Final Goodbye to Kona Lanes~Costa Mesa, CA - General Tiki

T tikiyaki Tiki Socialite The Exotic Port of REDONDO BEACH, CA Joined: May 18, 2004 Posts: 2725	T tikiyaki Posted posted on Fri, Jan 9, 2009 9:26 AM On 2009-01-09 00:15, Tiki Shaker wrote: As for Eichler, of course the homes are gorgeous. Unfortunately the rest of the world preferred poorly designed garbage. Otherwise things wouldn't look the way they do. Yes, I know his homes are as popular now than ever before... but they are popular to only a select few. Ask the average person on the street.. they would laugh at it or mock it as being something their grandparents had. You have to remember, our taste is the minority. Most people do not have our taste. Who says ? I don't think the world prefers poorly designed garbage. I think that people see what's in front of them, and think that's their only option. On 2009-01-09 00:15, Tiki Shaker wrote: I totally agree that most things now suck. It's just that I don't know how anyone is supposed to be able to afford to do what use to be done. How could any business person trying to make a living afford to have that kind of amazing signage or architecture created today? Like I said.... I wish it all looked amazing. I just feel that it is inevitable that things are going to be cookie cutter. It costs too much for it not be. I don't like it, sure... but how is it going to change? I agree that we should encourage the people who are lucky enough to own some of this amazing stuff to preserve it. I fully support that and encourage it. You know, Eichler, Fickett, and Cliff May were cookie cutter homes too....but the designs of those homes were based on some really sound principles...alot of which were inspired by Frank Lloyd Wright. Those developers just found a way to make it more affordable. On 2009-01-09 00:15, Tiki Shaker wrote:That's why I think the owners of these properties should be educated by people like us and encouraged to respect what they have. Even if the business is failing, they need to learn how to change their business and at least reuse the property and try and keep the flavor of what was originally intended. It's awesome when a business can reuse a space. Like when a restaurant moves into and old bank and keeps the old mosaic tile and reuses the counters. It's awesome when a person finds a 40's gas station and turns it into an art gallery. It's all about us encouraging and motivating these property owners. As tragic as the loss of Kona Lanes is... there is at least that small glimmer knowing that it sounds like the city council has admitted that they made a mistake. Hopefully that will encourage them to take a second look the next time something is slated to be torn down. Ironically enough, education is what caused the demise of the beautiful Hollywood Star Lanes, which was taken by eminent domain - The City Of Los Angeles forced the owners to sell them the property at market value to put up a school. Developers, for the most part don't want to be educated, and they certainly hate historical preservation laws...it keeps them from making top dollar from their properties due to things being deemed "historical" by the city. On 2009-01-09 00:15, Tiki Shaker wrote:The intended point of my comments in my earlier post was me trying to state that we have to at least try and understand it from these peoples perspectives. We don't have to agree with it, but we have to look at it from their point of view. Once we understand why they think they way they think, then we can hopefully come up with a way that will benefit them AND us. Believe, I DO get it, money speaks very loudly, and I'm not trying to attack you in any way, just to be clear. I know you and I are on the same side. I just think trying to see the side of people who want to destroy our historical sites to make more money isn't something I can get with On 2009-01-09 00:15, Tiki Shaker wrote:I admit, I know nothing about what happened at Kona Lanes. For all I know, the bowling alley was losing money, it was infested with asbestos, it would cost millions to clean up, they were afraid of lawsuits, someone gave them the bright idea to tear it down and build something that made them money. That ended up not working about, but it is costing them less to pay taxes on a vacant lot than what was going on before. Yes, what I just wrote was made up, but things like this do happen. Would that be greed for them to do that? Is it bad that they wouldn't want to lose money? Sooo many bowling alleys have shut down. Why? They don't make money. If the business plan no longer works, they should be encouraged to preserve the signage and hopefully reuse the building. Someone like us should show them what could be done with it. There are definitely cases where things like you describe here are the case, I agree. But, as Lucky Designs described, the case of KONA lanes doesn't fit into that scenario. It just needed a little TLC....that was a case of greed from a VERY wealty family. Also, How does a bowling Alley NOT make money ? Every one I see is packed, almost all the time. I can never get a lane at Pickwick in Burbank,, or Mar Vista Bowl...there is always a wait. On 2009-01-09 00:15, Tiki Shaker wrote:What we need to do is let current owners know why we like them, Tell an owner that you frequent their establishment because of the design. Encourage others to do the same. I have stopped at so many random places just because I saw a kick ass sign. There have been plenty of times when I stopped at some highway dive and have had the person behind the counter ask "first time here?" My response is "yep, i stopped cuz your neon sign was so damn cool." People have to learn why people like us support their establishments. You prove my point. If more businesses had more attention grabbing, creative signage, they may have more sustainability in the marketplace. But the problem is alot of the time, not with the business owner, but town ordinances, which have become very strict on sign restrictions. Most city ordinances will not allow a big sign, with odd 3-D shapes that are over 40 feet in the air. I'm guessing that most business owners would LOVE a nice big sign beaconing potential customers into their establishments...they're just not allowed to have it. And in the case of a strip mall l, if there is a major chain in there as a retail anchor, you can bet that they don't want, say, Tony's Pizzeria having a bigger, cooler sign that them, so I'm willing to bet they seek to get these kinds of restrictions and standards in place as part of their lease agreement, if they don't own the property themselves. On 2009-01-09 00:15, Tiki Shaker wrote:I've stopped and taken pictures of tiki apartment buildings. I have had managers ask what I was doing. I'd tell them I thought the place looked amazing and i wanted to document it. I told them so many have been lost, I was worried that perhaps their building was going to be next. That's awesome...documentation is all we can do at the end of the day. On 2009-01-09 00:15, Tiki Shaker wrote:Tikiyaki, when you posted that horrible generic sign with the current businesses and compare them to the old signage, it obviously shows your point.. which I totally agree with. Obviously it doesn't compare. But now look at each business. Imagine how much it would cost to create amazing signage for each one? Sure.. who needs another McD's or Starbucks or Kinkos? Well, obviously the public does.. otherwise it wouldn't be built. This is SoCal... we want to cram people in here like a New York, but we expect one business... like a bowling alley to take up as much space as it does? We wont' build vertical here.. how do we cope? Unfortunately it's those damn strip malls.. I know. What is the solution? Besides trying to reuse older buildings?.. I don't know. Personally, I need another Starbucks :D. Starbucks is one chain that I think is community minded, and a little creative in design. McDonald's...all unhealthiness aside, DOES still build some of their old designs. They understand that they are a big part of "Americana" as we know it, so sometimes you see the vintage McDonalds building, and it makes me think that they are not all that bad. With bowling alleys...they NEED that much space to have a bowling business...Lanes are 60 feet long, and all that machinery...it takes alot of space, and they provide a great community service in that it is a family activity, kids, adults, teens, everyone can bowl. At the end of the day, all of my complaining doesn't do anything, but TC is a place for preservationist spirit, so there ya go. It's just my opinion that architecture has gotten VERY BORING...I know you agree. I just think that bottom line thinking is a big reason why. I know there are great architects out there designing cool buildings...just look in a place like Venice. There are some really nice homes being built there. I just think developers are not interested in "interesting", just "cost effectiveness and maximum profit. Anyway. Jeff, did you take those pics of Linbrook bowl ? What great shots. [ Edited by: tikiyaki 2009-01-09 09:28 ] [ Edited by: tikiyaki 2009-01-09 09:30 ]

On 2009-01-09 00:15, Tiki Shaker wrote:

As for Eichler, of course the homes are gorgeous. Unfortunately the rest of the world preferred poorly designed garbage. Otherwise things wouldn't look the way they do. Yes, I know his homes are as popular now than ever before... but they are popular to only a select few. Ask the average person on the street.. they would laugh at it or mock it as being something their grandparents had. You have to remember, our taste is the minority. Most people do not have our taste.

Who says ? I don't think the world prefers poorly designed garbage. I think that people see what's in front of them, and think that's their only option.

On 2009-01-09 00:15, Tiki Shaker wrote: I totally agree that most things now suck. It's just that I don't know how anyone is supposed to be able to afford to do what use to be done. How could any business person trying to make a living afford to have that kind of amazing signage or architecture created today? Like I said.... I wish it all looked amazing. I just feel that it is inevitable that things are going to be cookie cutter. It costs too much for it not be. I don't like it, sure... but how is it going to change? I agree that we should encourage the people who are lucky enough to own some of this amazing stuff to preserve it. I fully support that and encourage it.

You know, Eichler, Fickett, and Cliff May were cookie cutter homes too....but the designs of those homes were based on some really sound principles...alot of which were inspired by Frank Lloyd Wright. Those developers just found a way to make it more affordable.

*On 2009-01-09 00:15, Tiki Shaker wrote:*That's why I think the owners of these properties should be educated by people like us and encouraged to respect what they have. Even if the business is failing, they need to learn how to change their business and at least reuse the property and try and keep the flavor of what was originally intended. It's awesome when a business can reuse a space. Like when a restaurant moves into and old bank and keeps the old mosaic tile and reuses the counters. It's awesome when a person finds a 40's gas station and turns it into an art gallery. It's all about us encouraging and motivating these property owners. As tragic as the loss of Kona Lanes is... there is at least that small glimmer knowing that it sounds like the city council has admitted that they made a mistake. Hopefully that will encourage them to take a second look the next time something is slated to be torn down.

Ironically enough, education is what caused the demise of the beautiful Hollywood Star Lanes, which was taken by eminent domain - The City Of Los Angeles forced the owners to sell them the property at market value to put up a school. Developers, for the most part don't want to be educated, and they certainly hate historical preservation laws...it keeps them from making top dollar from their properties due to things being deemed "historical" by the city.

*On 2009-01-09 00:15, Tiki Shaker wrote:*The intended point of my comments in my earlier post was me trying to state that we have to at least try and understand it from these peoples perspectives. We don't have to agree with it, but we have to look at it from their point of view. Once we understand why they think they way they think, then we can hopefully come up with a way that will benefit them AND us.

Believe, I DO get it, money speaks very loudly, and I'm not trying to attack you in any way, just to be clear. I know you and I are on the same side. I just think trying to see the side of people who want to destroy our historical sites to make more money isn't something I can get with

*On 2009-01-09 00:15, Tiki Shaker wrote:*I admit, I know nothing about what happened at Kona Lanes. For all I know, the bowling alley was losing money, it was infested with asbestos, it would cost millions to clean up, they were afraid of lawsuits, someone gave them the bright idea to tear it down and build something that made them money. That ended up not working about, but it is costing them less to pay taxes on a vacant lot than what was going on before.

Yes, what I just wrote was made up, but things like this do happen. Would that be greed for them to do that? Is it bad that they wouldn't want to lose money?

Sooo many bowling alleys have shut down. Why? They don't make money. If the business plan no longer works, they should be encouraged to preserve the signage and hopefully reuse the building. Someone like us should show them what could be done with it.

There are definitely cases where things like you describe here are the case, I agree. But, as Lucky Designs described, the case of KONA lanes doesn't fit into that scenario. It just needed a little TLC....that was a case of greed from a VERY wealty family.
Also, How does a bowling Alley NOT make money ? Every one I see is packed, almost all the time. I can never get a lane at Pickwick in Burbank,, or Mar Vista Bowl...there is always a wait.

*On 2009-01-09 00:15, Tiki Shaker wrote:*What we need to do is let current owners know why we like them, Tell an owner that you frequent their establishment because of the design. Encourage others to do the same. I have stopped at so many random places just because I saw a kick ass sign. There have been plenty of times when I stopped at some highway dive and have had the person behind the counter ask "first time here?" My response is "yep, i stopped cuz your neon sign was so damn cool." People have to learn why people like us support their establishments.

You prove my point. If more businesses had more attention grabbing, creative signage, they may have more sustainability in the marketplace. But the problem is alot of the time, not with the business owner, but town ordinances, which have become very strict on sign restrictions. Most city ordinances will not allow a big sign, with odd 3-D shapes that are over 40 feet in the air. I'm guessing that most business owners would LOVE a nice big sign beaconing potential customers into their establishments...they're just not allowed to have it. And in the case of a strip mall l, if there is a major chain in there as a retail anchor, you can bet that they don't want, say, Tony's Pizzeria having a bigger, cooler sign that them, so I'm willing to bet they seek to get these kinds of restrictions and standards in place as part of their lease agreement, if they don't own the property themselves.

*On 2009-01-09 00:15, Tiki Shaker wrote:*I've stopped and taken pictures of tiki apartment buildings. I have had managers ask what I was doing. I'd tell them I thought the place looked amazing and i wanted to document it. I told them so many have been lost, I was worried that perhaps their building was going to be next.

That's awesome...documentation is all we can do at the end of the day.

*On 2009-01-09 00:15, Tiki Shaker wrote:*Tikiyaki, when you posted that horrible generic sign with the current businesses and compare them to the old signage, it obviously shows your point.. which I totally agree with. Obviously it doesn't compare. But now look at each business. Imagine how much it would cost to create amazing signage for each one? Sure.. who needs another McD's or Starbucks or Kinkos? Well, obviously the public does.. otherwise it wouldn't be built. This is SoCal... we want to cram people in here like a New York, but we expect one business... like a bowling alley to take up as much space as it does? We wont' build vertical here.. how do we cope? Unfortunately it's those damn strip malls.. I know. What is the solution? Besides trying to reuse older buildings?.. I don't know.

Personally, I need another Starbucks :D. Starbucks is one chain that I think is community minded, and a little creative in design. McDonald's...all unhealthiness aside, DOES still build some of their old designs. They understand that they are a big part of "Americana" as we know it, so sometimes you see the vintage McDonalds building, and it makes me think that they are not all that bad.
With bowling alleys...they NEED that much space to have a bowling business...Lanes are 60 feet long, and all that machinery...it takes alot of space, and they provide a great community service in that it is a family activity, kids, adults, teens, everyone can bowl.

At the end of the day, all of my complaining doesn't do anything, but TC is a place for preservationist spirit, so there ya go.
It's just my opinion that architecture has gotten VERY BORING...I know you agree. I just think that bottom line thinking is a big reason why. I know there are great architects out there designing cool buildings...just look in a place like Venice. There are some really nice homes being built there. I just think developers are not interested in "interesting", just "cost effectiveness and maximum profit.

Anyway. Jeff, did you take those pics of Linbrook bowl ? What great shots.

[ Edited by: tikiyaki 2009-01-09 09:28 ]

[ Edited by: tikiyaki 2009-01-09 09:30 ]

Post #427976 by tikiyaki on Fri, Jan 9, 2009 9:26 AM