John Ball Zoo

[wingbert]

Didn't I hear somewhere (or maybe it was discussed here) about the zoo expanding into Milennium Park with some sort of tram/trolley/bus connecting new area with old?

Just think if they had an overpass over 196 connecting two halves of the zoo. They could hang banners on it, etc. that would keep the zoo foremost in local resident's minds plus alert visitors from the west as they drive into downtown - even those just passing through on their way to more northerly destinations might be lured for a visit. Save money on billboards plus create that, "Hey, I didn't know Grand Rapids had a zoo

[GRDadof3]

I've been a member so long that I think just before I joined John Ball held the meetings in his living room. But I don't go to these special events anymore because of the crowds. Nice to know the society is so popular but I prefer to see my animals more leisurely. If you can manage it, this time of year I'd recommend going to the zoo during the week in the late afternoon early evening. Usually you will have the place just about all to yourself. Only downside is those annoying announcements that the zoo is closing in x minutes.

I'm a crowd person. I like it when it is somewhat crowded, but even last night was a bit much.

wingbert, I think the Toledo Zoo has something like that.

[fotoman311]

I'm a crowd person. I like it when it is somewhat crowded, but even last night was a bit much.

wingbert, I think the Toledo Zoo has something like that.

Yeah, they definitely have something like that at the Toledo Zoo. It can make the walk from the parking lots quite a hike, but it definitely gives them more room for their actual exhibits. Their zoo is pretty nice.

I was looking at the satellite images for that area though, and I don't really know where they could put something like that at John Ball Zoo. Most of the land that's directly across the highway from the zoo is residential.

[Dedav]

[quote name='GRDadof3' date='May 28 2008, 01:45 PM' post='979866

The best part is that it apparently has a 24 ft high platform with great views of the downtown skyline. First one to post a shot from this new platform gets a prize.

[PR-15]

I was at the zoo today with the family and I noticed some nice improvements all around the zoo. There is a concerted effort to freshen it up which I appreciate.

That said, our zoo is terribly sad and pouring more dollars into that odd property seems futile at best. 90% of the animal exhibits have little regard for the animals themselves (that's unless you feel most species thrive with poured concrete as a habitat). The elevation changes require a sherpa. And they should leave water rations at 5 foot intervals due to the extreme heat radiating off the wood deck up by the llamas and monkey viewing platform.

Why on earth the zoo didn't accept Mr. Meijer's generous offer of beautiful land adjacent to the world class Frederik Meijer Gardens and Sculpture Park demonstrated a stunning lack of vision. FMG just gets better and better every year. I fear our zoo will never be beloved no matter how much money they dump into that parcel.

[fotoman311]

I was at the zoo today with the family and I noticed some nice improvements all around the zoo. There is a concerted effort to freshen it up which I appreciate.

That said, our zoo is terribly sad and pouring more dollars into that odd property seems futile at best. 90% of the animal exhibits have little regard for the animals themselves (that's unless you feel most species thrive with poured concrete as a habitat). The elevation changes require a sherpa. And they should leave water rations at 5 foot intervals due to the extreme heat radiating off the wood deck up by the llamas and monkey viewing platform.

Why on earth the zoo didn't accept Mr. Meijer's generous offer of beautiful land adjacent to the world class Frederik Meijer Gardens and Sculpture Park demonstrated a stunning lack of vision. FMG just gets better and better every year. I fear our zoo will never be beloved no matter how much money they dump into that parcel.

My recollection is that Kent County had placed a bond issue on the ballot to raise the funds to build the new zoo on Mr. Meijer's offered parcel and that it was rejected by the voters of Kent County, and that is why they did not move the zoo.

I wish it was easier to access the archives of the press without logging into my library account.

[PR-15]

My recollection is that Kent County had placed a bond issue on the ballot to raise the funds to build the new zoo on Mr. Meijer's offered parcel and that it was rejected by the voters of Kent County, and that is why they did not move the zoo.

I wish it was easier to access the archives of the press without logging into my library account.

Yep, I believe you're right and now I even remember voting in favor of the bond issue...so check my comment on the zoo lacking vision and put it squarely on the citizens of Kent County.

[GRDadof3]

I was at the zoo today with the family and I noticed some nice improvements all around the zoo. There is a concerted effort to freshen it up which I appreciate.

That said, our zoo is terribly sad and pouring more dollars into that odd property seems futile at best. 90% of the animal exhibits have little regard for the animals themselves (that's unless you feel most species thrive with poured concrete as a habitat). The elevation changes require a sherpa. And they should leave water rations at 5 foot intervals due to the extreme heat radiating off the wood deck up by the llamas and monkey viewing platform.

Why on earth the zoo didn't accept Mr. Meijer's generous offer of beautiful land adjacent to the world class Frederik Meijer Gardens and Sculpture Park demonstrated a stunning lack of vision. FMG just gets better and better every year. I fear our zoo will never be beloved no matter how much money they dump into that parcel.

I don't know, I think if they are able to convert many of the existing exhibits into more natural-like habitats in the current location, much like the new lion exhibit and the chimpanzee exhibit, the zoo could be quite interesting. What's the old saying about "size doesn't matter"? I too voted to move the zoo over to Leonard, but what's done is done.

But I agree it's nice to see even the small changes they are making to freshen up the signage and other structures. Keep at it!

BTW: My kids' favorite attractions are the pigmy goats and the reptile house (which is totally creepy crawly).

[wingbert]

My recollection is that Kent County had placed a bond issue on the ballot to raise the funds to build the new zoo on Mr. Meijer's offered parcel and that it was rejected by the voters of Kent County, and that is why they did not move the zoo.

I wish it was easier to access the archives of the press without logging into my library account.

It may help jog your memory if you recall the savvy marketing tactic the opponents of the zoo move used to influence the vote. They called the bond issue a "zoo tax" and as everyone knows, we Michiganders are allergic to taxes.

We may complain about the condition of our roads, the lack of police to fight crimes, the distance it takes for firefighters to respond to an emergency, the closing of public pools, etc. etc. etc. but ask us to kick in a little to help the cause and we'll file a recall ballot so fast it will make your head spin.

[dodgeboy11]

It may help jog your memory if you recall the savvy marketing tactic the opponents of the zoo move used to influence the vote. They called the bond issue a "zoo tax" and as everyone knows, we Michiganders are allergic to taxes.

We may complain about the condition of our roads, the lack of police to fight crimes, the distance it takes for firefighters to respond to an emergency, the closing of public pools, etc. etc. etc. but ask us to kick in a little to help the cause and we'll file a recall ballot so fast it will make your head spin.

I don't know that people voted against b/c of the cost. I voted against, along w/ a number of others I talked with at the time, because we were concerned about what the removal of the zoo from that part of GR would do to the quality of life, home values, etc. If the economic times were better, and they said the zoo would of become an aquarium, ampitheater, or something similar, I think you would have seen signifcantly more support....there was too little information on what would happen to the existing site.

[wingbert]

I don't know that people voted against b/c of the cost. I voted against, along w/ a number of others I talked with at the time, because we were concerned about what the removal of the zoo from that part of GR would do to the quality of life, home values, etc. If the economic times were better, and they said the zoo would of become an aquarium, ampitheater, or something similar, I think you would have seen signifcantly more support....there was too little information on what would happen to the existing site.

...and when the zoo wanted to expand in it's current location to improve itself, people "in that part of GR" threw a hissy fit about that as well. What exactly do people "in that part of GR" want?

What's also funny is that I don't recall the neighbors of Grand Rapids Golf Club opposing the zoo relocation to their area because it was going to raise their home values and enhance their quality of life. In fact, it was just the opposite.

Sorry to cop an attitude, but that whole situation will go down in the history books as one of the worst examples of head-in-the-sand, short-sighted, fear-of-change, NIMBY clusterf***s to come down the pike in years. Rest assured, your grandchildren and great grandchildren are going to asking what the hell you were thinking.

[GRDadof3]

...and when the zoo wanted to expand in it's current location to improve itself, people "in that part of GR" threw a hissy fit about that as well. What exactly do people "in that part of GR" want?

What's also funny is that I don't recall the neighbors of Grand Rapids Golf Club opposing the zoo relocation to their area because it was going to raise their home values and enhance their quality of life. In fact, it was just the opposite.

Sorry to cop an attitude, but that whole situation will go down in the history books as one of the worst examples of head-in-the-sand, short-sighted, fear-of-change, NIMBY clusterf***s to come down the pike in years. Rest assured, your grandchildren and great grandchildren are going to asking what the hell you were thinking.

I don't know about that. It is just a zoo after all. It's not like people scared away a new Google facility or Toyota engine plant or something.

[NorthCoast]

Not moving the zoo to the Meijer land was a big mistake. The new zoo could've been the 'real' zoo featuring exotic animals and John Ball could've been turned into a 'local' zoo featuring animals of the Great Lakes region...sort of like a living natural history museum.

[PR-15]

I don't know about that. It is just a zoo after all. It's not like people scared away a new Google facility or Toyota engine plant or something.

I disagree, I think the combination of a new zoo along side the FMG could have had a much bigger impact than many people could have imagined in terms of tourist dollars and traffic. To have two side by side world class institutions would have elevated our regional perception as an arts and leisure destination. But we'll never know now.

The current zoo will just limp along by renovating here an there and adding 1-2 projects a year as money allows. It will take forever to make an significant impact or change public perception.

I do appreciate the new zoo efforts...it's better than doing nothing. I renewed our family membership on Sunday.

I'm not a big boo-bird, but I wasn't crazy about the design of the new lions exhibit. I found the two ground level viewing areas with glass windows to be too small and each area become quickly overcrowded. The lions will rarely every be viewable from that area...those cats are going to hang out toward the back. Also climbing those stairs to the elevated platform is hardly accessible to everyone.

The new zip line area will cost each of your kids an additional $11 (that's in addition to the zoo entry fee). It's extremely pricey for a glorified jungle gym with a harness attachment.

[gvsusean]

I disagree, I think the combination of a new zoo along side the FMG could have had a much bigger impact than many people could have imagined in terms of tourist dollars and traffic. To have two side by side world class institutions would have elevated our regional perception as an arts and leisure destination. But we'll never know now.

The current zoo will just limp along by renovating here an there and adding 1-2 projects a year as money allows. It will take forever to make an significant impact or change public perception.

I do appreciate the new zoo efforts...it's better than doing nothing. I renewed our family membership on Sunday.

I'm not a big boo-bird, but I wasn't crazy about the design of the new lions exhibit. I found the two ground level viewing areas with glass windows to be too small and each area become quickly overcrowded. The lions will rarely every be viewable from that area...those cats are going to hang out toward the back. Also climbing those stairs to the elevated platform is hardly accessible to everyone.

The new zip line area will cost each of your kids an additional $11 (that's in addition to the zoo entry fee). It's extremely pricey for a glorified jungle gym with a harness attachment.

the zip line is $5... i did it a couple of weeks ago. But I agree its kinda expensive for what u do

[GRDadof3]

An article in the Biz Journal this week says that the zoo has more than doubled revenues since 2005, and reached an all time high attendance this past year.

Though not mentioned in the article, I believe that a new exhibit might get underway this year. Or a redesign of one of the current exhibits.

[joeDowntown]

I think Monkey Island is already in the midst of a major overhaul. I really like some of the moves the zoo has been making. I think the zip cord (which had to be a very low cost addition) has added a lot more interaction and fun to the equation. I hope they keep heading in this direction. They also had what looked to be a temporary exhibit where you could pet stingray's. It was a lot of fun and kept my kids entertained for a long time. I think the zoo can keep adding interest with a mixture of large exhibits and smaller interactive "adventure" activities. Almost like adding a festival / zoo approach to the zoo.

Joe

An article in the Biz Journal this week says that the zoo has more than doubled revenues since 2005, and reached an all time high attendance this past year.

Though not mentioned in the article, I believe that a new exhibit might get underway this year. Or a redesign of one of the current exhibits.

[GRDadof3]

The monkey exhibit is undergoing renovations right now, and will be ready for this season. There is also a new exhibit for ring-tailed lemurs opening this year.

http://www.wzzm13.com/news/news_story.aspx...65&catid=14

I'm pretty sure there is at least one new exhibit in the works that will be ready for 2010.

The lemurs should be a hit with the kids. They almost look like a mix between a cat, a racoon and a monkey.

http://images.google.com/images?ndsp=18&am...art=36&sa=N

[AndyK]

Wow. I can't believe all of the myopic "NIMBY" accusations on this thread aimed at opponents of John Ball Park Zoo expansion. Please, folks, take the blinders off. Here's a map of the area:

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source...mp;t=h&z=15

(sorry, first post here, and the html interface is kinda new to me)

Look at the neighborhood. It's residential. The lots are small, and there aren't many driveways or garages. Many of the homes are subdivided into apartments- the population density isn't quite up there with Heritage Hill, but it's still densely populated. And unlike HH, the population includes a lot of kids. I know this neighborhood well from an old job that had me walking these streets every 2 weeks or so over a period of 2 years.

Most of the parking in the neighborhood is on-street, curbside. On busy weekends the zoo traffic starts using those streets and taking those parking spots. Further expansion would most probably bring increased traffic (not so safe for the neighborhood's kids), and a higher demand for parking spaces.

Now you might think that the simple solution would be to simply convert the park's "unused" space on its southern end to expand parking, The catch here is that though that end of the park no longer contains the goalposts on the soccer field along Valley, or that the old GR Rec Department facilities on the southwest end of the property (parkhouse, playground, wading pool and baseball diamond) aren't kept up by the county, the residents of the neighborhood still use the park to stretch their legs.

I don't see any commercial benefit that expansion might bring to the neighborhood, either, except to the McDonald's & Dairy Queen on Fulton St.. Low-wage jobs won't add much to the lives of the neighborhoods residents.

Remember that John Ball donated the land to the city to be used as a park. The idea of public parks, in the late 19th century (when Ball donated the land), was thought of as quite the progressive innovation, akin to the 40-hour, 5-day work week. Public parks were seen as places where urban dwellers could get some fresh air, exercise and exposure to the beauty of flora and fauna. That the people in the John Ball Park area are chastised for attempting to protect their neighborhood and neighborhood park leaves me feeling a bit gobsmacked.

[tamias6]

^^

It goes the other way around. Not expanding the zoo is not beneficial to it either as they need room to add new and larger exhibits to enable it to be more competitive with other zoos. We all know the area around the zoo. It could expand over I-196 to the empty spaces to the west. But the land is unstable and riddled with sink holes rendering that land unbuildable. Secondly, John ball had a prime opportunity to build a brand new and much larger zoo in the Knapp Corner area on land Fred Meijer was willing to donate. But the same people that voted down expansion into John Ball Park also voted down moving the zoo onto Meijer's land. Overall, the NIMBY's have placed the zoo into a situation similar to a bird in a gilded cage. So somthing has got to give. Ether let the zoo expand into John Ball Park or let the zoo relocate to a roomier property.

[AndyK]

^^

It goes the other way around. Not expanding the zoo is not beneficial to it either as they need room to add new and larger exhibits to enable it to be more competitive with other zoos. We all know the area around the zoo. It could expand over I-196 to the empty spaces to the west. But the land is unstable and riddled with sink holes rendering that land unbuildable. Secondly, John ball had a prime opportunity to build a brand new and much larger zoo in the Knapp Corner area on land Fred Meijer was willing to donate. But the same people that voted down expansion into John Ball Park also voted down moving the zoo onto Meijer's land. Overall, the NIMBY's have placed the zoo into a situation similar to a bird in a gilded cage. So somthing has got to give. Ether let the zoo expand into John Ball Park or let the zoo relocate to a roomier property.

Are you sure that the neighborhood campaigned against the Knapp's Corner move, or that the John Ball neighborhood precincts did indeed vote aginst the proposal? I'm a bit fuzzy on that part of the campaign (I'll have to hunt Pete Carlberg, the neighborhood rep, to get clear on that one), but I do remember reading letters to the editor in the Press decrying the millage increases. Don't forget, that was a county-wide vote- and if you subtract East Grand Rapids from the mix, you'll notice that rest of the county rejects more millage increases than it passes, whether the issues are county-wide or more local.

I voted to move the zoo, and it wasn't an easy decision. I don't think a new zoo, unless world-class and state-of-the-art, would add that much to the area's image. And even if it was a magnet for visitors from outside of the area, how could we afford the upkeep of a world-class zoo that wasn't a very attractive destination from mid-October though mid-April? The counter-argument is that a move would leave that big chunk of the park nothing but shuttered buildings (though mainly out of public sight, like the long-abandoned picnic, recently reopened area/playground up-hill to the west of the zoo). The thought that tipped my vote, however, was that John Ball donated the property to the people of Grand Rapids, and designated that it should be used as a public park, and that the park might devolve back to the city. Ball's was a good and wise donation in the 1880's, and, imo, remains so today.

What I recall clearly is the movement in the late '80's, led by then-Mayor Jerry Helmholdt, to shift the financial burden of the zoo from the city to the county, and I was dead-set against selling the entire park to the county. There was no talk of selling Richmond, Garfield, or MLK Parks, or even parts of those parks which required the most upkeep (the pools) to the county. I can't say that I used the park a lot before the sale- I played soccer there, and played a rocket football game "under the lights" in the oufield of the ball diamond- but I was a (Mulick) "park kid" in the '70's/early '80's, and I just thought it wrong to give up control of those Rec Department facilities to a Kent County Commission chock-full of people oblivious to the needs of city dwellers.

[tamias6]

^^The votes were indeed a county wide issue. But the most vocal group going against the zoo's relocation were the same groups that protested the expansion of the zoo into John Ball Park. That's the part that sided me against the NIMBY's. As for the what the zoo would have been, if it were relocated, it would have been light years better than the current zoo. Many of the exhibits would have been roomier and would have simulated actual habitats of the animals on display, something that many state of the art zoos do. Also the new zoo would have brought in many species of animals the current zoo would have been unable to accommodate. I believe an elephant exhibit was one such offering. Plus there was room in that proposal to expand the zoo in the coming years. So GR would have had an awesome zoo if voter would have went for it.

Being closed for winter being a concern, is a valid point. For the 3-4 months of the cold season is a downside. But the current zoo does this as well and it seems to be doing just fine other than the need for more space. So I really don't see anything differences in effect when comparing the winter closures of the current zoo with that of the relocated zoo.

[gvsusean]

The fact that we lost the zoo that was going to be at the gardens was/is a black mark on the face of grand rapids. However, I believe that if the JBZ would be allowed to expand into the mostly unused park the current JBZ could be amazing. I think for parking the city should build a parking ramp to accommodate the visitors; maybe something like 38 commerce?

[fotoman311]

The fact that we lost the zoo that was going to be at the gardens was/is a black mark on the face of grand rapids. However, I believe that if the JBZ would be allowed to expand into the mostly unused park the current JBZ could be amazing. I think for parking the city should build a parking ramp to accommodate the visitors; maybe something like 38 commerce?

I don't see the city building any kind of parking ramp. The county would have to do it, since they own the zoo. I don't see the county building a parking ramp either, honestly.

I personally like having the zoo closer to the downtown. While there are not a ton of alternative transit options to get to the current location, there are far less to get out to the E. Beltline. I don't know if Grand Rapids is big enough at this point to support a huge zoo, with so many other zoological options within a few hours. Maybe I am wrong. I do like what they are doing to improve their current space. I plan to try the zipline this summer.

Also, Omaha, Nebraska, where I grew up, has a world class zoo, the Henry Doorly Zoo. It has a much larger footprint than JBZ, and they were landlocked for new expansion until just recently. With the construction of Omaha's new downtown baseball park, the old ballpark across from the zoo will be torn down and some of it will be converted to parking and the zoo will be able to reclaim some of the current parking that is right on the property. They do well in the winter season (which is only slightly shorter than ours) because they have many indoor exhibits, with one of the largest cat complexes in the world, an indoor jungle, a world class aquarium (complete with penguin webcam: http://66.37.232.214/pri/icam?name=camera1...iewfinder.y=116 ), and an indoor desert/night animal exhibit. In the summer they have an awesome train pulled by a steam engine that I absolutely loved when I was a kid.

[AlexPKeaton]

I think the last thing any of us want is for any of John Ball Park to become a parking lot.