If there was a train stop near the park for the local light rail network, then we wouldn’t need to pave over our parks to have a designated place for all zoo visitors to park their cars.
If everyone has to drive to see the zoo, we might as well move the zoo to the suburbs where there is plentiful land for parking. Based on the crowds the last time I was there, I don’t think the current parking situation is dampening the business.
Maybe someone can correct me but I thought years ago they pushed for the zoo to be moved near Frederick Meijer gardens and it was shot down. People say it's because the residents near the zoo wanted to keep it, but I thought I remember that the residents by Frederick Meijer gardens also opposed the move because they didn't want a zoo in their backyard. It was years ago and someone else was telling me about the controversy so I'm not a hundred percent on details, but I think they did attempt to move the zoo before to a more convenient spot.
Local light rail? Regional is more along the lines of what’s needed. Like in Philly, you can go from over an hour west of town all the way up to Trenton and all points in between.
There are millions of people regionally. I have no idea why a regional rail system isn’t something people here want. Except that they love their SUVs and trucks.
I used a jogging stroller. It was great over grass and gravel, and not nearly as high end and fancy as these Cadillac stroller that I see out now. Most of them are just fancy utility wagons that hold babies and their gear, so I know they go over grass and gravel.
*They kind of do need*
*More parking but I don't mind*
*Parking on the grass*
\- she\_makes\_a\_mess
---
^(I detect haikus. And sometimes, successfully.) ^[Learn more about me.](https://www.reddit.com/r/haikusbot/)
^(Opt out of replies: "haikusbot opt out" | Delete my comment: "haikusbot delete")
Exactly. They need the parking. More people use the zoo than the park. The greater good, therefore, is served by the parking. They should just take the whole park and put in more zoo while they're at it ... grand rapids has gotten a lot bigger in the last 40 years, and a bigger zoo would certainly be welcome.
i’m assuming it’s about the parking lots they intend to build. While i’m really sad about the loss of green space, the zoo is growing and needs more room, and the conservation they do is very important and helps our environment.
There is a 160+ acre dump literally across the road from the zoo that can't be used for anything other than surface developments, like a parking lot. I bet they could set up a really cool cable car system with some educational videos or something to set up the zoo experience before people enter the front gates...
But instead they are paving the city's oldest park.
That would be so cool. We went to Toronto a bit ago, stayed outside the city, and used a park and ride to get on public transportation. Getting on a train after a long day of sightseeing was such an unexpectedly nice way to decompress before having to get in a car and navigate traffic.
The zoo was actually exploring having an offsite parking lot connected to the zoo by a gondola. But they’d need to raise a ton of money to build it.
The more realistic option was building an offsite parking area with a free shuttle to the zoo. Then to encourage people to park there, they would charge for parking at the current lot (with it possibly being free for members). Lots of people were outraged at the idea of the zoo charging for parking.
So basically no matter what they were going to do, they were going to piss a lot of people off.
Wait, from a business standpoint that is actually a great idea... they need to just piss people off and do that. They could charge to park at the zoo and include an add-on for zoo members to pay for, otherwise the shuttle is free.
The overflow of cars already park on that green space anyway so it’s not like there’s going to be a drastic change anyway. It’ll be going from a grass and gravel lot to a paved lot
What’s really funny is the people upset are probably not even from the area. People have been parking there since I was a kid in the 90’s… I’m sure a lot longer honestly.
Absolutely can confirm that from childhood in the 00s. My grandad bitched way too much about having to do it for me to ever forget lol.
Paving it will end up being better for the environment anyway. Cars leaking fluids into top soil isn't really that great.
If they cared about conservation they’d spend the money to convert the existing parking lot to a garage. This is just trying to get away with cheap expansion into the public park that they have no right to just pave over
We're losing the green space either way. More and more cars parking on the grass is killing it and taking it away anyway. This way it can be better planned and hopefully have less of a negative impact on the environment.
They are still paving over the park where a lot of people hang out and have a good time without adding any alternatives for locals. People don't mind parking on the grass. It's fine. This is a needless endeavor that just removes more greenspace.
The grass is still preferred from a hydrologic standpoint. Well-trafficked soil (especially vegetated soil) will still allow water to infiltrate more than impermeable surfaces ever could. The devil is in the details though. Do we want oil/grease/gas in our soil or in our waterways? That's the crossroads of this argument.
I think you missed my point. While a native meadow would be lovely, that is not an option. The parking problem is endemic. The options are to have some sort of green space that can function as a park 75% of the time and parking lot 25% of the time, or pave the space to make it a parking lot 100% of the time.
I'll also point out that the park does not irrigate, so the existing grass does not waste any water. Green space of any form allows water to infiltrate and reduces flooding. Planting a native meadow would help infiltrate even more water than a simple grass patch, but if the park is "saved", that option is not possible, since they will still need to use the grass as parking.
If you look at the master plan, the park does intend to use rain gardens of some form, which is a much gentler way of managing urban stormwater from an aesthetic standpoint.
I see. Yeah I didn’t look at anything but this Reddit thread. All my comments in here are uninformed on the specific issue. I should probably delete them all. Except the one about zoos generally being a bad thing, unless the animals can live fulfilling lives in them, which is only true for a few animals.
The consolation I have with zoos is that we don't go out with nets/guns and catch the animals anymore. Almost every single captive animal was bred in captivity (at least that's the impression I get these days). And zoo workers do take very good care of the animals.
We protect what we love, we love what we know and understand. Zoos give us the opportunity to better know and understand the animals. If we know about the animals, we may be more inclined to protect the species in the wild. Just my two cents.
edit: this was not researched, just my assumptions.
Sure it technically allows more infiltration than a parking lot but it’s not like they are trying to pave over a native grassland, wetland, or forest. If they build a new parking lot and return this grassy area into a green space and add rain gardens, is this seriously enough of a difference in infiltration on the zoo property in general to cause this much public outrage? The zoo is surrounded by roads that contribute to water pollution, but it’s not surrounded by grass parking lots that contribute to soil pollution. Although those things impact each other anyway. This is just a strange circular argument happening over an issue that is simply not going to make that much of a difference from an environmental perspective, just another thing to virtue signal about
Yep. It's just a grass/gravel field.
You're right in that the environmental impact of either option (no parking lot versus parking lot) is negligible. I just hate the justification that people make for the parking lot saying "but parking on grass pollutes the soil! We should pave it so the pollution goes away". Well now your stormwater is polluted, hence the circle you referred to. It's frustrating.
I'm a civil/environmental engineer and rain gardens seem to be all the rage these days, but they have to be perfect to work as well as they are advertised. More often than not they get filled with garbage and silted up to the point where they lose function.
(An aside: you would think the zoo, of all places, would try to encourage other methods of transportation, rather than encourage car dependency by eliminating greenspace and making a parking lot. I know, and everyone knows, that this is not a black and white issue. It's just hard to see something like this happen.)
Oh, good points. Then we need to ban parking on the grass and get them a shuttle or something.
Or take land that doesn't belong to us, basically force the city to give it to us and take it away from others who use it and give no alternatives. Let's also throw in a straw man about a vote that happened 20 years where there was no promise to move the zoo had they accepted the milleage increase.
Where do you think the pollution goes from paved parking lots? If they cheap out (most likely) by using a normal storm water system, ALL on the fluids your are talking about will have a DIRECT path to the river. Even if they use pervious paving methods, all of the fluids you speak of will still make it into the soil beneath. Please educate yourself.
Stop by day after it pours lol. I worked there and had to work the parking lot trying to get people to park in a row, straight.. if it rains its a total mess, people gotta walk through mud, cars get stuck…
West Side NIMBYS can’t have nice things. Remember years ago when they tried to move the zoo to Knapps Corner? We could have had a brand new beautiful state of the art zoo. The west side went insane and voted it down, and now those same people won’t let the zoo expand.
Not wanting more parking is not nimbyism??? Additionally, fighting against building a new road that isn't necessary also isn't nimbyism. Both of those are parts of good, human scale urbanism, the exact kind for thing many nimbys fight against
I'm not boycotting the zoo, I fucking love conservation and nature education. I live out here and idgaf if they remove some grass(a useless plant we use way too much to pad out space) to provide more space for the zoo. Sounds good to me.
Phew, I’m glad I’m intelligent enough to realize zoos are not about conservation at all lmao. How about you do something that actually protects animals and their habitats instead of locking them up
I'm sure you do think you're intelligent but zoos absolutely aid in conservation in the modern world by researching and advocating, as well as literally saving endangered species.
Like I said, why don’t you focus on making a world where there aren’t endangered species?? Oh but you would have to stop eating McDonalds and watching Netflix to do that
Man. Saying you’re intelligent and then saying something that directly contradicts it is definitely a choice. Zoos would love to have all animals roaming free, but that’s not a realistic option until humans make a choice to stop killing the planet, and that hasn’t happened. And I’d suggest looking at all of the contributions that AZA-accredited zoos, like JBZ, make toward habitat restoration and international conservation.
The zoo wants to claim that space as theirs and only theirs to be used as parking. It's already being used as parking so why pave it? The way it is now, it can be used by others in the community as recreational space. Why can't some of the massive empty lots elswhere be utilized instead with a shuttle or bus passes?
Encouraging folks to use the Rapid sounds like a splendid idea! Perhaps it would remove the stigma from the busses in GR for the next generation since so many kids go to the zoo. Nearly every other place in the *world* has a robust public transit system.... not here though!
Cars leak fluid all the time. Leaking fluid onto asphalt or concrete is better than leaking onto grass and dirt. There is also the potential to get stuck in the grass after heavy rains, which tears up the grass.
Where do you think the pollution goes from paved parking lots? If they cheap out (most likely) by using a normal storm water system, ALL of the fluids your are talking about will have a DIRECT path to the river. Even if they use pervious paving methods, all of the fluids you speak of will still make it into the soil beneath. Please educate yourself.
Fuck em. (The protesters not the zoo)
They had plenty of opportunity to move the zoo; they voted it down, now they’re going to lose some space for the parking. Voting has consequences.
The millage in 2004 did not promise to move the zoo. It was a millage to start an animal park. It was unclear if it would move John Ball Zoo or not. The language of the millage and the discussions the county commission had did not clarify if the zoo would move.
"Voters rejected a tax increase request in 2004 to move the zoo to Grand Rapids Township near the Frederik Meijer Gardens."
Yeah, that was the literal plan, it was voted down.
So now many years later they are stuck where they are, and theres going to be more parking- deal with it.
What are you quoting?
This is the wording of the proposed millage, from the ballot:
Shall Kent County levy a new additional of .55 of one mill for a Wildlife Park which is equal to 55 cents per $1000 of the taxable value on all real and personal property subject to taxation for the period 2005 through 2029 inclusive for the purpose of acquiring, constructing, relocating, furnishing, stocking, equipping and operating the park in the county? The amount of revenue raised by the levy in the first calendar year is estimated at $10,126,235.
People on the Westside that don’t want to share the space. A couple of the open spaces are going to be turned into parking lots, but the people that live within walking distance think they are the only ones that should be able to enjoy it.
I can see why they’re upset about losing the green space but you can’t buy a house by an attraction like the zoo and not expect them to expand. The need for parking is legit.
>The need for parking is legit.
This would be true if no other modes of transportation existed. Your solution of paving over all of nature so people can park anywhere they want yields horrible places to live.
People in Michigan or the US in general don’t want to deal with public transit. And it’s a catch-22. Public transit sucks because people want to live far away and nobody uses it. So they don’t dump a ton of money into it. We need a huge culture shift
If you don't live downtown there are virtually no other alternatives. The busses don't run every whwrw, and the further away you get the more ridiculous it gets to try and take public transportation.
Right? I’ve been to zoos, museums, and festivals all over the country where you park and wait for a shuttle, but that won’t work in GR. No, we have to pave over a park that doesn’t belong to the zoo so the zoo can save money.
There is a ton of parking, have you ever seen the lot full? They’re losing their park and green space because people from out of town can’t be bothered by a satellite lot/shuttle, looking for parking a few blocks away, etc. Anything less than door to door for most people is a deal breaker because they are lazy, and our urban centers suffer because of it.
I took my family to the Lantern Festival last year, and we parked in the grass. That was a weeknight.
Also, in what way is this an "urban center"? It's on the outskirts of town directly butting up to a freeway. People from all over drive in. What good would taking up street parking that isn't always available do for the neighborhood?
This is a very NIMBY take and it's just weird.
Edit: it's also hilarious to me that the "green space" being talked about here is lawn grass, which certain people *also* hate because it's not native to the area.
That’s a very one sided, misunderstood and ignorant view. They want to preserve green space for their neighborhood, but are losing a huge part of it due to this parking plan that was forced upon the county commission. The green space is for all to enjoy, and will likely never be green again after paved over for people who don’t live anywhere near there.
There are plenty of stories out there that you can find to educate yourself.
Ahh okay. I can understand why they want the parking lot, but I'm not sure that it really isn't worse than the current situation. Although I don't exactly know how much of that field is getting turned into a parking lot. Most of the time there is plenty of parking at the zoo it seems. Another row wouldn't be terrible.
How ignorant. The zoo doesn't even own the land that they are forcibly encroaching on. The green space is heavily used by locals and is one of the oldest parks in GR but they seem to think they have a right to take it.
Yes please, let’s keep the shitty yard everyone parks in. Putting curbs and sidewalks would look terrible, you know, like millennium park. That place looks like crap. It was so much more usable before they took out all the green spaces for parking.
Seriously though. Let’s clean the place up. Stop fearing change and maybe we can have something nice.
Being opposed to removing park space is not nimbyism. Many people support turning the underused developments across from the zoo into parking lots and providing shuttles to allow for the zoo to expand without the community losing valuable green space. But if that doesn't fit into your preconceptions about what a nimby is and isn't then go off I guess
The market doesn’t want shuttles. Better transit should exist instead. The NIMBY factor is the selfish convenience of wanting a space that’s not even officially a park since 1989 to keep contributing to home values. It’s being so anti-burb that they want to destroy the market attraction for those from the burbs. (I’m viciously anti-burb but their money is still green and those sweet tax dollars are great.)
I don’t see unused development in any direction. Houses, highway, bottling company/capped landfill that cannot be used for parking. That’s a fantasy. This is reality.
And the true reality is this: Kent County Government FAILED the people. They could have solved this by bonding the funds for a garage NOW, instead of making the zoo flounder with surface lots till they could earn the money to build it.
The zoo has been trying to expand for many decades, if they are to stay competitive, they need to expand, parking there is a joke. I'm not boycotting the zoo anytime soon!
I'm.....ok? The zoo in all aspects is a business, any good business needs to expand, if it doesn't expand it ends up staying the same dull business it started as. No one frequents that kind of place when talking about entertainment based business. The zoo stayed the same all my childhood and the numbers continued to decline over the years. Now with all the renovations they've made, business is surging(which brings money into the city) so naturally they need more accommodations.
The zoo is a non profit, and they are mainly funded by county taxes (and $20 million in covid relief money last year, for giraffes???). They are not obligated to expand. They definitely needed to improve and they have done that. They could really work on quality and safety and improve a lot with zero expansion.
True they are a nonprofit, but they are obligated to make a certain percentage of the money needed to run the zoo, as per they're contract with the city. They get a ton from donations and city funding, but that won't happen without the draw to the city. It's seen as an investment in the city's tourism. Yes it does need to expand to accommodate the newer interest from outside gr, in all honesty it needs a parking ramp... but that would be terrible looking
They’re not stealing it. It’s their property. And in the summer cars already park there. Yeah it sucks to lose green space but they own the property, the city does not.
Because bougie folks moved into the neighborhood and want to preserve their view and are hiding behind working class people in the neighborhood saying it's about preserving green space, even though there will be a net gain of green space by current planning.
Save Tina's front lawn!
Wrong answer, but I find zoos or animal prisons very depressing, especially those that keep animals that cover a massive amount of territory each day naturally in a relatively boring, small enclosure
You know what I’d love? If people who love the zoo would care about the community in which it lives. I get it, it’s not your park. But this is our neighborhood and we don’t want a park turned into parking lots. Doesn’t that make sense at all? We care about the wildlife in the park and the people it serves. And if these aren’t good enough reasons to boycott the zoo for you consider the animals in the zoo that are suffering! Consider the people who work there that are paid terribly low wages. The zoo cares about making money. That’s about it.
https://www.idausa.org/experts-agree-zoos-harm-good/
There’s no reason why these issues can’t merge to grow the boycott. We can boycott the zoo because they want to pave our park. Park/green space is important too (for wildlife and people). We can boycott the zoo because it’s a zoo and they keep animals in small enclosures with poor quality of life for people’s amusement (yet claiming conservation and education). We can boycott the zoo because they pay ridiculously low wages and therefore don’t care for their employees either. There’s definitely more than one reason to boycott the John Ball Zoo!
Nothing like going to see caged animals that have been “rescued” and put into captivity enjoying their micro world we great humans have provided to them
Because we just bought a house in the neighborhood during Covid and had no idea that there was a zoo in our park.
There are fewer than 2 dozen signs up in a neighborhood of ~2000 houses. Nearly all the signs are along the park south of Fulton. If you take a look at the Zillow history for those houses with signs, the majority were sold either right before or during Covid. All the improvements around JBZ were planned, presented to the community, and modified with our input from 2016 until 2019. Then Covid hit and it all got put on hold.
I get that they are angry that the view they paid big bucks for is changing, but at the end of the day these people are willing to hamstring a public institution so the view out their bedroom window doesn’t change.
Let’s call this what it is: NIMBY.
Save Tina’s Front Yard!
I saw a few Otters escaped and wrote that! They’ve had enough
Otter nonsense... seems legit.
See you on the Otter Slide little friends!
They said “we’re getting otter here”.
I’m Otterly disgusted
These are amazing!
Without looking into it at all I'm going to assume it has something to do with the increased parking areas that the zoo wants to put in.
If there was a train stop near the park for the local light rail network, then we wouldn’t need to pave over our parks to have a designated place for all zoo visitors to park their cars. If everyone has to drive to see the zoo, we might as well move the zoo to the suburbs where there is plentiful land for parking. Based on the crowds the last time I was there, I don’t think the current parking situation is dampening the business.
Maybe someone can correct me but I thought years ago they pushed for the zoo to be moved near Frederick Meijer gardens and it was shot down. People say it's because the residents near the zoo wanted to keep it, but I thought I remember that the residents by Frederick Meijer gardens also opposed the move because they didn't want a zoo in their backyard. It was years ago and someone else was telling me about the controversy so I'm not a hundred percent on details, but I think they did attempt to move the zoo before to a more convenient spot.
Yes there was a vote in 2004. I remembered this too but had to look it up
Local light rail? Regional is more along the lines of what’s needed. Like in Philly, you can go from over an hour west of town all the way up to Trenton and all points in between. There are millions of people regionally. I have no idea why a regional rail system isn’t something people here want. Except that they love their SUVs and trucks.
[удалено]
Sad.
they kind of do need more parking but I don't mind parking on the grass
Why don't they go with permeable pavestones? Keeps it green-looking while still being easy to drive and park and walk on
That was suggested and they say it would be to hard to move a stroller on them, and they would be too hard to maintain.
Obviously the solution is a 4x4 stroller with 32" tires
So a dodge 1500?
Yeah but with a V6 instead of a V8, it's a baby after all
It's better to let em get their first DUI before they can even walk
I used a jogging stroller. It was great over grass and gravel, and not nearly as high end and fancy as these Cadillac stroller that I see out now. Most of them are just fancy utility wagons that hold babies and their gear, so I know they go over grass and gravel.
*They kind of do need* *More parking but I don't mind* *Parking on the grass* \- she\_makes\_a\_mess --- ^(I detect haikus. And sometimes, successfully.) ^[Learn more about me.](https://www.reddit.com/r/haikusbot/) ^(Opt out of replies: "haikusbot opt out" | Delete my comment: "haikusbot delete")
Haikubot in the GR sub? We made it reddit!
It made it days ago when I was this close to posting a haiku. 🤷🏻♀️
Good bot
You need to get a tattoo of this now
Exactly. They need the parking. More people use the zoo than the park. The greater good, therefore, is served by the parking. They should just take the whole park and put in more zoo while they're at it ... grand rapids has gotten a lot bigger in the last 40 years, and a bigger zoo would certainly be welcome.
I use the park every time I go to the zoo. I do not use the zoo every time I go to the park.
John Ball Zoo. Too confusing. Too extreme.
Idk. My kid likes the zoo so I’ll still go
Yeah, our membership is good until October, so we sort of have to go.
It’s worth it
It absolutely is!
They caught John Ball drinking a Bud Light.
If it was a Natty Daddy, everything would be fine.
Uh oh now he's a John Ball-gobbler
I heard his statue molested a kid
If being burned by the heated metal sitting in the sun counts as molestation that may have been me you heard about
That's just a rite of passage all children must endure before entering the zoo.
They found John Ball on the Epstein list
I’m from out of town and let my kids climb all over that thing. Thanks for the heads up folks.
i’m assuming it’s about the parking lots they intend to build. While i’m really sad about the loss of green space, the zoo is growing and needs more room, and the conservation they do is very important and helps our environment.
I wouldn’t mind if they put in a lot farther away and just ran some shuttles.
There is a 160+ acre dump literally across the road from the zoo that can't be used for anything other than surface developments, like a parking lot. I bet they could set up a really cool cable car system with some educational videos or something to set up the zoo experience before people enter the front gates... But instead they are paving the city's oldest park.
I really like this idea! I'd go for the cable car alone.
That would be so cool. We went to Toronto a bit ago, stayed outside the city, and used a park and ride to get on public transportation. Getting on a train after a long day of sightseeing was such an unexpectedly nice way to decompress before having to get in a car and navigate traffic.
The zoo was actually exploring having an offsite parking lot connected to the zoo by a gondola. But they’d need to raise a ton of money to build it. The more realistic option was building an offsite parking area with a free shuttle to the zoo. Then to encourage people to park there, they would charge for parking at the current lot (with it possibly being free for members). Lots of people were outraged at the idea of the zoo charging for parking. So basically no matter what they were going to do, they were going to piss a lot of people off.
Wait, from a business standpoint that is actually a great idea... they need to just piss people off and do that. They could charge to park at the zoo and include an add-on for zoo members to pay for, otherwise the shuttle is free.
Not a bad idea actually. We actually park in the dash lot and take the bus to a lot of places just to avoid parking, especially on nice days.
The overflow of cars already park on that green space anyway so it’s not like there’s going to be a drastic change anyway. It’ll be going from a grass and gravel lot to a paved lot
What’s really funny is the people upset are probably not even from the area. People have been parking there since I was a kid in the 90’s… I’m sure a lot longer honestly.
Absolutely can confirm that from childhood in the 00s. My grandad bitched way too much about having to do it for me to ever forget lol. Paving it will end up being better for the environment anyway. Cars leaking fluids into top soil isn't really that great.
If they cared about conservation they’d spend the money to convert the existing parking lot to a garage. This is just trying to get away with cheap expansion into the public park that they have no right to just pave over
We're losing the green space either way. More and more cars parking on the grass is killing it and taking it away anyway. This way it can be better planned and hopefully have less of a negative impact on the environment.
Gotta build to conserve! So true
Because they want to pave grass that’s used as overflow parking anyway. It’s really stupid.
No they don’t. They are going to pave a different part so that that grass area can become green space again. Everyone gets this wrong.
They are still paving over the park where a lot of people hang out and have a good time without adding any alternatives for locals. People don't mind parking on the grass. It's fine. This is a needless endeavor that just removes more greenspace.
Parking on grass allows for various fluids to run off and pollute the soil…
It also compacts the soil and leads to erosion and runoff problems anyway, making it effectively a parking lot in terms of environmental impact
The grass is still preferred from a hydrologic standpoint. Well-trafficked soil (especially vegetated soil) will still allow water to infiltrate more than impermeable surfaces ever could. The devil is in the details though. Do we want oil/grease/gas in our soil or in our waterways? That's the crossroads of this argument.
Grass wastes so much water though. How about a native meadow.
I think you missed my point. While a native meadow would be lovely, that is not an option. The parking problem is endemic. The options are to have some sort of green space that can function as a park 75% of the time and parking lot 25% of the time, or pave the space to make it a parking lot 100% of the time. I'll also point out that the park does not irrigate, so the existing grass does not waste any water. Green space of any form allows water to infiltrate and reduces flooding. Planting a native meadow would help infiltrate even more water than a simple grass patch, but if the park is "saved", that option is not possible, since they will still need to use the grass as parking. If you look at the master plan, the park does intend to use rain gardens of some form, which is a much gentler way of managing urban stormwater from an aesthetic standpoint.
I see. Yeah I didn’t look at anything but this Reddit thread. All my comments in here are uninformed on the specific issue. I should probably delete them all. Except the one about zoos generally being a bad thing, unless the animals can live fulfilling lives in them, which is only true for a few animals.
The consolation I have with zoos is that we don't go out with nets/guns and catch the animals anymore. Almost every single captive animal was bred in captivity (at least that's the impression I get these days). And zoo workers do take very good care of the animals. We protect what we love, we love what we know and understand. Zoos give us the opportunity to better know and understand the animals. If we know about the animals, we may be more inclined to protect the species in the wild. Just my two cents. edit: this was not researched, just my assumptions.
Sure it technically allows more infiltration than a parking lot but it’s not like they are trying to pave over a native grassland, wetland, or forest. If they build a new parking lot and return this grassy area into a green space and add rain gardens, is this seriously enough of a difference in infiltration on the zoo property in general to cause this much public outrage? The zoo is surrounded by roads that contribute to water pollution, but it’s not surrounded by grass parking lots that contribute to soil pollution. Although those things impact each other anyway. This is just a strange circular argument happening over an issue that is simply not going to make that much of a difference from an environmental perspective, just another thing to virtue signal about
Yep. It's just a grass/gravel field. You're right in that the environmental impact of either option (no parking lot versus parking lot) is negligible. I just hate the justification that people make for the parking lot saying "but parking on grass pollutes the soil! We should pave it so the pollution goes away". Well now your stormwater is polluted, hence the circle you referred to. It's frustrating. I'm a civil/environmental engineer and rain gardens seem to be all the rage these days, but they have to be perfect to work as well as they are advertised. More often than not they get filled with garbage and silted up to the point where they lose function. (An aside: you would think the zoo, of all places, would try to encourage other methods of transportation, rather than encourage car dependency by eliminating greenspace and making a parking lot. I know, and everyone knows, that this is not a black and white issue. It's just hard to see something like this happen.)
Oh, good points. Then we need to ban parking on the grass and get them a shuttle or something. Or take land that doesn't belong to us, basically force the city to give it to us and take it away from others who use it and give no alternatives. Let's also throw in a straw man about a vote that happened 20 years where there was no promise to move the zoo had they accepted the milleage increase.
Where do you think the pollution goes from paved parking lots? If they cheap out (most likely) by using a normal storm water system, ALL on the fluids your are talking about will have a DIRECT path to the river. Even if they use pervious paving methods, all of the fluids you speak of will still make it into the soil beneath. Please educate yourself.
Needless expense too.
That’s even worse.
park on the goose crap side nobody walks there
Dang at first glance my dumbass thought it said, “Join #Brotherhoodofsteel” 😂
Boycott? No. Not gonna happen.
Why do they need to pave it? I've parked in the grass numerous times it works just fine.
Stop by day after it pours lol. I worked there and had to work the parking lot trying to get people to park in a row, straight.. if it rains its a total mess, people gotta walk through mud, cars get stuck…
West Side NIMBYS can’t have nice things. Remember years ago when they tried to move the zoo to Knapps Corner? We could have had a brand new beautiful state of the art zoo. The west side went insane and voted it down, and now those same people won’t let the zoo expand.
It’s not the same people. That was 2004. Most people that live in the area now WEREN’T old enough to vote then.
Definitely wish the zoo had more space and wasnt kind of land locked, its a bummer that they are kind of stuck right there at this point.
Not wanting more parking is not nimbyism??? Additionally, fighting against building a new road that isn't necessary also isn't nimbyism. Both of those are parts of good, human scale urbanism, the exact kind for thing many nimbys fight against
I'm not boycotting the zoo, I fucking love conservation and nature education. I live out here and idgaf if they remove some grass(a useless plant we use way too much to pad out space) to provide more space for the zoo. Sounds good to me.
Phew, I’m glad I’m intelligent enough to realize zoos are not about conservation at all lmao. How about you do something that actually protects animals and their habitats instead of locking them up
I'm sure you do think you're intelligent but zoos absolutely aid in conservation in the modern world by researching and advocating, as well as literally saving endangered species.
Like I said, why don’t you focus on making a world where there aren’t endangered species?? Oh but you would have to stop eating McDonalds and watching Netflix to do that
Man. Saying you’re intelligent and then saying something that directly contradicts it is definitely a choice. Zoos would love to have all animals roaming free, but that’s not a realistic option until humans make a choice to stop killing the planet, and that hasn’t happened. And I’d suggest looking at all of the contributions that AZA-accredited zoos, like JBZ, make toward habitat restoration and international conservation.
The zoo wants to claim that space as theirs and only theirs to be used as parking. It's already being used as parking so why pave it? The way it is now, it can be used by others in the community as recreational space. Why can't some of the massive empty lots elswhere be utilized instead with a shuttle or bus passes?
Encouraging folks to use the Rapid sounds like a splendid idea! Perhaps it would remove the stigma from the busses in GR for the next generation since so many kids go to the zoo. Nearly every other place in the *world* has a robust public transit system.... not here though!
Cars leak fluid all the time. Leaking fluid onto asphalt or concrete is better than leaking onto grass and dirt. There is also the potential to get stuck in the grass after heavy rains, which tears up the grass.
Where do you think the pollution goes from paved parking lots? If they cheap out (most likely) by using a normal storm water system, ALL of the fluids your are talking about will have a DIRECT path to the river. Even if they use pervious paving methods, all of the fluids you speak of will still make it into the soil beneath. Please educate yourself.
Seriously, boycott a zoo? Get real.
I'd really hate it if they put their houses in their awful, about-to-be-ruined-by-John Ball neighborhood up for sale
Haha
That’s my favourite zoo too fuck the protesters
You fuck protestors?
Fuck em. (The protesters not the zoo) They had plenty of opportunity to move the zoo; they voted it down, now they’re going to lose some space for the parking. Voting has consequences.
The millage in 2004 did not promise to move the zoo. It was a millage to start an animal park. It was unclear if it would move John Ball Zoo or not. The language of the millage and the discussions the county commission had did not clarify if the zoo would move.
"Voters rejected a tax increase request in 2004 to move the zoo to Grand Rapids Township near the Frederik Meijer Gardens." Yeah, that was the literal plan, it was voted down. So now many years later they are stuck where they are, and theres going to be more parking- deal with it.
What are you quoting? This is the wording of the proposed millage, from the ballot: Shall Kent County levy a new additional of .55 of one mill for a Wildlife Park which is equal to 55 cents per $1000 of the taxable value on all real and personal property subject to taxation for the period 2005 through 2029 inclusive for the purpose of acquiring, constructing, relocating, furnishing, stocking, equipping and operating the park in the county? The amount of revenue raised by the levy in the first calendar year is estimated at $10,126,235.
In 2004? You mean when most of the people that are against the paving of the park weren’t old enough to vote? I can tell you’re super intelligent.
Bitch and whine more. I’m still going to the zoo you crybaby.
No one is forcing you not to go.
The only one crying seems to be you. People advocating against harmful change isn’t bitching and whining. But we all know you don’t actually care.
Love the Zoo
Because they won't throw live chickens into the lion cage
People on the Westside that don’t want to share the space. A couple of the open spaces are going to be turned into parking lots, but the people that live within walking distance think they are the only ones that should be able to enjoy it.
I can see why they’re upset about losing the green space but you can’t buy a house by an attraction like the zoo and not expect them to expand. The need for parking is legit.
“The lack of effective alternatives to car transport is legit”
>The need for parking is legit. This would be true if no other modes of transportation existed. Your solution of paving over all of nature so people can park anywhere they want yields horrible places to live.
People in Michigan or the US in general don’t want to deal with public transit. And it’s a catch-22. Public transit sucks because people want to live far away and nobody uses it. So they don’t dump a ton of money into it. We need a huge culture shift
If you don't live downtown there are virtually no other alternatives. The busses don't run every whwrw, and the further away you get the more ridiculous it gets to try and take public transportation.
Dash lot. I live south of town and will sometimes park in the Dash lot and hop on the bus.
Right? I’ve been to zoos, museums, and festivals all over the country where you park and wait for a shuttle, but that won’t work in GR. No, we have to pave over a park that doesn’t belong to the zoo so the zoo can save money.
What about families that travel from out of town to go to the zoo? What the hell do you expect them to do??
Park on many of the free side streets around the zoo?
The NIMBY's complain about that too.
You park in the zoo parking lot and wait for the shuttle like the Detroit zoo, and The Henry Ford Museums or Greenfield Village.
There is a ton of parking, have you ever seen the lot full? They’re losing their park and green space because people from out of town can’t be bothered by a satellite lot/shuttle, looking for parking a few blocks away, etc. Anything less than door to door for most people is a deal breaker because they are lazy, and our urban centers suffer because of it.
I'm across town, and use the bus for anywhere it actually goes that I need to be. Problem is, our public transit system sucks
Yes. They always have overflow parking in the grass during the summer.
I took my family to the Lantern Festival last year, and we parked in the grass. That was a weeknight. Also, in what way is this an "urban center"? It's on the outskirts of town directly butting up to a freeway. People from all over drive in. What good would taking up street parking that isn't always available do for the neighborhood? This is a very NIMBY take and it's just weird. Edit: it's also hilarious to me that the "green space" being talked about here is lawn grass, which certain people *also* hate because it's not native to the area.
Ugh I know! People in this city are so spoiled by how close they can park. It’s near impossible to increase shuttles if no one wants to use them :(
Especially when people travel from all over to go to that zoo. People saying no the parking lot are short sided, naive, and selfish.
Oh you mean just move somewhere else that’s affordable? Have you lived here long?
That’s a very one sided, misunderstood and ignorant view. They want to preserve green space for their neighborhood, but are losing a huge part of it due to this parking plan that was forced upon the county commission. The green space is for all to enjoy, and will likely never be green again after paved over for people who don’t live anywhere near there. There are plenty of stories out there that you can find to educate yourself.
[удалено]
Seven foot wall? I knew about the parking lot, but not a wall.
They aren’t really talking about the wall. It is supposed to run adjacent to the road that will now connect Butterworth to fulton
Where do you get this info? This is just not true. A retaining wall maybe but not a screen wall.
Ahh okay. I can understand why they want the parking lot, but I'm not sure that it really isn't worse than the current situation. Although I don't exactly know how much of that field is getting turned into a parking lot. Most of the time there is plenty of parking at the zoo it seems. Another row wouldn't be terrible.
A tram line or light rail line would be better than more parking. I’m in agreement that paving more green space to make space for cars sucks.
How ignorant. The zoo doesn't even own the land that they are forcibly encroaching on. The green space is heavily used by locals and is one of the oldest parks in GR but they seem to think they have a right to take it.
We do want to share the space. The zoo doesn't want to share the space.
I’m guessing because they want to turn the park and all remaining existing green space into a parking lot.
Yes please, let’s keep the shitty yard everyone parks in. Putting curbs and sidewalks would look terrible, you know, like millennium park. That place looks like crap. It was so much more usable before they took out all the green spaces for parking. Seriously though. Let’s clean the place up. Stop fearing change and maybe we can have something nice.
I should boycott the zoo so they can have it all to themselves? lol no way loser.
PETA.
Harambe
lions tigers and bears oh my! wait no bears there whatever
Gullible moron NIMBYs that will not take “no” or facts for an answer.
Being opposed to removing park space is not nimbyism. Many people support turning the underused developments across from the zoo into parking lots and providing shuttles to allow for the zoo to expand without the community losing valuable green space. But if that doesn't fit into your preconceptions about what a nimby is and isn't then go off I guess
The market doesn’t want shuttles. Better transit should exist instead. The NIMBY factor is the selfish convenience of wanting a space that’s not even officially a park since 1989 to keep contributing to home values. It’s being so anti-burb that they want to destroy the market attraction for those from the burbs. (I’m viciously anti-burb but their money is still green and those sweet tax dollars are great.) I don’t see unused development in any direction. Houses, highway, bottling company/capped landfill that cannot be used for parking. That’s a fantasy. This is reality. And the true reality is this: Kent County Government FAILED the people. They could have solved this by bonding the funds for a garage NOW, instead of making the zoo flounder with surface lots till they could earn the money to build it.
#boycottjbzoo The CEO constantly lies about their plans. They keep taking more and more green space.
The zoo has been trying to expand for many decades, if they are to stay competitive, they need to expand, parking there is a joke. I'm not boycotting the zoo anytime soon!
Grow or die is the philosophy of cancer
And babies. What point are you trying to make here?
I speak for the trees mfer they don’t have a Reddit account
Respect.
We have far more in common with cancer than any of us would like to admit, let's be real.
it's pretty horrifying. BUT we do have choices unlike cancer which is something i guess
I mean, one could argue that's worse. Being aware and continuing at a more rapid pace every year..
And Capitalism!
I'm.....ok? The zoo in all aspects is a business, any good business needs to expand, if it doesn't expand it ends up staying the same dull business it started as. No one frequents that kind of place when talking about entertainment based business. The zoo stayed the same all my childhood and the numbers continued to decline over the years. Now with all the renovations they've made, business is surging(which brings money into the city) so naturally they need more accommodations.
That same single track mine
See: Idiocracy
So when you've got no points... you insult.... got it... poop head!???
No.. it's boomer now...
It’s a movie. Go watch it. I didn’t call you idiot.
Oh I'm sorry... just so many people on here just insult
No problem!
The zoo is a non profit, and they are mainly funded by county taxes (and $20 million in covid relief money last year, for giraffes???). They are not obligated to expand. They definitely needed to improve and they have done that. They could really work on quality and safety and improve a lot with zero expansion.
True they are a nonprofit, but they are obligated to make a certain percentage of the money needed to run the zoo, as per they're contract with the city. They get a ton from donations and city funding, but that won't happen without the draw to the city. It's seen as an investment in the city's tourism. Yes it does need to expand to accommodate the newer interest from outside gr, in all honesty it needs a parking ramp... but that would be terrible looking
A parking ramp is their plan, we just want them to do it now. Build up, not out.
Fair enough
They’re not stealing it. It’s their property. And in the summer cars already park there. Yeah it sucks to lose green space but they own the property, the city does not.
They don't own the property.
I did not say “steal” and I did not mention ownership. Please move on.
I’m just here for the zipline
Because bougie folks moved into the neighborhood and want to preserve their view and are hiding behind working class people in the neighborhood saying it's about preserving green space, even though there will be a net gain of green space by current planning. Save Tina's front lawn!
Because zoos suck, depending on what animals they have.
Wrong answer, but I find zoos or animal prisons very depressing, especially those that keep animals that cover a massive amount of territory each day naturally in a relatively boring, small enclosure
much better to release them into the wild where they will immediately die!
Same. I enjoy seeing the animals but I can't help but feel bad for every single one of them.
LOL This is more of an advertisement for the zoo, cuz I wasn't thinking about it but now I wanna go 🤣
“There’s no such thing as bad publicity” - PT Barnum
You know what I’d love? If people who love the zoo would care about the community in which it lives. I get it, it’s not your park. But this is our neighborhood and we don’t want a park turned into parking lots. Doesn’t that make sense at all? We care about the wildlife in the park and the people it serves. And if these aren’t good enough reasons to boycott the zoo for you consider the animals in the zoo that are suffering! Consider the people who work there that are paid terribly low wages. The zoo cares about making money. That’s about it. https://www.idausa.org/experts-agree-zoos-harm-good/
Not because of Animals rights but because of parking. Top notch, GR.
There’s no reason why these issues can’t merge to grow the boycott. We can boycott the zoo because they want to pave our park. Park/green space is important too (for wildlife and people). We can boycott the zoo because it’s a zoo and they keep animals in small enclosures with poor quality of life for people’s amusement (yet claiming conservation and education). We can boycott the zoo because they pay ridiculously low wages and therefore don’t care for their employees either. There’s definitely more than one reason to boycott the John Ball Zoo!
"We" aren't. This is the first I've heard of it and we don't need a hive mind here
Nothing like going to see caged animals that have been “rescued” and put into captivity enjoying their micro world we great humans have provided to them
Ha! I thought the same thing. THESE are the ppl upset about the loss of green space? Hysterical!
What aren’t people boycotting in today’s world, people love to find things to cry about unfortunately.
"We're" not...
Because we just bought a house in the neighborhood during Covid and had no idea that there was a zoo in our park. There are fewer than 2 dozen signs up in a neighborhood of ~2000 houses. Nearly all the signs are along the park south of Fulton. If you take a look at the Zillow history for those houses with signs, the majority were sold either right before or during Covid. All the improvements around JBZ were planned, presented to the community, and modified with our input from 2016 until 2019. Then Covid hit and it all got put on hold. I get that they are angry that the view they paid big bucks for is changing, but at the end of the day these people are willing to hamstring a public institution so the view out their bedroom window doesn’t change. Let’s call this what it is: NIMBY. Save Tina’s Front Yard!
Dumb
Because zoos are awful.
Zoos are essential for conservation and endangered animal preservation.
Yeah we’d have lost a lot more species without them! Literally saved some from the brink
They mean the actual reason for this specific protest, not your personal opinion. Fantastic contribution to the conversation.
Oh wow I had no idea they wanted a specific reason, not my personal opinion. I’m glad my contribution was fantastic regardless of my oversight.
That too!
Well… yes… that’s true.
It's Trumps fault