Supervisors approve Kensington home after applicant and neighbor reach conditions; appellant agrees not to litigate

The Contra Costa Board of Supervisors on Oct. 21 denied an appeal and approved a development plan and Kensington design review allowing construction of a new single‑family residence at 279 Colusa Ave., Kensington, after the applicant and an adjacent neighbor reached a negotiated set of conditions.

The project proposes a new approximately 1,780‑square‑foot residence behind an existing dwelling; the existing house will be retained as an accessory dwelling unit under the applicant’s plans. The board approved the project after the applicant agreed to multiple design adjustments intended to reduce impacts on a neighboring property to the south.

Key concessions and conditions Under the terms presented to the board the parties agreed to the following revisions before county stamping of building plans: reduction of eave depth from 12 to 8 inches; reduction of a porch roof rake; shortening the second‑floor roof terrace by 4 feet 8 inches and reducing a porch dimension; moving the terrace’s screen wall inward to match a new railing line; requiring textured glass for all bathroom and laundry windows; raising all side windows on the second floor by 10 inches (both sill and header moved upward); adopting a lighter exterior finish; and reducing the overall house width by 9 inches.

To further increase separation from the most affected neighbor the site plan will be revised to provide a 4 foot 3 inch side‑yard setback to the north and a 12 foot 3 inch setback to the south (an increase on the southern side compared to the previously submitted plan). The appellant, who had objected to the project, stated on the record that he would not pursue litigation if the board approved the project with the negotiated conditions.

Why it matters Kensington has its own combining district standards that guide building placement and scale in a steep, tight neighborhood; the case underscores how neighborhood‑level design standards, ADU rules, and state law interact as owners pursue additional dwelling units and replacement homes on constrained lots.

Board action and votes County planning staff recommended the project, noting consistency with the R‑6 residential zoning and Kensington combined‑district rules as applied. After public comment and a brief statement of the negotiated conditions, the board denied the appeal and approved the project unanimously. The approvals include the project findings and the conditions described in the staff report plus the negotiated modifications described above.

Lede provenance: staff presentation began at the public hearing and the board recorded the approval later in the afternoon on Oct. 21.