Restaurant Redesign Kerfuffle

Author: Phil Trubey

Date: May 11, 2021

After Holly Manion raised the alarm during last Thursday's board meeting about the too "modern" décor for the new restaurant, I took a look myself at what she referenced on the Ocio Design website.

Like many of you, I was aghast. So much so that I texted five Association board members on Friday asking their opinion on the design. All the responses I got back led me to believe that this design was operative. i.e. that while the décor might be tweaked, this was the latest version that the 3x3 committee was working towards.

Couple that with the board vote to spend $80K on permitting and construction documents, it sure sounded to me (and everyone else) like the train had left the station and we were set to be saddled with a Marriott hotel interior design.

I published my board meeting review article on Sunday and the feedback I've received (see below) mirrored my concerns.

Monday, Bill Johnson, a member of the 3x3 committee that is in charge of the renovations emailed me this:

Recently I learned about the Ranch Clubhouse renderings posted on Ocio Design Group’s website and reprinted in the Post. As far as I know, those drawings were never put into storyboards or approved by anybody at the Golf Club. They were sent to Brad Shupe over a year ago but he didn’t officially present them to anybody in authority because the project was on a Covid hold at that point. 

For your information, we are in the early stages of revitalizing the project with the intent to present designs to the whole community when they are completed.  Let me assure you and your readers, however, that we have no intention of remodeling the clubhouse in the style portrayed in the preliminary Ocio renderings you published. And we’ve asked Ocio to give us new renderings that are more in keeping with his original sketches, and that better reflect the ambience of both our community and our club.

And when I subsequently asked him why the board approved $80K for permitting and construction documents (which is something you would do after you got buy in from community members), he further replied:

We aren’t spending anything until we socialize the final designs with the Boards and the community. That was part of the request. We wanted the necessary money in the budget so that we would be in a position to move once we all agree on where we are going. As you probably know better than I do, the permitting process can be long and we want to be ready when both Boards have approved the project, the community has seen the designs, and the funds are available to begin construction.

Which basically alleviates most people's concerns. So, I guess this is a giant misunderstanding? Not quite. Based on the information we were all furnished, there was no misunderstanding. We just weren't given all the information. And neither, apparently, was the Association board based on my interactions with them via text messages.

Since I will no doubt get blamed for spreading misinformation, allow me to vent a bit here.

What the heck is the 3x3 committee doing and thinking??? The restaurant renovation is a huge deal. Everyone cares about it since we all want a nice facility we can all enjoy. 

But the 3x3 committee appears to be doing all its work in secrecy. And then not telling us what's going on and then getting surprised when Association board actions (approving $80K for construction docs)  lead us to believe the project has sped ahead of us. 

The Association web site has a tab for Committees. The 3x3 committee is not listed there. Do you know who is on the committee? How about meeting agendas? How about minutes? How about being able to attend a meeting to listen in on what is happening? How about some communications, any communications, telling us what they are working on and what stage the project is at? 

Look, this is how big projects fail. If you don't tell people things, no one will back it. In my opinion, this kerfuffle is a black eye for the project. It can't afford too many more.

Below are emails the RSF Post received expressing community member's opinions on the Ocio design and décor. As you read these emails, you can envision support for the project melting away...

I 100% agree with both you and Holly Manion that the proposed design of the dining room is neither in keeping with the aesthetics of RSF nor attractive from a modern design standpoint (reminiscent of the Marriott is a perfect way to put it).

Thank you for keeping all of us up to speed on the RSFA Board and other community information!

Diana Clark

I’m all in favor of modernizing the area but this lacks sophistication and style. Bottom line it looks like a Holiday Inn Express host area. They need a new designer. This is so bad, it would be better to leave it as it is vs. this.

Susan Bien
Former Association Board President and Treasurer 2002-2005
Former Board Member of the Historical Society 2000-2003
Former Board Member of the Tennis Club 2001-2004
Former Tennis Club Member
Current Golf Club Member

I agree the design for the remodel of the Club is out of character with the existing building and does resemble a Vegas or hotel setting. While contemporary motif is “in”, the design lacks fluidity and the colors chosen ignore the rest of the interior of the building. It is entirely possible to update the facility without destroying the existing character. I suggest the Board visit The Reserve Club in Palm Desert to see our how to create an update without painting everything white. I am willing to host such a visit to see how tastefully such a remodel can be.

Please share my comments with the Board and community.

Fred W Wasserman, Past President Rancho Santa Fe Association

I've looked at the concept by Ocio Design Group for remodeling the golf club restaurant. While I appreciate efforts to improve indoor/outdoor flow, I find the overall design aesthetic to be utterly lacking in charm and history, two of the features which attracted our family to Rancho Santa Fe in the first place. Moreover, the proposed aesthetic will date quickly, so hardly seems like a good investment. For example, will overhead plants thrive, or will management resort to fake ones-- or will it be reminiscent of greenery on top of kitchen cabinets, regardless? Aren't people already getting tired of "grayed out" colors? Do we really want circular bulkheads that look like landing spaceships? I'm dismayed that the Association has decided to spend $80k to get this design priced out. More member input should have been solicited before proceeding to the design phase, much less to the expense of pricing out the design.

If the goal is to have more casual options, think more about how people like to interact in casual settings, vs creating a bland, aggressively neutral design aesthetic. Here are some ideas:

• Have a family seating area, where parents can bring younger children who are still learning restaurant manners
• Have an outdoor area for seating people accompanied by well-mannered dogs
• Have a "grab and go" area for coffee and sandwiches/salads
• Have more small plate and cocktail options
• Have a game or two available outside, for the kids (or adults)-- corn hole, or a ring-post, or a sculpture for tots to climb on
• Expand takeaway "community kitchen" options for family meals, to boost restaurant sales (see what Farms has done).
• Have "pop-up" offerings for a limited time... for example ramen or poke bowls
• Have more casual events (trivia night, yappy hour).

It is possible to preserve our charm and history while creating more "casual" options! Let's not lose what makes RSF unique.

Stephanie Struble

Wanted to express how disappointing it is to learn the approval by the Association Board of a $80,000 expenditure to move the Golf Club Restaurant renovation concepts from Ocio Design through construction cost estimation and permitting. The decision seems quite unreasonable when the Association hasn’t publicized the initial design and hasn’t received general membership feedback!

Thanks to RSF Post the initial concept was made available for all of us to see AND just a day after the concept was made “generally” available to members the reaction is overwhelmingly negative…

• From the general reaction we are hearing it appears that the membership (both general and golf) are very taken back by this initial concept…
• Letter from member Holly Marion criticizing the design as being too modern and not in keeping with Rancho’s aesthetics – indeed, it is not!
• Opinion in the RSF post of defining the design as a “a Marriott hotel vibe” – not sure it is synonymous with RSF
• Design could “be casual without looking cheap or retro futuristic” – indeed we have challenge
• Multiple vocal concerns at the Golf membership that it’s “out of character” – should have recorded the ladies “niners” lunch discussion today the remodeling of the restaurant should be looked upon with a complete financial outlook. How will the Association/Golf Club recoup the investment (when it has been recently heavily publicized that the restaurant is a money pit…)?

While opinions will vary it appears it is clear from the “rumor mill” that the decision will most certainly end up being a waste of funds. It would be advisable to stop it before it gets started and ensure that membership input is gathered before proceeding:

• We are in no hurry for this renovation which has been in talks for years…
• Ocio is supposed to present in June or July… Why not get feedback first?
• Understanding that in person meeting are restricted it would be very simple for the association to create an online survey to gather general feedback so as to help justify such an expense (the expenditure could then be approved AFTER the Board receives a generally positive feedback from the general membership and if not, back to the drawing board).
• What a disappointment it will be to have a new golf course with pristine conditions and be then casually dining in a “subpar” environment feeling like a public facility

Since at this year’s budgeting cycle it has finally been recognized that the expense of operating the restaurant should be shared between the Golf Club and the Association then why not go a step further… Create a general $200/month/Covenant household minimum food charge to drive increase utilization of the restaurant by all association members? Will certainly create opportunities to not only finance the renovation but also stabilize the overall finances of the restaurant.

Thanks,

Pascal Stolz

We write to express our disappointment with the proposed designs for the remodel of the Golf Course Restaurant. The plans remind one of a hotel, chain restaurant, or airport lounge dining area and are fully inconsistent with the restaurant’s Spanish exterior, the Clubhouse, and most importantly, the historic Latin character of RSF inspired by Lilian Rice. We believe the proposed ‘Euro-modern’ look is unattractive and uncomfortable, with shortcomings in design, décor, seating, lighting, color palette, and overall atmosphere and ambience.

Our family has dined and taken guests to the RSF Golf Club restaurants since 1958, and we have recommended the facility for wedding receptions and special events. We and our guests have enjoyed the current facility, with its Latin décor, charming entrance and fireplace, and comfortable tables and chairs both inside and on the patio. If this proposed remodel is undertaken, I doubt we will revisit the restaurant and will not invite guests to dine there. Instead, we will frequent more comfortable, interesting, and aesthetically pleasing restaurants on the coast. One of the key features of top restaurants is their uniqueness. The Latin-inspired design and décor is what is unique and special about RSF, our village, La Morada, and our current Golf Club restaurant. While we are not opposed to updating and refreshing, the proposed plans fall short on numerous levels. For many residents, they raise questions about the criteria recommended by those leading the effort, the choice of design firm, and the oversight and review of plan drafts during the process.

Our neighbors have also described the design as “cold,” “cheap-looking,” and “uninviting for family members with walkers or wheelchairs, as well as those needing high chairs for grandchildren and great grandchildren.” They miss the round tables that have enabled multi-generational family gatherings, noting that “the proposed tables seem aimed at pushing people out as fast as possible….will likely alienate many existing diners.” Several noted that other Latin-inspired restaurants have managed to retain the warmth, comfort, and style missing in the current design. We forwarded this modern design to our son and several nephews and nieces, successful professionals who have visited our Golf Club restaurant throughout their childhoods and young adulthoods. One couple is considering venues for a future wedding reception. The feedback included: “Totally lacking in charm compared to the current Spanish design; like the cabana windows but dislike the interior and strange, saucer-like roof line,” and “Looks cheap, cookie-cutter, and sterile…none of our friends would choose this place for a wedding reception,” and “Bad design…doesn’t reflect the Ranch. And I hate tables that are so close together that there’s no privacy…..Not family-friendly like the current restaurant, where as many as 4 generations can enjoy a meal together. I would never take my kids there. Is that the point? To discourage families?”

Who provided the guidance and oversight for this disappointing design, and what were the design criteria shared with Ocio Design Group? Was the Art Jury asked to provide input and guidance? Many residents are concerned about the Association Board’s domination by Golf Club members, especially when more than 75% of residents are non-members. Efforts should be made to obtain input from non-Golf Club members who also frequent the Club restaurant.

We believe that these Golf Course Restaurant plans should be widely distributed for comment to the entire RSF community before any additional funds for a remodel are released. ($85,000 has already been spent!) The immediate reaction from neighbors and friends has been quite negative, with almost everyone expressing a preference to leave the restaurant as it is rather than move forward. RSF Board members spoke about the need to “sell these designs” to the community at last Thursday’s meeting. Instead, there should be a request for honest, impartial feedback, using methods and questions proven to solicit unbiased input from potential customers/diners representing different demographics of our community. Given that the Golf Club restaurant runs a deficit even in non-Covid years, the financial consequences of continuing with an unpopular restaurant remodel will affect all RSF residents for the long-term future.

Finally, we recommend that the designs distributed to our community include every room/area in the restaurant, including the entrance and reception rooms. You might also provide accurate views of the golf course from our restaurant; the picture in the proposed plan clearly is not our course!

Thank you for considering our views.

Respectfully,
Sally and Chester Koblinsky, RSF Covenant Residents