03-12-2025 CDAC Minutes
110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95030 ● 408-354-6832
www.losgatosca.gov
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
CONCEPTUAL
DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY
COMMITTEE REPORT
MINUTES OF THE CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING
MARCH 12, 2025
The Conceptual Development Advisory Committee of the Town of Los Gatos conducted a
regular meeting on March 12, 2025, at 4:00 p.m.
MEETING CALLED TO ORDER AT 4:00 PM
ROLL CALL
Present: Vice Chair Kendra Burch, Councilmember Mary Badame, Councilmember Maria Ristow,
Commissioner Steve Raspe.
Absent: Chair Jeffrey Barnett due to a conflict of interest with the proposed project.
VERBAL COMMUNICATIONS
None.
CONSENT ITEMS (TO BE ACTED UPON BY A SINGLE MOTION)
1. Approval of Minutes – February 12, 2025
MOTION: Motion by Committee Member Raspe to approve the consent calendar.
Seconded by Councilmember Badame.
VOTE: Motion passed unanimously (4-0).
PUBLIC HEARINGS
2. 235 Oak Meadow Drive
Conceptual Development Advisory Committee Application CD-25-001
Consider a Request for Preliminary Review of a Planned Development Amendment and
a Proposal for Construction of a Multi-Family Residential Development (12 Units) on
Property Zoned O:PD. APN 529-10-132.
Property Owner: Michael Shields, Dog Friendly Rentals, LLC
Applicant: Kurt Anderson, Anderson Architects
Project Planner: Jocelyn Shoopman
Project Planner presented the staff report.
PAGE 2 OF 4
MINUTES OF CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING OF
MARCH 12, 2025
N:\DEV\CDAC\CDAC MINUTES\2025\03-12-2025 CDAC Minutes.docx
Open Public Comment.
Kurt Anderson, Applicant
There is a high street and low street, and based on our current proposal of five stories,
we are 31 feet in height from the high street. We are asking to utilize the state density bonus
law to allow this. We are willing to consider changes in the height and reducing one level from
the building. We are including a roof deck, which the neighborhood could use for private events
once a month. We are also including a public dog park for use by the neighborhood. We have
parking per the requirement for both residents, guests, and bikes. We understand that there
are concerns about the architecture, but you do see contemporary throughout Los Gatos these
days.
Mike Shields, Property Owner
The bulk of the building is at the lower level of the building with no residential. The dog
park is open to public and will be maintained by the HOA.
Kurt Anderson, Applicant
The rooftop deck will be usable for neighbors once a month free of charge. For the side
setback relief, we have one spot where we are encroaching a little bit that we are asking for
relief. For the possibility of dropping the height, the building could go down to 53 feet from 63
feet if we change the height. On level 1, we would have a 1-bedroom, 2-bedroom, and 3-
bedroom. If we lower the height, the roof deck would be lower, but still available.
Paul Vieth, Neighbor
The building size and architecture is completely out of proportion with the area. This lot
is subject to CC&Rs, so this means that the HOA has the power to approve any architecture that
comes into the neighborhood. After reviewing with the Town Attorney, we have this confirmed.
The Board will not approve of this project, as is. This will also cause traffic issues and road
damages. The environmental impact will be bad too and cause a strain on cable and electrical.
Lee Fagot, Resident
It’s interesting to see this type of building going in this neighborhood. The fact that
there is an HOA with the ability to determine what is going to be built in this community. This
does not fit the neighborhood here. Perhaps there is a way for the applicant team to consider
modifying the plan to align with the neighborhood. The safety risk with this site as the egress
and egress is tight. Safety is the number one concern at this site.
Jody Knister, Neighbor
The reason we bought the house across from this location about a year ago and chose
this location is because it was a nice, quiet neighborhood. It’s very disturbing to see that this
could be built across the street. We don’t need a roof top deck to gather on as we already
gather anyway. We enjoy the trees that are currently there, but we assume that those trees will
not be there with this project. This is going to negatively impact our livelihood.
PAGE 3 OF 4
MINUTES OF CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING OF
MARCH 12, 2025
N:\DEV\CDAC\CDAC MINUTES\2025\03-12-2025 CDAC Minutes.docx
Laura Vieth, Neighbor
We don’t have any interest in the rooftop deck. We already connect with our neighbors
daily. We have no interest in the dog park either. The structure does not fit in this community.
Marty McFarland, Neighbor
We had a project go before the Planning Commission in this neighborhood, so we are
familiar with the process. I am not opposed to this lot becoming residential, but the issue is the
height of the building and how it would block the views. It needs to be compatible with the
neighborhood and the stress on the roads and traffic is concerning.
Mike Shields, Property Owner
The first issue is the CC&Rs, Lot 12 is not subject to the CC&Rs and is not a part of the
HOA. This property does have a responsibility to maintain the road and a 25 percent cost of the
maintenance of the road. We are happy to meet with an attorney to verify that the CC&Rs do
not apply to this lot. The second thing is fire service and safety, Oak Meadow Road is a through
street. We designed the project, so much of the traffic comes off from Blossom Hill Road, so its
minimal impact at the top of the road. We will cut it down a floor to be more compatible with
the neighborhood. We also made this a condominium building rather than apartments to help
minimize the traffic.
Closed Public Comment.
Committee members discussed the matter and provided the following questions and
comments:
• The issues between the CC&Rs and whether they apply to this property for architectural
control need to be determined prior to a formal application.
• Concerned about safety, evacuation routes, and Fire’s review of the project.
• The architecture is a concern as it is out character with the wooded area.
• The height is a concern as it still seems out of character with the neighborhood, even with
the discussion of removing one level.
• The architecture could use further refinement because of privacy concerns with the amount
of glass proposed. Frosted glass or other details should be considered to mitigate privacy
concerns.
• The project feels too big, intense, and out of scale for the wooded neighborhood.
• Not opposed to a modern design, but the project could use more wood details and better
placement with the existing trees to mitigate privacy concerns.
• The dog park does not add value to the project and the roof top deck makes more sense for
a denser project.
• Before you re-draw this project based on feedback from the Committee, deal with the HOA
and CC&Rs. Speak with staff to help with getting direction when changing your plans as they
are very helpful with this.
PAGE 4 OF 4
MINUTES OF CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING OF
MARCH 12, 2025
N:\DEV\CDAC\CDAC MINUTES\2025\03-12-2025 CDAC Minutes.docx
OTHER BUSINESS
None.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 4:42 p.m.
This is to certify that the foregoing is a true
and correct copy of the minutes of the
March 12, 2025, meeting as approved by the
Conceptual Development Advisory Committee.
/s/Joel Paulson, Community Development Director