Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Zoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Venice council approves rezoning for two parcels in island neighborhood over resident objections
Summary
The City Council approved an ordinance changing two properties from multifamily to single-family zoning after a public hearing that drew neighborhood comments and a 5-1 council vote.
The Venice City Council voted 5-1 on June 24 to adopt Ordinance No. 2025-20, amending the official zoning atlas to change the zoning for properties at 225 Park Boulevard South and 528 Menendez Street from Residential Multifamily-4 to Residential Single Family.
The rezoning drew public comment from residents with different perspectives. Donald O’Connell, a long-time Venice resident and property owner in the historic apartment district, described the area’s original intent as workforce housing and said zoning changes since the 1950s had reduced density and made new rental housing effectively impossible in the district. He warned the current rules have “made it impossible to build new rental housing in the district.” Marguerite Delver, speaking in favor of the applicant’s request, argued that restoring single-family rights would preserve neighborhood character and restore property rights she said had been “abruptly taken” from the Borah family.
The council opened a quasi-judicial public hearing on the ordinance after the clerk read the title and received no ex parte disclosures or written communications on the item. Council member Engelking moved adoption “based on the evidence in the record,” and Council member Howard seconded. Council member Smith said he opposed the change and repeated concerns he had voiced earlier; the motion passed 5 to 1.
Why it matters: the action changes long-term development rights for the two parcels and signals the council’s willingness to adjust zoning designations in island neighborhoods. Supporters said the change restores an owner’s ability to build single-family homes in the future; opponents said it undermines the historic apartment district and reduces supply of smaller rental units.
Council action and next steps: the ordinance was adopted at second reading and becomes effective per the terms in the ordinance. No additional staff responses or applicant rebuttals were recorded in the hearing record. The council did not identify a timeline for any redevelopment of the parcels.
Community context: speakers framed the issue around the city’s historic “John Nolan” apartment district, changes in density limits adopted in the 1970s, and long-standing local concerns about maintaining affordable/workforce housing in the island neighborhood.
