- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Vote on moving Baton Rouge Zoo, expanding Greenwood Park expected Today
Posted on 6/22/17 at 10:46 am to kingbob
Posted on 6/22/17 at 10:46 am to kingbob
City park... I don't believe you could fit an elephant exihibit on the spot and still have the space needed for other quality exihibits.. tou could probably squeeze by with the bare minimum but that maybe frowned upon for a new space.. if possible then great but elephants aren't the only kickass exhibit that can drive zoo sustainability
2
Posted on 6/22/17 at 10:48 am to TROLA
The argument that moving the zoo will cost NBR a tone of business is BS. The citizens of that area do not work at the zoo nor do they attend the zoo. Also, no one is stopping to get gas or food in that are before or after leaving the zoo. We all eat and fill up with gas before getting on the interstate specifically so we don't have to stop in that area.
The new location needs to make it more convenient for ascension and Livingston schools to go to, otherwise they will just drive 10 extra minutes to go to audubon.
City park is too small to have a zoo with a reasonable event venue, I think down Nicholson near lauberge is the ideal spot. It needs to be close enough for people to want to have parties and receptions there, while having something other venues can't offer.
The new location needs to make it more convenient for ascension and Livingston schools to go to, otherwise they will just drive 10 extra minutes to go to audubon.
City park is too small to have a zoo with a reasonable event venue, I think down Nicholson near lauberge is the ideal spot. It needs to be close enough for people to want to have parties and receptions there, while having something other venues can't offer.
Posted on 6/22/17 at 10:48 am to TROLA
quote:
if possible then great but elephants aren't the only kickass exhibit that can drive zoo sustainability
I think every zoo needs the following:
Lions
Tigers
Elephants
Giraffes
Monkeys
Everything else is just lagniappe.
I would put the parking structure where that u-shaped parking lot is now or on the corner of E. Lakeshore and Dalrymple. If the U-lot isn't used for the parking garage, it would be torn up and incorporated into the zoo. You could use the art museum as an entrance to the zoo as well.
This post was edited on 6/22/17 at 10:53 am
Posted on 6/22/17 at 10:51 am to kingbob
Rhinos. I want to see a rhinoceros.
And otters. Otters are awesome.
And otters. Otters are awesome.
Posted on 6/22/17 at 10:51 am to Creamer
Probably the best point made in this thread regarding the move
Posted on 6/22/17 at 10:54 am to TROLA
quote:
I just hate the thought that Elephants are the driving force behind the zoo relocation. I hate that we have a great opportunity and space that is being overlooked based on one animal..
Well, the Baton Rouge Zoo does have a history with wanting elephants. That whole penny drive thing with Buckskin Bill and whatnot.
Posted on 6/22/17 at 11:02 am to kingbob
quote:
I think every zoo needs the following:
Lions
Tigers
Elephants
Giraffes
Monkeys
Everything else is just lagniappe.
All zoos need a reptile house as well. You'll probably also have a local flair to it. So, an exhibit with native "megafauna" would include alligators, Louisiana black bear, and likely cougars. Probably, given the LSU mascot, would have tigers over lions.
I agree with giraffes and an assortment of primates being a must.
Posted on 6/22/17 at 11:02 am to Creamer
quote:
City park is too small to have a zoo with a reasonable event venue,
The golf course is approximately 25 acres.. you combine the zoo with the existing museum and you have plenty of space for events and a quality over quantity zoo in the heart of baton rouge.. you also have the brand new kids museum next door. I believe that we should use existing space over sticking it out where it's once again a stand alone attraction. Coupling attractions drives more visitors IMO.
Posted on 6/22/17 at 11:11 am to TROLA
Let's be honest though, an attempt to move the zoo to City Park is going to be NIMBY'd to death before it can get past planning stage. Even if it could work logistically, it's a non-starter.
Posted on 6/22/17 at 11:11 am to TROLA
quote:
The golf course is approximately 25 acres
And what are you going to fit on these 25 acres with appropriate display habitats, off display space, equipment space, infirmary/quarantine space, any potential breeding facility/endangered species recovery/research space (if that's something BREC even does), etc.
You would have a zoo with mostly small animals and one or two of the things that people actually want to see. It's doable, but it will be a very limited zoo as far as attractions are concerned. Would require a clever design and good exhibit choices.
quote:
Coupling attractions drives more visitors IMO.
I agree with this.
Posted on 6/22/17 at 11:12 am to trom83
quote:
next to the current zoo location near Baker — which would include a water park, horse trails, zip lines, a carousel, soccer fields and more.
Posted on 6/22/17 at 11:12 am to Creamer
quote:
The argument that moving the zoo will cost NBR a tone of business is BS.
I agree, considering the zoo isn't in NBR anyway. It isn't in BR and Baker borders it on three sides.
It's more symbolic than anything.
As for the new location being convenient to Livingston and Ascension, that should not be a factor unless we build a regional zoo and they contribute. That isn't going to happen so its a non issue. The zoo isn't going to turn a profit no matter where they put it.
I realize the study that BREC commissioned says the cost of a new zoo and renovating the old zoo is the same. That doesn't make sense at all. BREC already owns the property, there is infrastructure in place now at the present location, and there are facilities surrounding the zoo in place to supplement what the zoo provides.
The notion that the zoo is run down, its not modern and we need a new one is being pushed by the very same people who let the zoo fall into decline, and who have not kept up with the times by doing planned renovations periodically,
Zoos are constantly evolving, renovations are carefully planned, and a good zoo is constantly evolving. BREC didn't do this, and now they are crying that they need a new one.
And why hasn't BREC picked a new location? My guess is they have one in mind, but don't want it announced. Why?
I'm guessing few people around City Park, Shenandoah, the University Club, etc. want the zoo in their neighborhood; while folks around Baker and the present area want the zoo where it is so why force feed this thing on people who don't want it in there neighborhood?
BREC is going to force feed the new zoo on somebody, and they don't want a public outcry. That's what I see happening.
They want to help a developer, maybe the casino, or someone else who is connected and that's driving this thing. That and a few well-minded citizens who think a zoo is great.
Posted on 6/22/17 at 11:14 am to Creamer
quote:
Most zoo's in other cities derive a large portion of their revenue from corporate events, parties, and wedding receptions.
Guess what, nobody wants to hold these events at the current location. Move the thing and incorporate an event venue and the revenue will be there.
all of this.
Posted on 6/22/17 at 11:17 am to CBandits82
I saw a post on either Facebook or Instagram that suggested moving the zoo to the old warehouses/empty land north of the capitol. Revitalizing that area would be ah huge game changer for downtown, and provide a northern termination for any future street car. It fits all of the needs of what BREC wants, and keeps the Zoo towards Northern EBR parish.
Posted on 6/22/17 at 11:17 am to Sasquatch Smash
Central Park zoo is less than 7 acres.. it's not meant to be a driving stand alone attraction.. the area is part of a whole attraction and this is what BR should try to achieve regardless of where it's located..
Posted on 6/22/17 at 11:21 am to doubleb
quote:
As for the new location being convenient to Livingston and Ascension, that should not be a factor unless we build a regional zoo and they contribute.
They're the customers
Right now, the distance makes Audubon make more sense since it's not that much farther. Moving the zoo 20 minutes closer to its customer base changes that completely.
quote:
I realize the study that BREC commissioned says the cost of a new zoo and renovating the old zoo is the same. That doesn't make sense at all.
Agreed. Someone is cooking the books or the costs include keeping the zoo running while doing the renovations, which makes it take longer and cost more money.
quote:
there is infrastructure in place now at the present location, and there are facilities surrounding the zoo in place to supplement what the zoo provides.
The problem is that there really isn't. Their classroom space is insufficient and the parking lot is not secure. They would have to build a new elephant habitat from scratch while making it work in the existing space.
quote:
BREC already owns the property
BREC owns the property at all of the other sites under consideration as well. They're not going to be buying any land, only using existing BREC owned or additional donated land.
quote:
The notion that the zoo is run down, its not modern and we need a new one is being pushed by the very same people who let the zoo fall into decline, and who have not kept up with the times by doing planned renovations periodically,
Agreed. But I guess the feeling is that in the present location, there's only so much blood you can get from that stone.
quote:
And why hasn't BREC picked a new location? My guess is they have one in mind, but don't want it announced. Why?
This is my big hangup. They should not be voting on whether or not to move the zoo before the public knows where they would be moving to. There are some locations I would support them moving to and other I would likely oppose.
quote:
BREC is going to force feed the new zoo on somebody, and they don't want a public outcry. That's what I see happening.
The Friends of the Baton Rouge Zoo want elephants, BRAF wants a new zoo, and daggummit, they're going to get what they want at all costs (paid by the taxpayer of course)
quote:
They want to help a developer, maybe the casino, or someone else who is connected and that's driving this thing.
Bingo. That's why City Park was taken out of consideration and only 3 sites were mentioned as possible locations. The Fairgrounds and O'Neil are horrible locations that make the Gardere location near the casino look reasonable by comparison. I'd bet good money that that's where they want to put it and that Laberge is the ones wanting it. I've also heard rumors that future expansions of the much-discussed streetcar line would eventually bring it all the way to Laberge.
This post was edited on 6/22/17 at 11:23 am
Posted on 6/22/17 at 11:23 am to TigerRob20
quote:
I saw a post on either Facebook or Instagram that suggested moving the zoo to the old warehouses/empty land north of the capitol.
You realize that the majority of those warehouses aren't empty right? All sorts of industrial-ish businesses are in there.
Posted on 6/22/17 at 11:24 am to LSUBoo
quote:
You realize that the majority of those warehouses aren't empty right? All sorts of industrial-ish businesses are in there.
Bingo.
Posted on 6/22/17 at 11:35 am to kingbob
quote:
They're the customers
BREC is here to serve our parish first, the needs of our "customers" comes second.
Also consider who the "competition" is. You are competing against the Audubon Zoo and the Aquarium in New Orleans. People are going to drive a little farther if the difference is first class and average and face it; do you ever see BREC having a first class zoo?
quote:
The problem is that there really isn't. Their classroom space is insufficient and the parking lot is not secure. They would have to build a new elephant habitat from scratch while making it work in the existing space.
All of that could be done right where the zoo is now, A place where there's an environmental friendly sewer treatment system, water, some parking and some infrastructure surrounding it.
quote:
BREC owns the property at all of the other sites under consideration as well.
The study commissioned in 2015 had two sites; one at the Fairgrounds (which BREC owns but flooded) and another at Nicholson and Bluebonnet which BREC does not own.
Other sites mentioned so far are City Park (BREC owns) and off O'neal and by the Gov. Mansion (which BREC does not own).
quote:
But I guess the feeling is that in the present location, there's only so much blood you can get from that stone.
Only because BREC let it decline. I've been to zoos before and it seems to me they always have sme construction project going on. They'll shite down one part to renovate do that, and then renovate another part. Keeping up with the times and keeping things fresh is a year to year thing. BREC doesn't do that. They let it fall apart and then cry about how bad it looks.
quote:
This is my big hangup. They should not be voting on whether or not to move the zoo before the public knows where they would be moving to. There are some locations I would support them moving to and other I would likely oppose.
Ye, exactly.
Posted on 6/22/17 at 11:42 am to TROLA
quote:
Central Park zoo is less than 7 acres..
The zoo has been there for 80 years, is located in a park that's 100 times that size, and said park is the main green space for a population, what?, two-three times the state of Louisiana.
Is it possible? Sure. They'd have to choose animals wisely and design it well, especially considering how animal exhibits are being constructed these days (larger enclosures with natural grass and dirt rather than concrete).
quote:
it's not meant to be a driving stand alone attraction.. the area is part of a whole attraction and this is what BR should try to achieve regardless of where it's located..
I agree with you here. Grouping things together with museums and whatnot is a good idea.
But that one poster is right, and goes back to what I said earlier regarding smells and sounds...the NIMBYs wouldn't allow it.
This post was edited on 6/22/17 at 11:43 am
Page 5 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News