Residents ask San Clemente council to enforce 17-foot height limit on Delacata; Broadmoor HOA criticized

A series of residents urged the San Clemente City Council on Sept. 2 to compel the Broadmoor Homeowners Association to enforce a 17-foot height limit on vegetation and structures along Calle De La Cota (Delacata), saying the restriction was a binding part of approvals granted in the 1970s.

The appeals came during the public-comment period from homeowners who said Broadmoor has repeatedly ignored council directives dating to a June demand letter and subsequent council actions. “If elements and agreements are selectively used and enforced, it weakens them to the point of being practically meaningless,” said John Carretti, a long‑time homeowner above Broadmoor, referencing the original negotiated concessions tied to development of Delacata.

Bridal Buck said the 17‑foot restriction was the quid pro quo for Felicidad homeowners’ concessions—land, slope regrading and a sidewalk waiver—and that the city actively participated in securing those concessions. “The city was involved in all of this,” she said, adding Broadmoor has ignored council instructions from June 2024, an enforcement pause in November and a March directive to abate violations.

Multiple speakers described slow or partial compliance: Eric Fuhrman recounted a May 15 inspection with Broadmoor representatives and said inspectors told him enforcement could be “subjective” and fines, if levied, were not specified. “I have not received any updates since our May 15 inspection,” Fuhrman said, and asked the council to request an auditor-style report listing which homeowners received notices, which agreed to comply, which refused and any fines assessed.

Paul Buck said roughly 36 violations remain unresolved and urged the council to assume enforcement authority if Broadmoor does not act. “Only the city has the authority and obligation to enforce its own conditions of approval,” Buck said. He urged the council to remove remaining violations when the item returns to the council on Sept. 16.

Council members did not take new enforcement action during the meeting; multiple speakers requested the item be agendized for the council meeting on Sept. 16. Staff did not report any new fines or abatement timeline on Sept. 2; a Broadmoor representative was mentioned as having been given documents and prior directives, but Broadmoor’s responses were characterized in public testimony as insufficient.

The public record cited by speakers includes recorded CC&Rs, a developer’s sworn declarations and city approval documents dating to the 1970s; speakers asked the council to rely on those records if Broadmoor does not bring properties into compliance.

The council did not vote on enforcement at the Sept. 2 meeting. Several speakers said they would return on Sept. 16 if compliance had not occurred.