Columbus Zoo and Aquarium Columbus zoo resort/theme park

Z

zooman

Well-Known Member
15+ year member
From
Designing Zoos

Multi-Disciplinary Integration…A Mouthful of Fun!

Posted: 07 May 2009 08:31 AM PDT

Quote

Columbus Zoo's Boat Ride

And, finally, Columbus Zoo. Through a series of moves that appears to be an effort to shift almost 180 degrees from a science-based institution into a mini-resort, the Zoo has announced the initiation of a feasibility study on adding a hotel to the already massive complex. Recently, the zoo added a golf course and a water park (check out their fun website). Considering the Zoo is actually a zoo and an aquarium, the complex is quickly becoming a major multi-disciplinary destination, with the focus shifting from science to play. Columbus Zoo again illustrates the emergence of multi-disciplinary integration. I’m extremely confident that as we move forward in the evolution of science-based institutions, we’ll see many, many more of these kinds of integrations.
Quote
 
Could their web page be any worse?

Eeegads... About as user-unfriendly as I've ever seen, and I doubt it comes anywhere close to meeting even the slightest of ADA guidelines for vision impaired visitors! FLASH animations everywhere (in fact, the site won't even come up without it - bad design!), and I found the way they designed the 'Animals' index to be dizzying at best.

I was puzzled by how difficult site navigation was at first, and then I saw that this is (apparently) the home zoo of Jack Hannah. While not a problem in and of itself, the very first impression I came away from the site with was "Sea World Wannabe," and Hannah's obvious influence serves only to back that up.

I would hope the zoo itself is considerably better organized and visitor-friendly, though the fact that they obviously diverted financial resources towards a water park and golf course bothers me. Neither is appropriate nor necessary, in my mind, for a zoo setting.

I'll reserve final judgment until I actually see the place (if I'm up that way), but I will say the first impression was not a good one.

Happy travels.

---
Bruce "Where's my anti-nausea pills?" Lane
Associate member, IMATA, AZA, AAZK
kyrrin (at) bluefeathertech dot calm
 
kc7gr said:
they obviously diverted financial resources towards a water park and golf course bothers me. Neither is appropriate nor necessary, in my mind, for a zoo setting.
Click to expand...

I doubt they "diverted financial resources." I'm sure the only reason they would add these is because they make money for the zoo, not take money away. Although I have mixed feelings about attractions like this, I think a hotel is a fantastic idea. I wish more zoos would do that, especially if it incorporated some kind of animal viewing (a la Disney Animal Kingdom Lodge, only less expensive!).
 
There has been some negativity in the past about the blossoming of the Columbus Zoo due to the potential "Disneyfication" of the establishment, but I've visited over 50 zoos in North America and I'd rate Columbus in the top 5. The zoo/aquarium is amazing, and the waterpark, golf course and amusement park are all currently optional and do not affect an individual's enjoyment. An upcoming hotel is a brilliant idea, especially with a 70-acre African Savanna and South American zone to be added in the future. Columbus will remain one of the largest and best zoos on the continent, and families will want to stay nearby in order to appreciate all of the amenities.
 
The golf course and water park have been next door to the zoo for years but were separate entities until a few years ago. I believe that the golf course was optioned first and then the water park. The zoo is in a growing area where many new housing additions have grown up in the past several years. I would hazard a guess that if the zoo had any intention of growing that they needed to acquire the land when it became available.
 
Let me clear a few things up:
1) We have over two hundred acres of non developed land. We have plenty and still have room to acquire more.

2) Even in these "tough economic times" we are probably one of the most financially stable zoos in the US. We DID NOT divert any funds to build the water park or golf course - we had had that money for years. We already have the money for the hotel and three of our five construction projects (Polar Frontier, Animal Encounters, and African Savannah). We can only build things so many things so fast.

3) @ Arizona Docent - The hotel will most likely be built next to African Savannah and will have a Savannah theme. Just like at DAK visitors should be able to wake up to an African Savannah!

4) I dont really like our website either but judging a zoo by it's website is ignorant. Personally I dont like the Bronx Zoo's website but their zoo is one of the best in the nation. You have to see the zoo in person to make such judgments.

And being perfectly honest - I didnt like the water park or golf course at first either. But both attractions have helped promote the zoo, conservation and education. They have raised thousands and thousands of dollars that will help the zoo and our conservation projects and their profits have made us financially stable. Both attractions are supporting and promoting conservation and education which is the main purpose of a zoo. So at the end of the day the water park and the golf course - no matter how "Disneyfied" they are - are aiding the main purpose of a zoo.
 
And once again, I'm going to stand up for Disney and say "disneyfication" is not necessarily a bad thing! (that is if it is actual disneyfication, often what people claim is disneyfication is more like shopping mall rainforest cafeication)
 
The Columbus is the best themed and most organized zoo I have been to. I think all the additions including the hotel are a wonderful idea and I can't wait to see what the future holds.
 
Frankly, what the Columbus Zoo is doing is just smart business. They're diversifying to create attractions that offer something for everyone in a family which also gives the zoo financial benefit. A hotel/resort will help make this a destination attraction. Too many zoo people are offended by the idea of focusing on anything other than the animals but in today's market, you have to offer more.
 
I'm not convinced of that...

More specifically, the argument "in today's market, you have to offer more." I'm not entirely convinced that's true, based on my own travels.

HOWEVER -- People, please! I'm not "judging the zoo by it's web site," nor am I condemning them out of hand. That would be foolish, since I have not yet been there. I expressed my OPINION that the web site is very unfriendly to vision-impaired visitors, and dizzying at best to navigate. I also expressed another OPINION that the first impression I received was not a good one.

I would think ANY zoo should be concerned about first impressions, electronic or otherwise.

I'm pleased to hear that no funds were 'diverted,' per se. However, I still have to wonder if they could not have been better spent. Again, I will not know for certain until I see the place.

It is entirely possible that, should I visit, I would enjoy the heck out of the water park as well as the zoo. I never said I wouldn't set foot in the place just because of their web site, or because they were looking at putting a hotel in.

Outside of an annual electronics-scrounging trip to the Bay Area, and our usual July 4th escape to Canada, I never know where my travel plans will take me from year to year. However, I will see if a trip to Columbus can be done in the next year or so.

In short: I will reserve judgment if the rest of the board's readers will stop attacking me simply for expressing my opinions. Isn't said expression part of what the forum is for?

Thank you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top