and/ or zoning designation should be at least
equal to the predominant general plan and/ or zoning designation of
parcels contiguous to, or directly across a public right-of-way from the
subject site.
Page -16-
,> / I' '\
\ t' . ~ ~ I '1- ,.
\_; ....j I J ~. I j l ~J ~. A..J. 1~ f.
'~ n ',- I, J -," II ' , ['[ I ) I' r'
.. ~ \ ~ . l J I .J!..,I 1 L L J -(1 j
2. N otwi thstanding the above, existing parcels that are designa ted for single
family residential development which are contiguous to other parcels
designated for single family residential must remain designated for
single family residential.
3. With the exception of parcels directly abutting Winchester Boulevard, no
General Plan Amendment in the San Tomas Area should exceed the low-
medium denisty classification of 6-13 units per acre.
4. In situations where no general plan and/ or zoning designation is pre-
dominant, the Planning Commission and City Council shall determine
the appropriate general plan and/ or zoning designation based upon land
use factors specific to the subject site. The factors to be considered include,
but are not be limited to, the following:
· Compatibility with adjoining land uses
· Privacy impacts
· Traffic
· Noise
5. Notice of a public hearing for a General Plan and / or Zoning Amendment
shall be as specified in Chapter 21.78 of the Campbell Municipal Code. In
addition, a notice containing the time, place, and general purpose of the
hearing shall be placed at the project site at least 10 days prior to the
meeting.
M. Planned Development Zones
The standards below shall apply to Planned Development (PD) projects in the
San Tomas Area:
Low Density Residential Projects ( less than six units per acre)
1. Low density residential projects in PD zones shall conform with the
standards for single family development contained with this document
and the Campbell Municipal Code, except that private local access streets
shall be permitted when there is a home owner's association established
to maintain them.
2. In addi tion to the parking requirements for single family homes specified
in Section 21.50.50 of Campbell Municipal Code, low density residential
PD projects shall provide shared guest parking totaling two spaces per
Page -17-
(' / I' '\
" ' I' ". ~~' '~ I ]......:J>.
~ " "'1 t, [I r"J ~> A l~ 3..1
'~ . . -.1 I . 0 i .... ,I I) i
.... 1, 'I, ..l.J!.. I lL 1,.1 . .::. It
unit. Spaces located in the driveways of the units shall not be included as
guest parking.
3. The minimum lot size for low density residential projects in PD zones
shall be at least equal to the predominant minimum lot size requirement
of parcels contiguous to, or directly across a public right-of-way from the
subject site.
a. In situations where no minimum lot size requirement is predomi-
nant, the Planning Commission and City Council shall determine
the appropriate minimum lot size based upon land use factors
specific to the subject site.
b. The minimum lot size shall not include the private local access
street, common areas, or open space areas.
c. Common areas and open space areas are exempt from the mini-
mum lot size requirements.
Low-Medium Density Projects (6-13 units per acre)
1. Low-Medium density developments in PD zones shall be compatible
with the existing neighborhood. To integrate new projects with the
neighborhood, low-medium density developments should conform to
the following criteria:
a. To the extent possible, the public street elevation of any unit or
building group shall foster the appearance of single family resi-
dential design. The width of the individual units should be
expressed architecturally on the exterior elevation.
b. Building design, shall contain traditional single family architec-
tural elements. These elements may include, but are not limited to,
defined entries, porches, projecting eaves and overhangs. The
intent of this criteria is to provide a single-family residential scale
and help reduce building mass.
c. The entry way of units adjacent to a public street shall be oriented
to the public street and should not be walled-off or inward ori-
ented. The backs of units and privacy fences should not face public
streets.
d. The appearance of attached garages shall be minimized by incor-
porating the measures listed below, or other similar measures as
approved by the Community Development Director:
(1). Limit garage doors to no more than 50% of the linear front
elevation of a unit or building group, with the remainder of
the elevation devoted to living area or porch.
Page -18-
{' / [' \
,\ '" ~ ~ I J ,..
\. I ~l I I U I [ I 1.1 ~, A] 1; tJ
'~, ,. , ." I ",,' I) I . .
.. L II) ~ , l.l', i 11 1, I, t 1 ,1'1 r i
(2). Garages which exceed 50% of the front elevation shall
either:
. Provide an entry porch with a porch roof or trellis
extending in front of the face of the garage.
. Recess the garage from the front wall of the house a
minimum of five feet.
2. The maximum height for a low-medium density development shall be 28
feet and not exceed 2-1/2 stories.
3. Buildings shall be setback 15' from the property line of adjacent parcels
and the public right-of-way, except that garages or carports shall be 25'
from any public right-of-way.
Page -19-
'. .
., / I' \
' ,., "" . . I "'.
~:s;....1 t I U t f I ..... ~ A]' t . ti
',,-:'. '.- II j "" i. e, " [I r) I .'
\, " l, I IJ I .J~. , ,l.t. !... l,::(. ,.
TRANSPORTATION ISSUES
Goal Statement
The City should manage and develop the transportation system in the area to retain the
rural character while providing for adequate traffic, pedestrian and bicycle circulation
and safety. For local streets it is undesirable to introduce urban street standards in those
neighborhoods that have remained rural.
Objectives
1. Maintain the rural appearance of the local streets in the San Tomas Area.
2. Take the minimum amount of right-of-way and provide only the minimum
street widths necessary to maintain appropriate traffic function and safety.
3. Match the actual use of streets with their functional classification, and also
provide for a more uniform physical appearance along all streets.
4. Traffic through the area should be discouraged and routed via Winchester
Boulevard, Pollard Road, Quito Road, and Campbell Avenue.
Transportation Policies
A. Street Classification
1. Rename the functional classification of streets so that:
a. Local access streets becomes Major and Minor Local Access de-
pending upon volumes.
b. Collector I and II become Major and Minor Collector respectively.
c. Arterial I and II become Major and Minor Arterial respectively.
d. Private Lane and Private Access Streets should be created as new
street classes to permit developers flexibility in site design.
2. Adopt the functional classification recommendations for the San Tomas
Area which are contained in Exhibit "A" of this document. The recom-
mended plan for functional street classifications is based upon providing
for through traffic on arterials bypassing the area. The plan encourages
through traffic to use Winchester Boulevard, Pollard Road, Quito Road,
and Cam pbell A venue as the only through routes. All other streets should
effectively serve local traffic in the San Tomas Area. The following
collectors should not be extended beyond the limits listed below nor
upgraded in classification from those recommended in the plan:
a. Budd Avenue from the San Tomas Expressway to Virginia Avenue
Page -20-
'. .
c.' ? r' '\
\_-) "'1 ! J D n I ~1 ~ ...' ';\ J' r::ti
''\. '.- I I '," I "" I I') I' , "
.\ t; j I, 1, ;.l~.! j L I, [I r 1'1 .J l
b. Burrows Road/San Tomas Aquino Road from Pollard Road to
Harriet A venue
c. Capri Drive from the south City Limits to Hacienda Avenue
d. Hacienda Avenue from Winchester Boulevard to west City Limits
e. Harriet Avenue from the northern City Limits to Westmont Av-
enue
f. Hazel Avenue from Virginia Avenue to San Tomas Aquino Road
g. McCoy Avenue from Harriet Avenue to west City Limits
h. Sunnyoaks Avenue from Winchester Boulevard to Virginia Av-
enue
i. Virginia Avenue from Budd Avenue to Chapman Drive
3. Adopt the San Tomas Street Design Standards contained in Exhibit "B" of
this document which specify design and operating standards for each
class of street in the San Tomas Area.
4. Burrows Road from Pollard Road to Hacienda Avenue, San Tomas
Aquino Road between Hacienda A venue and Harriet A venue, and
Westmont Avenue between Harriet Avenue and San Tomas Aquino
Road will remain as Minor Collectors which is their present classification,
even though each of these streets now experiences volumes in excess of
that classification. Once Route 85 is open to traffic in 1995, traffic will be
monitored on these streets to determine whether additional traffic con-
trols are required to bring traffic volumes within the accepted range of
Minor Collector (i.e. volumes less than 4,000 cars per day).
5. Under the San Tomas Neighborhood Plan, Capri Drive, south of Haci-
enda Avenue, is classified as a minor collect?r. The street design standard
for minor collector streets requires street improvements, including curb,
gutter, and sidewalk. Per the street design policies discussed in Section
B, deferred maintenance agreements will be taken to install improve-
ments on Capri. However, mitigation measures currently under consid-
eration for West Parr Avenue may reduce traffic on Capri. Upon instal-
lation of the West Parr mitigation measures, traffic on Capri will be
monitored. Should traffic on Capri be reduced to 1,200 cars per day or
less, Capri will be reclassified as a minor local access street. Should Capri
be reclassified, a notice of fulfillment for any existing deferred mainte-
nance agreements will be recorded, and the securities returned.
6. Traffic volumes on Virginia Avenue from Budd Avenue to Hazel A venue
and Budd Avenue from Virginia Avenue to the San Tomas Expressway
indicate that a two-way left turn lane is required. On these sections, the
long-term objective will be to eliminate on street parking, and install a
Page -21-
" .
n 'I' '\
. I .... .., . ~ ' "",'
\~ ("l I I, tit tl ,. ..i. 1 t ~ 1:1
'", ' I I I I (0) I
A " t.; Ii: t ! ...) J.. 1 l!..!.: (l . I tJ ri
two-way left turn lane with fourteen foot curb lanes including a striped
four foot bike lane on each side. This is two feet less than the recom-
mended cross-section for Major Collectors, because it will never be cost-
effective to widen Budd Avenue or Virginia Avenue to provide the
minimum recommended cross-section. Implementation of this objective
will be a city funded project. Adjacent property owners will not be asked
to contribute to the funding of this project.
7. Truck routes in the San Tomas Area should be restricted to arterial routes,
and only those collectors where the predominant abutting land uses are
commercial and industrial. This means that only Pollard Road and
Winchester Boulevard are truck routes within the San Tomas Area, and
the Campbell Municipal Code should be changed accordingly.
B. Street Design Standard Implementation Policies
1. New Streets
All newly created streets proposed for construction after the adoption of
this plan by the City Council shall be designed and built according to the
appropriate design standard attached to this policy. These standards are
for use in the San Tomas Area only.
2. Existing Streets
a. Existing streets with improvements on more than 50% of the street:
(1). Where improvements exist on more than 50% of the lineal
footage of one side of a street wi thin a block, regardless of
the street classification, the requirement will be to continue
to install matching improvements and to dedicate the asso-
ciated right-of-way within that block. Each block and each
side of the street will be considered independently.
(2). Any proposed new development on those streets would be
required to dedicate right-of-way to the predominant di-
mension and construct the street to the predominant street
width, install curb, gutters, sidewalks, or street lights as
necessary to be consistent with the existing improvements
on the majority of the street.
(3). However, for major local access streets and above, all
design features identified in the San Tomas Street Design
Standards for that street that do not currently exist shall be
installed.
Page -22-
j '. ,
" '[~ \
\~ .... t I D II [ t.. ~ ).']" !:: -t1-
'''- ',' , I' I I 1-') I
.." I I i: 1) r: 1 I Dr:, I l . 1 t'J n
(4). New developments will be required to install storm drain-
age or contribute to the cost of providing storm drainage,
as determined by the City Engineer.
b. Existing streets with improvements on 50% of the street or less:
Where improvements exist on 50% or less of the lineal footage of
one side of a street within a block, the following policy will be
implemented:
(1) For Minor Local Access Streets the predominant right-of-
way and street pavement width will define the standard for
that block. Each block and each side of the street will be
considered independently.
Any proposed new development on these existing streets
would be required to dedicate right-of-way to the predomi-
nant dimension, but would not be required to dedicate
additional right-of-way beyond the predominant dimen-
sion nor widen the street beyond the predominant street
width, nor install curb, gutters, sidewalks, street trees,
street lights, or strorm drains.
(2) For all other street classifications, dedication shall be to the
predominant dimension, or shall conform to the minimum
established in the San Tomas Street Design Standards,
whichever is greater. Each block and each side of the street
will be considered independ~ntly.
New development along these streets shall be required to
install improvements consistent with the San Tomas Street
Design Standards.
3. Constrained Right-Of-Way
For those streets classified as Minor Collectors and Major Collectors
where sufficient right-of-way is not available, because buildings or homes
are close to the existing right-of-way, parking may be eliminated on one
or both sides of the street. Listed below are examples of streets where this
constraint exists:
Page -23-
, \. .
t:: 'I' \
~~'~I...j I 1> 1"1 I "'I ~ I.' 1" f: ?J
''"' '.-! ,,' [)' -
.l. ' ~, IJ j ..) to J ! j L to ., 11:1 r I
a. Minor Collectors:
· Burrows Road
. San Tomas Aquino Road between Hacienda Avenue and
Harriet Avenue
b. Major Collectors
. Budd Avenue - San Tomas Expressway to Virginia Av-
enue
. Virginia Avenue - Budd Avenue to Hazel Avenue
On the major collector streets listed above, in addition to parking
being removed, the half street section shall be reduced to 20 feet;
and the existing right-of-way shall be retained.
4. Deferred Improvement Agreements
a. Deferred improvement agreements for minor local access streets
will not be taken in lieu of installation of street improvements in
the San Tomas Area. Improvements for minor local access streets,
when required by this policy must be installed upon development.
b. The policies below shall apply to major local access streets and
above:
(1). If the property under consideration is adjacent to existing
improvements, the irnprove~ents shall be installed at the
time of development.
(2). If the property under consideration is not adjacent to exist-
ing improvements and if more than 50% of the lineal
footage of one side of a street within a block has improve-
ments installed or agreements exist to complete more than
50% or more of the improvements, the improvements will
be installed immediately.
(3). In situations where 50% or less of the lineal footage of one
side of a street within a block is unimproved and there are
no deferred agreements to complete at least 50% of the
improvements, secured deferred improvement agreements
will be taken. The agreement shall include an offer of
dedication to be accepted at the time the improvements are
installed. Deferred improvemen t agreements will be revis-
ited every four years and either the improvements will be
Page -24-
'. .
{' '[' \
,.jtl II D n'I",':~ A 2'1;i.!
'''-' . I I I I ') I
,'''- i' 1 i: 11 f: i- II f: Dr! (". t..l. t\
installed or the agreement will be renegotiated.
5. Removal of Existing Improvements
Home owners or developers will not be required to remove existing
improvements within an unimproved area where improvements are not
required, under this policy. Upon their request, the property owner will
be allowed to remove these improvements at their cost.
6. Return of Excess Right-Df-Way
Property owners may request that any right-of-way no longer necessary
under this policy be reverted to the property owner. The City's current
procedure for vacation of excess right-of-way will apply.
7. Existing Deferred Street Improvement Agreements
Current practice has created a number of secured improvement agree-
ments for properties which under the proposed San Tomas Policy will no
longer be required. A notice of fulfillment of the agreement will be
recorded, and the securities returned.
8. Acceptance of Conditions Associated with Unimproved Streets
The proposed policy adopts street design standards that may not include
curb, gutters, and sidewalks and realizes the following conditions are
associated with the implementation of this policy:
· Streets wi thout curb and gutters may deteriorate faster than streets
constructed with curb and gutters. The San Tomas Policy is not
recommending that the maintenance funding to the San Tomas
Area be increased to compensate for the increased long term
maintenance costs associated with the alternative Minor Local
Access street design presented in this policy.
· Drainage systems are not as efficient when concrete gutters are not
used to channel runoff to the storm drain system.
· A higherlevel of maintenance effort is required to keep unimproved
streets and shoulders drained properly, the required level of
maintenance may not be available to keep these areas drained
properly.
· A uniform area for parked vehicles is not provided.
· The edge of pavement will deteriorate more rapidly without the
gutter present as a barrier to hold it in place.
Page -25-
, .
'. ,
" '[' \
' , ".. ~, ' I,.., ,
~):t:l II 1,lll:(:..;;.... T.t~fJ
'~. '..! J ", I. , ,I l~) i .
,'\. " l~ J IJ I! ) L I I U L {j Ltl iL
· The adjacent unpaved shoulders may become increasingly
potholed, resulting in puddles during the rainy seasons.
· As the edge of the pavement and the adjacent unpaved shoulder
deteriorate, the pavement base and the sub base may also erode
and result in pavement failures.
· Street sweepers cannot effectively sweep streets without curbs.
· Pedestrians are not afforded the additional safety provided by
curbs and a designated area to walk.
9. Exceptions
All exceptions to the policies contained in this document shall be subject
to review and approval by the City Council.
Page -26-
. ~'+':" \, f
Appendix A
San Tomas Street Classifications
>-
0:::
<[
(:::l
Vl Z
<[ :::J
:L 0
0 o::l
t-
<[
Z W
<[ 0:::
Vl <[
ifJ.
Z
o
-
E-<
<
U
-
~
-
lfJ
ifJ.
<
.....:l
U
E-<
~
~
~
E-<
ifJ.
ifJ.
<
~
o
E-<
Z
<
ifJ.
r
I
C__ ~
-,
___5
Vl Vl
Vl Vl
W W
U U 0::: 0::: a:::
U U 0 0 0 .-J
<[ <[ f- f- f- <[
U U U
.-J .-J W Wf- W f- a:::
<[ <[ .-J .-J(:::l ~ (:::l W
U U .-J 6<[ .-J <[ f-
0 0 0 0 a:::
.-J .-J U Uo U 0 <[
0 0
a::: 0::: 0::: a::: 0 0::: 0 a:::
0 D ' D a5
D D ,00 D
Z , Z , Z
~ <[ ~ <[ II <[ ^
I :L :L :L :Lv :L ::;:
t- ..~~
0::: . I I
0 .
z I
15 .
z .
w I
LJ .
W .
.-J I
.
~llo
o
o
o
(\J
o
o
o
-
OJ
;:
~
V1
V1
o
U
+'
V1
,/
L
o
+'
V1
,/
QJ
4-
<J
o
u
o
,/
u
~
--,
+'
(Y)
0'
"-
o
-
.. .lII" {I. .
Appendix B
San Tomas Street Design Standards
,." .f \ ,,,. .
SAN TOMAS STREET DESIGN STANDARDS
PRIV A TE LANE *
~
llJl(
STREET 'WIDTH
20 FEET
PUBLIC SERVICE EASEMENT
30 FEET
Policies
Tro.ffic VoluMe < 100/do.y
Mo.xiMUM Length I 300 feet
Prohibited Connections : Mo.J. Collector or higher
MiniMUM RequireMents for New Construction ***
Vehicle Lones : 2 X 10'
Sepo......ote Turn Lones No
Bike Lo.nes or Areo : shore
Meclio.n : No
On Po. veMeni: Po.rking : No
Pedestrio.n F o.Cility I No
Po. ved Curb &. Gutter I No
la' Veh. Lones Street Lights I No
PubliC Lo.nclsco.Ping : No
StorM Dro.inS : PriVo. te - Yes
Pork Strip : No
* Not to be used for single fo.Mily developMents.
** No Po.rking o.llowecl on street. Sho.recl Po.rking toto.ling two sPo.ces per unit,
excluding on site spoces, sholl be providecl.
*** Construction MUst conforM to City sto.ndo.rds for street construction.
9/93
ST ARST D.D\lG
.,t \... .
SAN TOMAS STREET DESIGN STANDARDS
PRIVATE LOCAL ACCESS
blJd
.
STREET \JIDTH
27 FEET
PUBLIC SERVICE EASEMENT
30 FEET
Policies
Tro. ffiC VoluMe < 500/do.y
Ma.xiMUM Length : 750 feet
Prohibited Connections : Mo.J. Collector or higher
MiniMUM RequireMents for New Construction
***
Vehicle Lo.nes : 2 X 10'
Sepo.ro.te Turn Lo.nes : No
Bike Lo.nes or Area. : sho.re 10' Veh. Lo.nes
Medio.n : No
On Po. veMent Po.rking : 1 Side, 7' lo.ne
Pedestria.n F o.cility : No
Po. vea Curio Be Gutter : No
Street Lights : No
PubliC Lo.ndsco.ping : No
StorM Dro.ins : Privo. te - Yes
Po.rk Strip : No
* Po.rking on one side only. Sho.red po.rking toto.ling two spa.ces per units,
excluding a.ny on-Site spa.ces, sho.ll be provided.
*** Construction Must conforM to City sto.ndo.rds for street construction.
9/93
STARSTD.DIoIG
~ ,,', \ 1."'... .
SAN TOMAS STREET DESIGN STANDARDS
MINOR LOCAL ACCESS
DEVEUPHE:NT ON EXISTING
MINOR LOCAL ACCESS STREl:T
.. NE'J...... L..lJC-. ACCESS STREET
\//llUt.VAY
<0Nl.. Y \/HERE \/IIlLJ(S caST
IN ) ~ OF" Il.DOC ON
SAME SIIlO
cun MIll CiUTTO
/<DNL Y \/MERE CUi casTS
III > ~ OF" a.ocx ON
SAME SUO
rnd
GRADE SHOULDER
'TO DRAIN
STREET \/TITH
.
HALf ST1IO:T
STllaT \IBTH
11'
HlIIU" STJEI:T
UT1LITlES
EASEMENT
.
RIGHT OF' \lAY
2r
HIIllF STRUT
RIGHT OF" VAY
tW.f" STREET
Policies:
Tra.ffiC VoluMe < 1200/day
MaxiMuM length : 2000 feet <500 feet for cul-de-sac)
Proh~ited ConnectiOns I Express.a.y o.nd higher
MiniMUM RequireMents For New Construction
Vehicle la.nes : 2 X 10'
Separa.te Turn Lanes : No
Bike lanes or Area.: sha.re in 10' Veh. lanes
Median: No
On PaveMent Parking : Yes (only where Min. 17'
hal f street eXists>
Pedestria.n Facility : No .
Pa.ved Curb & Gutter No lIE
Street Ughts : No
PubliC lo.ndscaping : No lIE
StorM Drains: Yes lIE
Pa.rk Strip: No .
Utitities Ea.seMents : Yes (2XS') lIE
Cut-de-sac Bulb Dia.Meter: 70' FOC-FOC,
90' ROW' lIE
lIE Match predOMinant diMensions (right-of-wo.y o.nd street width) and
install iMproveMents consistent with those existing on > 50/. of the
block on the saMe side of the street.
9/93
STARSTD.lJ'JG
.\ ~....
SAN TOMAS STREET DESIGN STANDARDS
MAJOR LOCAL ACCESS
\ mEn '''"n"
AT INTERSECTION ONLY
bID
.
STREET 'WIDTH
36 FEET
.
RIGHT OF 'JAY
50 FEET
Policies:
Traffic VoluMe < 2500/day
MaxiMuM Length : 2000 feet
Prohibited Connections : Expressway and higher
MiniMUM ReqUireMents for New Construction
Vehicle Lanes : 2 X 11'
Separate Turn Lones : No
Bike Lanes or Area : share 11' Veh. Lanes
Median : No
On PaveMent Parking : Yes (2X7')
Pedestrian Facility : Yes
Paved Curb & Gutter : Yes
Street Lights : Yes (at
intersections only)
Public Landscaping : No
StorM Drains : Yes
Park Strip : No
Utilities EaseMents
Yes (2X5')
lIE in areas with existing iMproveMents) Match predOMinant diMensions
(a t least 18' half street on 25 feet of right of way)
9/93
ST ARSTD.D\JG
... ,,,,*.
SAN TOMAS STREET DESIGN STANDARDS
MINOR COLLECTOR
STREET TREES
mm uruHl," J
IF CONSTRAINED RIGHT-OF-'JAY
\lITH ON-STREET PARKING _ _
'JALK'JAY
STREET 'JIDTH
18'
HALF STREET
RIGHT or 'JAY
28'
HALf STREET
Policies:
t.
~
CURB &. GUTTER
.
4.5'
.
4'
UTILITIES
STREET 'JIDTH
u,-
HALf STREET
RIGHT or 'JAY
.
20'
HALf STREET
Tra.ffic VolUMe < 2500 to 4000/do.y
Ma.xiMUM Length : 3000 feet
Prohibited Connections : Expresswo.y o.nd higher
MiniMUM RequireMents for New Construction
Vehicle Lo.nes : 2 X 11'
Sepo.ro.te Turn La.nes No
Bike Lo.nes or Area. : sha.re 11' Veh. La.nes
Median : No
On Po.veMent Po.rking : Yes-Only with Min. 18'
half street
Pedestria.n Facility: Yes
Po.ved Curb 8. Gutter : Yes
Street Lights : Yes **
Public Landscaping : Yes
StorM Drains : Yes
Po.rk Strip : No
Utility EaseMents : N/R
* on streets with existing iMproveMents, Match predoMinant diMensions - Must
Meet MiniMUM diMensions 0.5 shown o.bove.
9/93
** lighting sto.ndo.rds: COMMercial/Business = 0.6 ft/co.ndles, 1:5 o.vg/Min
residential = 0.4 ft/co.ndles, 1:5 0. vg/Min
STARSTD.DVG
,>I ..,.
SAN TOMAS STREET DESIGN STANDARDS
MAJOR COLLECTOR
"'EO u'""" /
STREET VIDTH
23'
HALf STREET.
STREET VIDTH
29'
HALf STREET
7'
UTILITIES
MINIMUM
REQUIREMENTS
( :S: 9000 ADT>
..
MINIMUM
REQUIREMENTS
(OVER 8000 ADT>
TVO-VAY TURN OR
MEDIAN (HAlf>
6'
CURB L GUTTER
,'"
os
RIGHT OF >JAY
35'
HALf STREET
RIGHT OF VAY
.1'
HALF STREET
Policies:
TroffiC VolUMe : 4000 to 12000/doy
MoxiMUM Length : 1.5 Miles
Prohibited Connections : Expresswoy ond higher
MiniMUM ReqUireMents for New Construction
Vehicle Lones : 2 X 11'
Seporo te Turn Lones : Yes
Bike Lones or Areo : Closs II (2X4')
Medion : 2 woy L TL or Roisecl (over 8000 ADD
On PoveMent Po.rking : 2X8'
Pedestrion F ocility : Yes
Po.ved Curb &. Gutter: Yes
Street Lights : Yes lIElIE
Public Lo.ndsco.ping : Yes
StorM Droins : Yes
Utilities EoseMents : N/R
Po.rk Strip : Yes
lIE in oreos with existing iMproveMents, MO tch predOMino.nt diMensions - MUst Meet
MiniMUM diMensions 0.5 shown obove
lIElIE Lighting Standards: COMMercioUBusiness = 0.9 ft/co.ndles, 1:4 ovg/Min
Residential = 0,6 ft/co.ndles, 1:5 o.vg/Min
9/93
STARSTD.DVG
..."",,.
SAN TOMAS STREET DESIGN STANDARDS
MINOR ARTERIAL
~ ""'" ",",n..
PARKING AlLOVEO .
. NO PARKING ALUJ\JED
PARK STRIP
PARKING LANE
S'
STREET VI OT H
40'
HALf STREET
.
STREET VIDTH
32'
HALF STREET
RIGHT Of VAY
44'
HALF STREET
RIGHT or VAY.
52'
HALF STREET
Policies:
Tro.ffiC VolUMe: 12000 to 30000/do.y
Mo.XiMUM Length : 4 Miles
Prohibited Connections : None above
MiniMUM RequireMents for New Construction
Vehicle Lo.nes : 4 X II'
Sepo.ro. te Turn Lo.nes Yes
Bike Lo.nes or Areo.
Clo.SS II (2X4')
Pedestrio.n Facility : Yes
Paved Curb & Gutter: Yes
Street Lights : Yes lIE'*'
PubliC Lo.ndscaping : Yes
StorM Drains : Yes
Pork Strip : Yes (2 X 7')
Utilities EaseMents : N/R
Median : 2 \lay L TL or Raised
On Po. veMent Po.rking : No, unless
exception granted
)IE in areas with existing iMproveMents, Match predOMino.nt diMensions _ Must Meet
MiniMuM diMensions o.S shown o.bove
**
Street Lighting: Business\CoMMerCial =
Residential =
1.2 ft/candles, 1:3 avg/Min
0.6 ft/candles, 1:4 avg/Min
9/93
STARSTD.D'JG