The article you’re about to read is from our reporters doing their important work — investigating, researching, and writing their stories. We want to provide informative and inspirational stories that connect you to the people, issues and opportunities within our community. Journalism requires lots of resources. Today, our business model has been interrupted by the pandemic; the vast majority of our advertisers’ businesses have been impacted. That’s why the DP Times is now turning to you for financial support. Learn more about our new Insider’s program here. Thank you.

By Cindy Monroe, Dana Point

When my husband and I opened Luxe Restaurant almost four years ago our two boys were just out of diapers and I didn’t have much spare time to donate. Despite that, I was encouraged by Councilman Schoeffel (a regular customer of Luxe at the time) to be a “spokesperson or ambassador” of sorts for the Town Center Project to rally support by local business owners and property owners. I did just that. Later, when I was invited to join the Town Center Committee, I gladly accepted. Then unfortunately, when the vote to fund the Del Prado phase (where my business is located) of Town Center was presented to the council, Mr. Schoeffel did a complete 180 and voted against it!

I recently was named, along with a few others on the Town Center Committee, on what was intended to be a “hit piece” that was inserted into the Dana Point Times. The piece unsuccessfully insinuates that we are self-serving, bad people. When in reality, we are local business and property owners—and very nice ones, I might add—that would like to see the Town Center project carried out to completion. This “hit piece” then asks for voters to choose Jody Payne, Chuck Rathbone and Nancy Jenkins—who are ironically all supported by Councilman Schoeffel. Jenkins has since stated that the piece was published without her knowledge or her permission.

Like most Dana Point residents, I am for healthy and responsible development. But can all variances be bad? The adjacent lot to my restaurant is now a giant hole with a fence around it. The proposed project met all of the Town Center requirements. It was an aesthetically pleasing design of three stories (first floor retail) and had two and a half levels of subterranean parking. The developer could not get the project to pencil out due to the cost for all of the parking, so the investor scrapped the project altogether.

Had they asked for and been granted a small variance, there would have been shops, restaurants and residences there today. For how long will Dana Point residents tolerate that not-so-lovely green fence? At least the lot had Christmas trees for a month of each year prior to that! It seems without a little variance here and there we will all fail. Thus the reason variances exist, just as amendments do. Currently there are 14 vacant lots in the Town Center. There have been only two new developments within the last 20 years.

The St. Regis, Ritz Carlton and Laguna Cliffs Marriott all required several variances (although permitted before city incorporation and therefore presided over by the county) and are the biggest sources of income for our city. They currently send most of their guests to Laguna Beach to shop and dine. As a 10-year Dana Point resident and small business owner, my personal wish for Town Center and future developments like Doheny Village, is to attract additional local, small business owners to open successful businesses for myself and other residents to enjoy. I look forward to easy, convenient, one-time parking where customers can stroll, shop and dine. After passing the PCH and Del Prado street improvements on a 5-0 vote by our City Council, our city employees worked hard to make this vision a reality. To carry this out, Roma Design was contracted. Roma is an extremely reputable firm that is responsible for projects such as: The Embarcadero and Fisherman’s Wharf in San Francisco, Third Street Promenade in Santa Monica and the Martin Luther King Memorial in Washington DC—just to name a few. Albeit on a much smaller scale, our Lantern District is sure to be fabulous with credentials such as these.

Enter stage right … the politically-motivated fear mongering! They say: “No variances should be considered!” “Development is bad!” “Our ‘hometown character’ will be destroyed!” Finally, a few mud-slinging hit pieces are published against good, hard-working members or our community. Can’t we all just get along? Not as long as they continue to promote divisiveness among our residents. I beg your support. Our local businesses need companion businesses and not vacant storefronts and lots. We are all suffering through the current construction struggling to pay rent and working hard to support our families and those of our employees. Must it all be in vain? Not all variances are bad.

Trustworthy, accurate and reliable local news stories are more important now than ever. Support our newsroom by making a contribution and becoming a subscribing member today.

About The Author Dana Point Times

comments (3)

  • In answer to the title of this letter DPRRD is not against development in Dana Point and has never stated that we were on any of our materials to the residents. Without our relentless input from the first hearing of the Majestic condo project at the Planning Commission we and many others expressed dismay at the number of condos, lack of adequate parking and overall lack of building aesthetics more suited for Irvine, not Dana Point. Because of the residents input the developer came back with a better building plan and more parking plus opening up the building paseos to the public. The city Planning Dept wasn’t asking for any of those things and was virtually giving the developer anything they wanted. We are only asking that the Town Center Master Plan be followed without the need for story and height variances.

    Cindy Monroe should be careful what she wishes for since Majestic is only interested in leasing and promoting their tennants and not any other business in Town Center. They too will probably have a similar wine bar business, in which the proximity for their residents will make Luxe just another competitive business that the residents probably won’t frequent if they can just go down an elevator to get to one. In Majestic’s presentation at the Council meeting Ms. Tapas stated they would have upscale quality restaurants and businesses similar to Luxe and acted like there weren’t any good restaurants available in Dana Point already.

    Dana Point Residents for Responsible Development is trying to maintain the quality of life we have enjoyed for years in our town and would like a better City Council more responsive to residents opinions and desires and that’s why we’re endorsing Jody Payne, Chuck Rathbone and Nancy Jenkins.

  • Hi Cindy,

    You seem to be personally offended by criticism of the Town Center I think residents are still upset about the disgraceful, June 17 City Council meeting in which several of its members including the Chairman participated. Residents also feel betrayed by being asked to spend $20 million for the Town Center Plan which is not being followed. Everyone wants Town Center to be successful and we hope your restaurant will share this success.


  • Hi Cindy,

    I think what last night hopefully shows is that not a lot of value is gained from going negative. All the council candidates truly want Dana Point to be great, and each simpy have different ideas on how to best accomplish this goal. If you think about the negative campaigning from this election, the hit piece against you and the other Towncenter business owners didnt accomplish too much. It certainly didnt accomplish the goal of electing the three folks mentioned in the piece and supported by Mr. Schoeffel.

    Actually, if I was Nancy Jenkins I would have a major problem with someone sending out a negative marketing tool and referencing my name. Huge turnoff at least in my opinion, and probably did more harm than good in a close election. She should feel a little used. Funny thing is, had the marketing effort been more about the value and benefits those three folks could bring as opposed to going after you business owners it might have created a much different result.

    I also feel very bad for Mr. Alan Wicksrom (great guy) who was taregted by “hit pieces”. I am referring to the mailer that the Surfrider exec was dropping off at local businesses at 5am. Really, if you cant put your true name on the content, and you have to run around dropping hit pieces off at 5am while scurrying back into your car, its pretty embarrassing.

    Fact is, all the candidates were good- just honest different ideas

comments (3)

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>