|
Post by Al Alven on Sept 26, 2006 11:14:47 GMT -5
In response to Kathi’s reply above:
- While I have witnessed some improvements to the two properties in question over the past few years, I believe that what you see here is what you get… and that’s about it. I doubt that there are any grand schemes for the Binns and Bonito as we know them. The rehabilitation that has taken place seems to have been enough to bring these motels up to some level of respectability and functionality, but my best guess is simply that the owner(s) are waiting to eventually cash in on some sort of redevelopment opportunity. Whatever that might be and whenever it comes, obviously remain to be seen.
- I do have some photos of the “front” of the Binns somewhere, and I’ll try to post one soon. Like I said, it’s nothing special, but it looks a whole heck of a lot better than the backside of the motel.
- While the Binns and Bonito are obviously owned by the same person(s) these days (and are essentially operated as one entity), I really don’t know enough about the history of the properties to say whether or not this has always been the case. Like you, Kathi, I assume that they were once built/owned by different folks, considering the dissimilarities that you mentioned.
- The Bonito is actually made up of two structures. The larger building sits back on the west side of the property, and runs north-south (with the neon sign on the north side) between Spencer and Spicer. The smaller building is on the south side of the property, and runs east-west along Spicer.
Again, I’ll try to post a pic soon in an attempt to make more sense of this layout.
- I continue to think that this would be a prime spot for a new resort highrise. I am worried that a property like this would be replaced with more vinyl boxes, something that is certainly not out of the realm of possibility. Honestly, I still have the same fear when it comes to the old site of the Rio.
North Wildwood has already “lost” Surf Ave., its one-time main entertainment drag. Wildwood cannot afford to have the same thing happen to Atlantic Ave., particularly in this area. It is a district ripe with possibilities, and, IMO, would be a great spot for something radical forward-thinking.
|
|
|
Post by Al Alven on Sept 26, 2006 11:20:04 GMT -5
I got to say the area looks scary. We walked by last month on our way to Juan Pablo's for dinner--made sure we walked another route back when it was dark---just a bad crowd hannbing out in that area of those 2 motels. That area in general needs a great deal of rehabilitation and attention. Trust me, having stayed at the Skylark for a long time now, I've seen some crazy things and witnessed some amazingly shady characters in that district. It's good to see that some businesses there are still doing well (the Skylark, the Quebec/Pink Cadillac Diner, Club Casba, etc.), but the area still needs a major makeover, for sure. Again (not to beat a dead horse here), it is an area ripe with possibilities. It will be an area where the impact of radical change will continue to be debated, with the Binns/Bonito situation and the proposed Riviera highrise complex(es) on the horizon.
|
|
|
Post by Al Alven on Sept 26, 2006 11:26:32 GMT -5
In response to Kathi’s reply above: - The Bonito is actually made up of two structures. The larger building sits back on the west side of the property, and runs north-south (with the neon sign on the north side) between Spencer and Spicer. The smaller building is on the south side of the property, and runs east-west along Spicer. Again, I’ll try to post a pic soon in an attempt to make more sense of this layout. Yes, I'm quoting myself. How sad is that? ;D Now that I think about it, I think the Bonito might actually be comprised of three structures. I'm at work now and am trying to visualize the property, but I think this is the case. When I get home tonight, I'll try to dig up some pictures to either confirm or deny this... In the meantime, does anyone else happen to know for sure?
|
|
|
Post by themanbefore on Sept 26, 2006 12:20:14 GMT -5
Now, I'm drawing a blank and I'll probably get pounced on but where exactly is the Bonito? Is that the one directly behind Binns? Also, I'm glad I got a picture of myself on the Skylark patio sitting in front of the Binn's sign.
|
|
|
Post by wildwanderer on Sept 26, 2006 17:46:35 GMT -5
Goodbye Binns can't say that I will miss you.
|
|
|
Post by thelastresort on Sept 26, 2006 17:56:53 GMT -5
So, should we be happy that these dumps are going down, or sad because we are maudlin sentimentalists who just simply can't bear the thought of change???
Dumps iz Dumps, if they are dumps, down they go, I'm glad. In fact, I'm really glad. Put up a nice new place, for the good of WW.
|
|
|
Post by fuzzyscorpio on Sept 26, 2006 23:29:26 GMT -5
- While the Binns and Bonito are obviously owned by the same person(s) these days (and are essentially operated as one entity), I really don’t know enough about the history of the properties to say whether or not this has always been the case. Like you, Kathi, I assume that they were once built/owned by different folks, considering the dissimilarities that you mentioned. Well, that's what I thought until you mentioned this odd business of the Binns having its back to Atlantic Ave. Now I'm wondering--if they weren't owned by the same interests from the beginning, why would the Binns have been designed to face the Bonito (at the expense of making the Atlantic Ave facade look like a warehouse)? Thanks... I'm really curious about this now! If highrises have to happen I would rather see one here than at the Rio site, but better still to keep them no closer to the ocean than Pacific Ave. Let the conventioneers walk off some of that upscale food and drink they're going to be consuming . My bottom-line problem with any such structure is that the highrise is an urban form, and urban, to me, just doesn't belong in Wildwood. A highrise represents all those influences we go to Wildwood to get away from.
|
|
|
Post by organator on Sept 27, 2006 9:59:34 GMT -5
So, is the demolition of the Binns and Bonito coming very soon - like over the winter this year?
|
|
|
Post by fuzzyscorpio on Sept 27, 2006 10:12:23 GMT -5
So, should we be happy that these dumps are going down, or sad because we are maudlin sentimentalists who just simply can't bear the thought of change??? My stated policy notwithstanding, I can't resist asking whether this off-the-wall question was directed at anyone in particular, TLR? I'd hate to have seen this post BEFORE you edited it...
|
|
|
Post by thelastresort on Sept 27, 2006 11:35:08 GMT -5
Hi Fuzzy,
Nah, my question was more of a rhetorical one, to myself also. I find myself thinking the same thing about some places that I knew as a youth, but then when I step back and look at it objectively, it seems that the only reason I want to keep the place around is for what it was, not what it currently is. It's like having an old 80' car you don't want to part with (actually, I have one of these). I keep telling myself it is going to be a "classic" someday, but I wonder if I'm just keeping it around due to some misguided sentimental attachment (e.g., a holdover form my single days, my first new car, etc.).
I suppose I am just curious that if the Binns and Bonita are such dumps as evidenced by the posts in this string, then why should we even shed a tear about them? The title "Goodbye Binns & Bonita Motels" sounds like a sad farewell, unless I am misunderstanding something. Why be sad? If they are so crappy, be happy the city is rid of them.
Like I've mentioned before, I have some fond memories of the Oceanic Bar, but I would rather it, and the Days Inn, get replaced with some fully-functional new hotel, doo wop or not. Better, in my opinion, than leaving them as eyesores, especially since they are adjacent the new convention center, which is supposed to be the WW's ticket to success.
I just think there needs to be some common sense, and it is not good business for the island to be so blinded by the passion for doo wop architecture to advocate keeping an old run down place standing and status quo versus throwing a few places overboard for the overall good of the vacation community. That's kind of all I was getting at.
|
|
|
Post by fuzzyscorpio on Sept 28, 2006 1:41:56 GMT -5
Hi Fuzzy, Nah, my question was more of a rhetorical one, to myself also. I find myself thinking the same thing about some places that I knew as a youth, but then when I step back and look at it objectively, it seems that the only reason I want to keep the place around is for what it was, not what it currently is. It's like having an old 80' car you don't want to part with (actually, I have one of these). I keep telling myself it is going to be a "classic" someday, but I wonder if I'm just keeping it around due to some misguided sentimental attachment (e.g., a holdover form my single days, my first new car, etc.). I suppose I am just curious that if the Binns and Bonita are such dumps as evidenced by the posts in this string, then why should we even shed a tear about them? The title "Goodbye Binns & Bonita Motels" sounds like a sad farewell, unless I am misunderstanding something. Why be sad? If they are so crappy, be happy the city is rid of them. Like I've mentioned before, I have some fond memories of the Oceanic Bar, but I would rather it, and the Days Inn, get replaced with some fully-functional new hotel, doo wop or not. Better, in my opinion, than leaving them as eyesores, especially since they are adjacent the new convention center, which is supposed to be the WW's ticket to success. I just think there needs to be some common sense, and it is not good business for the island to be so blinded by the passion for doo wop architecture to advocate keeping an old run down place standing and status quo versus throwing a few places overboard for the overall good of the vacation community. That's kind of all I was getting at. Nice save You gotta be wary of the temptations of being rhetorical--hyperbole, oversimplification, sarcasm. Rhetoric is black and white, life is not. This thread wasn't really about being either happy or sad--it was about "mixed emotions," as Al said, and it was about weighing things. I was a bit too rhetorical myself in my comments about the Binns Bonito as it's now called, never having really paid any attention to those two properties in 50+ years prior to this past firemen's weekend, when I tried to cover a lot of ground, photographically and otherwise. I was certainly being flippant when I referred to the Bonito as a "dive," which I really meant only in the sense that about half of the smaller, older motels in the Wildwoods are dives. A term of endearment, almost. I like dives, they're real; I dislike too much slickness. I was concerned about the Binns, though, because I thought I detected the smell of death about it. A terminal case being run by completely jaded individuals. The neighborhood didn't seem so bad last weekend, and I was around there several times. With all due respect to the concerns of year-round residents, I'd rather not see every last trace of "seediness" eradicated from Wildwood. Anyway, although a few people who've actually done business with them did mention concrete grievances, I'm not sure it's fair or accurate to classify these motels as "dumps." What I am certain of is that we have to be very careful about dismissing any piece of what's left of doo-wop. No great "passion for doo-wop architecture" has stopped the Wildwoods from throwing more than 100 classic motels overboard already. Every culture under attack, and that's what doo-wop is, has the potential to reach a tipping point where it is so thinned out by losses that it starts to break apart and dissolve. That point, it seems to me, has to be drawing near. At the heart of our informal discussion on this thread is the question whether these two links in the doo-wop chain were salvageable, and worth saving, and I'd say the jury is still out--partly because we don't know what would replace the Binns Bonito if we did vote it off the island.
|
|
|
Post by thelastresort on Sept 28, 2006 8:00:45 GMT -5
Every culture under attack, and that's what doo-wop is.
This definitely hits the nail on the head. Or better yet, every aspect of traditional American culture is under attack, which is what 50's WW is.
To be honest, wasn't it the 60's generation that fundamentally rejected all of this in the first place 40 years ago? (which is why I don't really care for the 60's -- yeah, sure, I like the music). And now, the chickens are coming home to roost, so to speak, but it's too late. Maybe the generation that started the movement should go ask the Maharishi for advice as to what to do about it now.
|
|
|
Post by Al Alven on Sept 28, 2006 20:14:42 GMT -5
This is kind of random at this point in the conversation, but here's a shot of the classic Bonito sign. I know I have a better shot of this somewhere, and if I can find it, I'll post it. While the Binns and Bonito have very dubious reputations to say the least, it is at least interesting to point out that both motels' neon signs (particularly this one) are very well maintained.
|
|
|
Post by writhinganacondo on Sept 28, 2006 21:45:02 GMT -5
The longtime owners of the Bonito sold about 5 yrs. ago just after getting a new sign, which was a copy of the previous. Bonito started out as just the dozen or so units on the Spicer Ave. side, 1950's. Binns (family name)....a 30's era streamlined hotel much later stuccoed over had a restaurant at one time on the south end. For those thinking these places have "turned the corner", its still a long long walk.
|
|
|
Post by Rob Ascough on Sept 29, 2006 8:44:22 GMT -5
So the Binn's building is 70-something years old?
|
|