PREPARED BY: Erin M. Walters
Senior Planner
Reviewed by: Town Manager, Assistant Town Manager, Town Attorney, and Community Development Director
110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95030 ● (408) 354-6832 www.losgatosca.gov
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: 08/11/2026
ITEM NO: 1
ADDENDUM
DATE: August 7, 2026
TO: Mayor and Town Council
FROM: Chris Constantin, Town Manager
SUBJECT: Consider a Recommendation by the Planning Commission to Approve the Subdivision of One Lot into Twelve Lots with a Vesting Tentative Map, Construction of a New Single-Family Residence on Each Lot, Site Work Requiring a Grading Permit, and Removal of Large Protected Trees Under Senate Bill 330 (SB330) on Vacant Property Zoned RC. Located at 178 Twin Oaks Drive. APN 532-16-006. Architecture and Site Applications S-24-023 through -032 and S-24-059, Subdivision Application M-24-013, and Mitigated Negative Declaration Application ND-25-001. An Initial Study and Recirculated Mitigated Negative Declaration Have Been Prepared. Property Owner/Applicant: Larry Dodge. Project Planner: Erin Walters.
REMARKS:
Public comments received between 3:01 p.m., Thursday, August 6, 2026, and 3:00 p.m., Friday, August 7, 2026, are included as Attachment 14.
ATTACHMENTS:
Previously Received with the August 11, 2026, Staff Report:
1. Draft Resolution making the required findings and approving the applications subject to the Conditions of Approval (included as Exhibit A)
2. December 17, 2025, Planning Commission Staff Report, with Exhibits 1-27
3. December 15, 2025, Planning Commission Addendum, with Exhibit 28
4. December 16, 2025, Planning Commission Addendum 2 Report, with Exhibits 29 and 30
5. December 17, 2025, Planning Commission Desk Item, with Exhibit 31
6. December 17, 2025, Planning Commission Verbatim Minutes
7. June 11, 2026, Planning Commission Staff Report, with Exhibits 32 through 43
8. June 9, 2026, Planning Commission Addendum, with Exhibits 44 and 45 PAGE 2 OF 2
SUBJECT: 178 Twin Oaks Drive
DATE: August 7, 2026
9. June 11, 2026, Planning Commission Desk Item, with Exhibit 46
10. June 11, 2026, Planning Commission Verbatim Minutes
11. Revised Recirculated Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, July 2026
12. Modified Conditions of Approval – Redlined
13. Public Comments received between 11:01 a.m., Thursday, June 11, 2026, and 3:00 pm, Thursday, August 6, 2026
Received with this Addendum Report:
14. Public Comments received between 3:01 p.m., Thursday, August 6, 2026, and 3:00 pm, Friday, August 7, 2026
From: William Meleyco
Sent: Thursday, August 6, 2026 4:23 PM
To: Erin Walters <[email protected]>
Subject: Fwd: 178 Twin Oaks city council letter
[EXTERNAL SENDER]
> Erin.
> Attached is my letter to the City Council regarding the Special Meeting on 8/11. > Thank you
> William Meleyco
> Longmeadow Drive
> Los Gatos Ca
>
>
>
> Wm Meleyco
>
>
From: David Greenfield
Sent: Thursday, August 6, 2026 4:45 PM
To: Erin Walters <[email protected]>
Subject: feedback on 178 Twin Oaks Drive
[EXTERNAL SENDER]
Hi Town Council,
My wife and I live at Longmeadow Drive, just down from Twin Oaks and have been following the saga of 178 Twin Oaks Drive for many years. I'd like to amplify a few points that I've made at multiple planning and council meetings over the years.
The environmental impact report is no longer accurate or valid and needs to be redone.
Multiple variables have changed since the initial report including an extensive additional pavement "project" dramatically increasing the hardscape square footage (on the road to the homes) which will clearly change the storm run-off calculations and the observation of a previously undocumented creek which showed up during storm run-off earlier this year. It is not surprising that added "creeks" were noted subsequent to the filing of the existing impact report since the "environment" was not reviewed during a storm.
The 2nd item is a request by the existing neighbors for a trail around the new development.
The latest proposal creates 2 disjointed and un-connected easements which were offered for use in some future trail. They effectively would enable 2 very short trails to no-where, that could not be connected. During the last planning meeting, the builder highlighted that the margins were just so exceptionally tight that the economics of the entire project would be unstable if the builder funded a proper trail. The builder was unwilling to highlight what a trail would cost. If the builder considered throwing this small bone to the existing homeowners, the builder might create a bit of positive good-will that would go a long way during this extensive development.
Finally, as a resident of Longmeadow, I find it repulsive that the home-owners along Longmeadow and a few home-owners at the end of Twin Oaks would have to bear the entire brunt of all noise, trucks, debris, and vehicular manslaughter of this project because there is only a single entrance (for construction) for the entire project. And I don't count the single new home off Cerro Vista as added access. The single access (along with a presumably locked gate to Brooke Acres to be unlocked in the event of emergency) is problematic in many areas. Let the builder figure out how to create another proper entrance so that the pain of this development is shared more equitably among the neighbors.
While none of the neighbors want to see the hill developed, we are resigned that due to "builders remedy", development is clearly coming. Sticking the entire burden on a Longmeadow is onerous and creates significant fire risk due to egress issues. I've seen how the illusion of a second exit can be a problem when homeowners don't know how to unlock the gate.
Thanks for considering this input.
Regards,
Dave Greenfield