ZSL London Zoo Casson Pavillion Ideas

Pertinax said:
There have been various rumours over the years about the Zoo wanting to extend into the Park a bit more. Nothing has ever happened and it seems there are rigid rules which will(unfortunately) ensure its prevention in the future either.
Click to expand...

Forgive me if I am wrong but I remember reading somewhere that London Zoo were granted planning permission some years ago to extent the zoo into Regent's Park, they did not however take this up and the zoo remained its current acreage.
 
And the park is something in the order of 160 acers?
I realise that financially its probably not an option but it could expand to a size where it could accomidate all the species (in decent enclosures) it held when its collection was at its largest.
Interesting thought.
The fact the zoo is cluttered with listed buildings that are inappropriate for housing the original inhabitants is very frustrating!
 
mcatee123 said:
And the park is something in the order of 160 acers?
I realise that financially its probably not an option but it could expand to a size where it could accomidate all the species (in decent enclosures) it held when its collection was at its largest.
Interesting thought.
The fact the zoo is cluttered with listed buildings that are inappropriate for housing the original inhabitants is very frustrating!
Click to expand...

It can be described as frustrating, the listed buildings are important pieces of architecture and most of them no longer house the species they were originally built for, they certainly add to the ambiance and character of this great zoo, however on the other side of the coin what purpose does the Lubitkin penguin pool serve zoologically in the present day?, have not the Mappin Terraces certainly served their purpose apart from housing the aquarium underneath?, the Casson Pavillion, will anything look really suitable in it when it was designed and built to house elephants and rhinos, and many would say it did not do this successfully, just think of what modern up to the date animal houses could be built on this space if these three architectural master pieces were demolished.
 
I agree that the are important peices of architecture, I do think more pragmatism needs to be applied.
A zoo building is essentially functional and regardless of the architectural merits of the Lubitkin penguin pool, Mappin terraces and Casson pavilion structures, I do think that from a design perspective they have failed in there role.
Zoo structures by their nature need to be extensively modified or sadly, in the case of the penguin pool demolished, as is seen fit.
Otherwise the zoo risks ending up as a morose collection of interesting buildings with little space left for the animals.
 
Last edited:
mcatee123 said:
I agree that the are important peices of architecture, I do think more pragmatism needs to be applied a zoo building is essentially functional and regardless of the architectural merits of the Lubitkin penguin pool, mappin terraces and casson pavilion structures, I do think that from a design perspective they have failed in there roll.
Zoo structures by their nature need to be extensively modified or sadly, in the case of the penguin pool demolished as is seen fit. Otherwise the zoo risks ending up a morose collection of interesting buildings with little space left for the animals.
Click to expand...

Exactly, it has to be remembered that these buildings were designed by architects not zoologists, Sir Hugh Casson was most respected in his field, he was responsible for the architecture of the royal yacht, Britannia, the Casson Pavilion is an amazing looking building the interior is almost cathedral like however it was virtually bad news from day one for the elephants, and I must add that I was very sad to see the elephants leave the park but the future well being of the animals concerned certainly at the end of the day has to over ride any sentiment and childhood nostalgia I may have had for this building. The old lion house, the parrot house, the old insect house were also impressive buildings but they were not listed structures resulting in their demolition to make way for new exhibits, and quite right too.
 
Pertinax said:
The plans definately show a new Pygmy Hippo enclosure to go approxmately inside where the current Zoo Entrance is.
Click to expand...

This is the 2007 Masterplan which, if the new penguin exhibit is anything to go by, certainly isn't set in stone. The planned repositioning of the zoo entrance on the eastern broadwalk hasn't happened, instead an exit has been created there. I am assuming that this was a scaled-down version of the original plan for a new entrance that won't be changed for some time. Therefore I would not antipicate any new pygmy hippo exhibit on the site of the current entrance, at least not for a number of years.
 
Jurek7 said:
London zoo also received government money for years
Click to expand...

No, it was given a one-off crisis grant of £10 million by the Thatcher government in the mid-eighties, to avert closure. ZSL did not receive funding when they were under threat of closure in 1991, despite appealing to the government for a second bailout.

I'm not clear when 'ZSL' became a charity, as in the whole of the organisiation rather than a charitable arm. I would agree that, since the advent of Gift Aid in the late 1990s, ZSL has been helped by its charitable status, however I would argue this is nothing like municipal state funding seen with zoos in other countries. Which is why I have such affection for London zoo.
 
TARZAN said:
Forgive me if I am wrong but I remember reading somewhere that London Zoo were granted planning permission some years ago to extent the zoo into Regent's Park, they did not however take this up and the zoo remained its current acreage.
Click to expand...

I have heard that discussed on here, but I have never seen documents/ articles with sources confirming that. However, ZSL were given permission to (and did) expand the southern corner of the zoo into Regent's park when they created 'Meet the Monkeys', but the Eastern perimeter now appears more set back than it used to, with a substantial planted border of shrubs and trees, so its possible the acreage has not changed.
 
TARZAN said:
Exactly, it has to be remembered that these buildings were designed by architects not zoologists.
Click to expand...

Yes, but I think many are so iconic and distinguish London from other collections. I think that, once the rest of the non-listed concrete and wire is removed, over the years, and as the vegetation continues to grow, the listed buildings will become more beautiful. The bird house now looks stunning, the stork and ostrich house is up next, and I have total faith that all the listed buildings, perhaps with the exception of the penguin pool (with its impossible drainage issues) will be maintained in an inventive and sympathetic manner.

I imagine the giraffery without the other Cotton Terrace houses surrounding it, looking fantastic and still serving its purpose well, baboons climbing up the slopes of the Mappins onto the the mountain tops, monkeys venturing out of the Roundhouse into the trees on the South Bank. I don't know if this is how these buildings will be used, but I am confident that ZSL will use them in the best way.

The Casson Pavilion is a difficult space, but I am confident if tapirs do arrive here, so much planting will be done it will start to transform the structure. Such a concrete monolith needs to be shown in the context of a time past, and trees/bushes growing up around it would symbolize that well.
 
Sad and confusing to hear that the zoo cannot not (or doesn't want to be) extended. It was succesful in Berlin, Basel, Copenhagen, Wroclaw, Rotterdam, is now happening in Zurich etc.

For Casson pavillion, ideally, the house interior should be redesigned to create just 2 or 3 large indoor spaces.

If not, I would use 3 of the inside boxes for orangutans, 2 for sun bears and one for Asian monkeys - possibly Javan langurs or lion-tailed macaques. Orangutans could share the exhibit with small-clawed otters, like in many other zoos. Visitor area could have an aviary for south Asian birds and perhaps tortoises and squirrels and tree shrews. I would prefer there several larger birds (size of pheasant, imperial pigeon or green magpie), because sparrow-sized birds in such aviaries are usually invisible.

If not and tiger exhibit takes out space of some outside exhibits, I would change sun bears or orangutans for large crocodilians, for example indian or malayan gharials.

Mappin Terraces could still be a good, modern exhibit for bears from temperate climate (I heard they have no indoor accomodation). Polar bears or possibly asian black bears would thrive there, naturally with good design.

The rest of London zoo - I think a way to go is changing layout of exhibits and paths, putting unused space inside animal exhibits. For example the hapless Lubetkin pool (a rare example of zoo structure, for which zoologists have not yet discovered a suitable animal). It could become a decent pool for some larger mammal inside a bigger exhibit.
 
Jurek7 said:
Sad and confusing to hear that the zoo cannot not (or doesn't want to be) extended. It was succesful in Berlin, Basel, Copenhagen, Wroclaw, Rotterdam, is now happening in Zurich etc

Mappin Terraces could still be a good, modern exhibit for bears from temperate climate (I heard they have no indoor accomodation). Polar bears or possibly asian black bears would thrive there, naturally with good design.

the hapless Lubetkin pool (a rare example of zoo structure, for which zoologists have not yet discovered a suitable animal). It could become a decent pool for some larger mammal inside a bigger exhibit.
Click to expand...

1. London is a huge, sprawling city, our green spaces are important. There's a lot of poverty in Camden, a lot of people can't afford the zoo, developers are always trying to encroach on green spaces here. Boris Johnson as Mayor ended funding for all schoolchildren to visit London Zoo and the Wildfowl & Wetlands Centre for free, which had been introduced by the previous mayor, Ken Livingstone.

2. Try and get a copy of 'The Buildings of London Zoo'. There are indoor bear dens along the top of what is the wallaby/emu exhibit now, although the zoo has opted for wooden huts rather than allowing the wallabies to use the bear dens for shelter. The book has some amazing photographs of the network of concrete tunnels and the huge spaces inside the hollow mountain tops. There are 'goat runs', underground chutes running from the caves used by the sheep and goats at the top right down to the indoor housing for wild pigs (now under substrate) at the bottom by the pond.

3. The only species I could imagine the Tecton penguin pool ever housing would be otters, and then only has an 'off-duty' enclosure for trained animals taking part in the Ampitheatre shows (not that there are currently any included in the show). I don't believe filling it with water would be permitted, let alone structurally safe.
 
Last edited:
Been thinking what could be appropriately housed in the Lubitkin penguin pool, we have had alligators and porcupine in the past, dare I say it but meerkats is the best I can come up with, although I appreciate that they are currently being exhibited in two parts of the zoo already so three would be perhaps pushing it,despite their current popularity, perhaps the current meerkat enclosures could therefore be utilised for something else, i.e. the one adjacent to the otters and the one in the children's zoo.Agree that the bird house/Blackburn Pavillion is looking good, a lot of thought, effort and of coarse money gone into this, I recall a criticism that it looked "theme parkish", this never crossed my mind at all, like the idea of baboons up on the old goat mountains, time will tell!
 
Many small mammal species would be appropriate for the Lubetkin pool, except that it acts like a giant water butt every time there is rain. Any loose substrate in the enclosure blocks the drain and it floods during heavy downpours. Hence short-lived experiments with Chinese alligators and then crested porcupines. Meerkats would be no different otherwise I imagine they would have been at the top of their list to exhibit there. Only a semi-aquatic species with contained areas of soil/planting would be possible, even with that it would be a constance maintenance issue of removing loose substrate dug up or scattered by the activities of the animals. Hence why I think, while otters could be kept here, it would not be justifiable for them to be held here unless they were tame and used in the shows much as many of the other 'exotics' held in the children's zoo.
 
johnstoni. said:
This is the 2007 Masterplan which, if the new penguin exhibit is anything to go by, certainly isn't set in stone. Therefore I would not antipicate any new pygmy hippo exhibit on the site of the current entrance, at least not for a number of years.
Click to expand...

Do you think the plans for a new Entrance area have been shelved? When I was there a few weeks ago I thought I saw plans for the new Entrance on show somewhere (at the new exit?) but maybe it was my imagination.

Re the Pygmy Hippos- it seems they will have to leave their existing area to accomodate the Tigers, and well before any new exhibit is done for them, if no new Entrance area is to be forthcoming soon. So a straight move into the existing Tapir area-after perhaps being modified for them?- does seem the most likely outcome.
 
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top