Exhibit 4 - Applicant's Response to the Consulting ArchitectGrosvenor – Property Americas T +1 (415) 434-0175
www.grosvenor.com
One California Street Suite 3000 San Francisco, California 94111 USA
4896-9879-6334 v1
March 25, 2025
Jocelyn Shoopman
Senior Planner
Town of Los Gatos
Community Development Department
110 E. Main Street
Los Gatos, CA 95030
Re: Final Application Submittal for 14859 Los Gatos Blvd and 16270 Burton Road (APN 424-
07-009, -053, -081, -094, -095, -115, -116, and -052)
Architecture and Site Application S-23-031
Subdivision Application M-23-005
Dear Ms. Shoopman:
I am writing to confirm our response to the Town of Los Gatos’s Consulting Architect report, dated
February 4, 2024. In Sections II and III of the October 3, 2024 letter addressed to you from Eric Phillips,
we acknowledged the receipt of the Cannon Design Group’s Design Review Comments and provided our
response. For ease of reference, the portions of the October 3, 2024 letter relevant to our response to
the Design Review Comments are excerpted and updated below.
As an initial matter, we note that the Project has been designed to comply with all of the Town’s
applicable, objective design standards, as demonstrated by the most recent “Objective Design
Standards” matrix submitted in support of our application. In addition, Grosvenor has partnered with
three highly-qualified, well-respected architecture firms who have expended a tremendous amount of
time and thought in developing a vision for Phase II of the North 40 that includes neighborhood serving
retail, complements the surrounding neighborhoods and uses, and maximizes open space that both the
North 40 and surrounding community can enjoy – all while satisfying the minimum density requirement
identified in the Town’s Housing Element. Therefore, we believe that the Project’s design thoughtfully
satisifes the Town’s applicable design standards and its housing policies in a manner appropriate for the
required density, the Project Site, its immediate surroundings, and the larger community-wide context.
The Project Complies with the Town’s Applicable, Objective Development Standards.
The Town has adopted “Objective Design Standards” to evaluate housing development projects. In its
December 23, 2024 Staff Technical Review letter, the Town did not identify any applicable Objective
Design Standards that the Project did not satisfy.1 Note that the Project has also applied for
concessions/incentives and waivers pursuant to the State Density Bonus Law (Government Code section
1 The Staff Technical Review letter requested additional justification related to the Project’s requests under the
State Density Bonus Law, which information was provided to the Town on March 7, 2025.
EXHIBIT 4
4896-9879-6334 v1
65915) to accommodate the Project’s design.2 Accordingly, not all of the Town’s Objective Design
Standards are applicable to the Project. However, the Project’s design satisfies all applicable Objective
Design Standards.
Cannon Design Group’s Design Review Comments are inapplicable to the Project.
The Town’s July 17, 2024 Staff Technical Review letter attached a report from the Town’s Consulting
Architect evaluating the Project (Design Review Comments from Cannon Design Group dated February 4,
2024, or the “Cannon Letter”). As discussed in more detail below, the Cannon Letter’s comments do not
address standards applicable to the Project or identify any basis to disapprove or condition the Project.
Therefore, the Project application material does not include a response to each specific comment in the
Cannon Letter.
First, the Cannon Letter focuses on the “vision, goals, policies, development standards, and design
guidelines” from the North 40 Specific Plan (“Specific Plan”). However, the referenced standards were
created for residential uses already developed in Phase I of the Specific Plan. The Specific Plan describes
commercial design guidelines for Phase II and the Project Site. However, as discussed in Section II of this
letter, the Specific Plan’s land use designations and standards are not applicable to a housing
development project that is consistent with the Housing Element’s designation for the Project Site.
Because the Project will consist of residential development consistent with the Housing Element, the
Specific Plan’s commercial design guidelines and Phase I residential design guidelines are not applicable
to the Project.
Second, the Housing Element designates the Project Site for residential development at 30 du/ac with an
expected yield of up to 461 units. The Specific Plan was intended for a much lower density development
and accommodated only 320 total units in Phase I and Phase II after a density bonus was awarded. This
means that the Specific Plan’s guidelines do not facilitate nor accommodate the density currently
allowed on the Project Site, and as such they may not be enforced. (See Gov. Code § 65589.5(f)(1)
(development polices “shall be applied to facilitate and accommodate development at the density
permitted on the site and proposed by the development”).)
Third, many of the Cannon Letter’s comments and the underlying design guidelines use the word
“should,” which is not mandatory language. (See Specific Plan, p. 3-1 [“Mandatory regulations are
denoted by the use of the word “shall.” A guideline, which is denoted by the word “should,” is not
mandatory”].) In addition to being advisory, the Cannon Letter’s comments and underlying design
guidelines are highly subjective, and the Town’s discretion is limited to compliance with objective
standards. No response is required to comments regarding non-mandatory guidelines, which are not a
basis to deny or condition the Project.
For example, the Architectural and Site Character Goals and Policies in the Specific Plan Design
Guidelines include a goal to “continue the small-town character of Los Gatos,” and Policy DG2 is to
“create a new neighborhood that has its own identity yet complements the existing character of Los
Gatos.” (Specific Plan, p. 3-1.) Throughout the Cannon Letter are many variations on the statement that
2 Because of the Project’s affordability levels, it is eligible for two concessions/incentives that result in cost
reductions and unlimited waivers of development standards necessary to accommodate the Project as proposed.
(Gov. Code § 65915(d)(2)(B), (e).)
4896-9879-6334 v1
the Project design should reflect the “look, feel and small-town character of Los Gatos.” These standards
are neither mandatory nor objective, so no response is required.
The Cannon Letter’s comments rely on inapplicable, subjective standards that conflict with the density
allowed in the Housing Element in an apparent effort to reduce the Project’s density, in direct conflict
with the Housing Accountability Act and the Town’s own Housing Element policies. For example, the
Cannon Letter takes issue with the Project’s proposed height. (See, e.g., pp. 10 [“The height and mass of
the structure are magnitudes larger than any other residential or commercial development in the
community”], 18 [“The currently proposed design falls arguably short of accommodating a building of
this size and height”], 27 [“The proposed height and bulk of the mixed use housing project would be a
major departure from the wishes of the community over the past several decades”], & 29 [design
concepts could “reduce the [Project’s] impact” but “could not fully mitigate [the Project’s] height and
bulk”].) None of these comments are based on applicable, objective standards. Rather, the Cannon
Letter raises issues with height and bulk in connection with its comments on the “character” of the
development, which is not a valid basis to review the Project.
We look forward to the Planning Commission’s and Town Council’s review of the Project application and
continuing to work with the Town to meet the community’s housing needs.
Yours sincerely,
Steve Buster
Senior Vice President
Steve.buster@grosvenor.com
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank