A detailed plan for Campbell’s newest neighborhood is inching toward completion, but some residents say the debate over its formation has created a rift.

The planning commission on May 23 reviewed the Campbell Village Plan, a detailed document that when complete will codify transportation and land use policies and future development standards, specifically for residential homes and a few businesses in the former

Cambrian 36 area, which was annexed and incorporated from Santa Clara County in 2012.

The draft plan has been in the works since the fall and was crafted by staff with input from residents. The council has final approval.

The commission combed through the details of the plan last week, analyzing proposed development standards for architectural styles, roof designs, building materials, building heights and design features like fences, balconies, garages and carports.

But the most contentious issue among neighbors is privacy, specifically rear setback standards. Setbacks are the specific number of feet a residence must be from a fence or wall separating properties. Residents are debating how close is too close for residences to be next to adjacent properties. Two petitions have been circulated in the neighborhood, with some people siding with a five-foot rear setback and others wanting a 20-foot rear setback.

The city currently requires a rear setback of five feet or half the wall height of the building that is adjacent to the property line, according to the staff report.

By comparison, the county requires a 25-foot rear setback and San Jose requires 20-feet.

Resident Lisa Dow told the commission she’d prefer five-foot setbacks to discourage two-story homes from being built. She added that with a five-foot rear setback, people remodeling their homes would likely stick with a one-story house by building as much as they can on their lot. This, she argued, would alleviate privacy issues from two-story homes overlooking adjacent homes and yards.

“If we would have been in the 20-foot setback, we would have done exactly what you thought,” she said. “We will be forced to go up, which entails more expense, and then, of course, everyone is concerned about the privacy issue. Every single day we’d get to have people watch over us, looking in our back yard.”

Some residents say the city’s process for crafting the plan has added to the tension between neighbors.

“They’ve been trying to create an area plan for years, and all we have to show for it is a new draft and a very angry neighborhood,” said homeowner Mike Jacoby in an email to this newspaper.

“They should create a basic area plan that takes care of our streets and sidewalks and call it done.”

Staff has met a few times with the neighborhood since October to gather comments and ideas for the plan. Earlier meetings focused on improvements to the public right-of-way, such as sidewalks, curb and gutters, street trees and traffic calming measures.

Nearly two dozen residents spoke at last week’s commission meeting, expressing their concerns with rear setbacks and how they “fought to be in Campbell” during the annexation process.

“I think that we on the planning commission truly hear what you are saying about what this is doing to your neighborhood, and I’m sorry,” commissioner Cynthia Dodd said. “I know I speak for all of us that we’re very sorry this is causing you a great deal of pain, strife and upset.”

Residents of Cambrian 36 worked for roughly five years with the cities of San Jose and Campbell on annexation. The area could have become one of 48 unincorporated Santa Clara County parcels to be absorbed by San Jose years ago, but residents there expressed an unwillingness to become a part of the large municipality.

The two cities struck a deal where Campbell would pay San Jose $199,000 every year for five years following the annexation to offset lost tax revenue. In April 2013, residents approved a tax measure of $325 for residential properties and $600 for commercial properties to help pay for emergency services and street maintenance.

There are 462 residential parcels in the neighborhood. Twenty-three parcels along Camden, Bascom and Union avenues are zoned as neighborhood commercial and general commercial.

The neighborhood encompasses residences between Union, Bascom and Camden avenues and McGlincy Drive in the southwest part of Campbell bordering San Jose.

The commission will review the neighborhood plan again on June 27.

To view the draft plan, visit bit.ly/camplanning.