Zoning

Rosenbaum Road vacation

Summary not yet generated for this topic.

Community sentiment

Opposed (1)

At a glance

Public comments
1
Last 30 days
0

Last discussed Jul 21, 2026.

Public comments (14)

OpposedSasha TopaJul 21, 2026

Objected to the CEQA categorical exemptions, arguing the road easement and parcel are tied to the church's 118-stall parking plan, and asked code enforcement to investigate the church's operations and area homeschool programs.

City Council and Successor Agency Meeting - Jul 21, 2026 · 44:17 →
ConcernedShelly BarkerJul 21, 2026

Supported staff's no-action recommendation and urged the city to preserve easements so the Trabuco Creek regional trail — the missing 'mountains to sea' link — remains possible.

City Council and Successor Agency Meeting - Jul 21, 2026 · 48:33 →
SupportiveFr. Daniel HabibApr 21, 2026

The church's senior priest described modest plans to build on 10% of the property, beautify the area, and add shared parking, urging adoption of both resolutions.

City Council and Successor Agency Meeting - Apr 21, 2026 · 1:23:10 →
SupportiveSam BotrosApr 21, 2026

A church member and 2014 resident said the church fits the city's founding character and thanked the council for its support.

City Council and Successor Agency Meeting - Apr 21, 2026 · 1:26:43 →
ConcernedCraig RobsonApr 21, 2026

Attorney for the George Rosenbaum Trust raised access concerns for large trucks at the ranch on parcel two but said they want to work collaboratively with the city.

City Council and Successor Agency Meeting - Apr 21, 2026 · 1:28:02 →
OpposedJames JonesApr 21, 2026

Owner of adjacent parcels said he lost his goat yoga business after city enforcement, and that the city never offered him the land it now plans to sell to the church.

City Council and Successor Agency Meeting - Apr 21, 2026 · 1:30:17 →
SupportiveMariam Soldin-WasfiApr 21, 2026

A local dental clinic owner and church member expressed gratitude and support for the church's presence.

City Council and Successor Agency Meeting - Apr 21, 2026 · 1:36:00 →
OpposedPamela ToomeyApr 21, 2026

A 50-year nearby resident worried the vacation is really about church parking, that the road is becoming dangerous, and that the rural character is being lost.

City Council and Successor Agency Meeting - Apr 21, 2026 · 1:36:59 →
SupportiveBethany NelmsApr 21, 2026

Returned to support the vacation, saying opposition stems from confusion and that the church acquisition would be beneficial.

City Council and Successor Agency Meeting - Apr 21, 2026 · 1:41:31 →
SupportiveMina MikhaelApr 21, 2026

A church board member thanked staff and said the vacation would let them beautify the area and add about six public parking spaces.

City Council and Successor Agency Meeting - Apr 21, 2026 · 1:43:00 →
SupportiveAlyson SmithApr 21, 2026

A resident who frequents the area said the land's current condition is unsafe and supports the church using it for parking.

City Council and Successor Agency Meeting - Apr 21, 2026 · 1:44:30 →
SupportiveMarcellino LazaApr 21, 2026

A San Clemente resident and church member briefly urged approval of the two resolutions.

City Council and Successor Agency Meeting - Apr 21, 2026 · 1:46:06 →
ConcernedChelsea MendozaApr 21, 2026

A Village San Juan resident asked the council to attach binding deed conditions before May 19 — requiring the church to disclose its intended use in writing and protecting public street access and parking.

City Council and Successor Agency Meeting - Apr 21, 2026 · 1:48:07 →
OpposedGary JonesApr 21, 2026

A Village resident described losing the area's ranch character, near-misses with church traffic, and asked why the land isn't put on the open market.

City Council and Successor Agency Meeting - Apr 21, 2026 · 1:50:33 →