Have you ever heard the song, Big Yellow Taxi by Joni Mitchell? Well, this past week, I’ve had that song in my head and it will not go away. In the words of Joni Mitchell, “Don’t it always seem to go, that you don’t know what you’ve got ‘til it’s gone. They paved paradise and put up a parking lot.” The paradise I’m thinking about is right here in our own Claremont neighborhood. It is the Bernard Field Station that is just east of our campus. The parking lot that I’m thinking about is the proposed Harvey Mudd College parking lot that will be on 11.5 acres of this land. While plans have not yet been finalized, construction may start as early as this summer.
These 11.5 acres of land sits on 86 acres of the Bernard Field Station. It is a piece of land that many of us see every day as we drive into and out of our own Claremont School of Theology campus. But did you know this land is an endangered coastal sage scrub ecosystem. Tearing down even a small part of this land would have an effect on this ecosystem. For example, if the parking lot or a similar structure was built, the number of vernal pools on the property would grow smaller and this in turn would affect the toad population that breeds in the pools.
The land is owned by Harvey Mudd College. Harvey Mudd is part of the Claremont Colleges consortium. They plan to build an environmentally conscious “green” parking lot. According to The Claremont Independent News, “the planned parking lot would have photovoltaic shades that generate electricity, plug-ins for electric vehicles, and bioswales to capture potentially hazardous run-off to mitigate its impact on the environment and the adjacent [Bernard] field station.”[1] This sounds great and the intention to help the environment is there, but in all seriousness, can developing a parking lot on a natural piece of land truly be the right thing to do?
I attended an undergraduate university that had over 20,000 students. So trust me, I can relate to how hard it is for students when parking is limited. However, I echo the sentiments of Paul Keller Ort, a Pomona College senior and member of the Students for the Bernard Field Station group. Mr. Ort said, “parking lots cannot be green. It violates all principles of environmentalism and sustainability to suggest that the destruction of native habitat for the creation of a parking lot can be justified as green.”[2] I don’t believe the benefit of having more parking spaces for students and faculty outweigh the irreversible harm that would happen to the ecosystem of this piece of land.
I hope the Claremont Colleges consortium looks at other alternatives. My undergrad university had a satellite parking lot that was less than a mile away from the school and offered a free shuttle service to and from the school. Many students, faculty and Claremont residents also believe that the building a parking lot on this land is harmful for the environment. They have written letters to the Claremont Colleges, distributed petitions and even formed website groups. It will be interesting to see what will happen in the months ahead. I hope it’s not too late for us to know what we’ve got ‘til it’s gone!
[1] www.claremontindependent.com/news/2008/12/11/Campus/Paving Our Way to A Greener Future-3572960.shtml
[2]www.insidehighered.com/news/2008/11/07/Paving Paradise?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
The objection you raise is a good one, as well as the question "Could there ever be a green parking lot?" Maybe ingenuity could lead to one. The greening of our culture calls for the inventors and the creative minds to step forward. This is an excellent blog, for it raises issues that we will eventually be forced to address. The time is now, not later.
ReplyDeleteI wonder if we have to "follow the money" on this one. It seems strange, in this period of economic downsizing, and the renewed interest in environmentally friendly practices, that a college would tear up one of the few patches of undeveloped land in Los Angeles county for a parking lot. A parking lot is still a parking lot. Cars that use fossil fuels will be parked there during the day and the lot will most likely be empty at night.
ReplyDeleteAlthough I saw the biggest group of Priuses in one place this weekend, electric cars are still not in wide use. See "Who Killed the Electric Car." If anything, why not a parking garage so that stacks of cars can be parked on a limited amount of space. Should said parking garage generate electricity for the campus, or have an experimental hydroponic garden on each floor, it might approach being green, but since when we are talking about paving over a living ecosystem, the justification as a green parking lot do not make sense.
Green would be encouraging people to park in park and ride lots and taking public transportation in. Green would be encouraging people to carpool, or ride their bicycles. Green would mean a change of thinking from today's convenience to long term thinking about the impact on the earth and the creatures that live here.
It's so ironic that in order to build this "green" parking lot, they're actually destroying much of the environment in its process. In order to make life more convenient, it seems we've produced many ways to shorten humanity's time on finite earth. I really do hope that we all awaken ourselves to this paving of paradise before we realize it's too late. This really should be on everyone's list of priorities.
ReplyDeleteOne of the things that attracted me to not only study at Claremont but to live here was how green the city is. I came from a city that is dirty and you can smell the smog in the morning, the most green you see are the over grown hedges and weeds by buildings cause nobody cares to make the city look better. I agree with what Kathleen said that is seems strange that in this “renewed interest in environmentally friendly practices, that a college would tear up one of the few patches of undeveloped land in Los Angeles county for a parking lot.” Not just any college but a Claremont college. Why doesn’t the college buy a plot of land that is already paved over and abandoned, like some on Foothill Blvd.? And then do what Eva says her undergrad did and offer Green shuttles. It just doesn’t make sense really; they are fixing the parking lot situation and causing another problem in return.
ReplyDeleteAs Eva and others have pointed out, paving undeveloped land to make a green parking lot involves a very strange definition of "green". I agree that it would be far better to investigate other options, such as parking garages, satellite parking, and/or promoting the existing Zip-car program and public transit.
ReplyDeleteOver the decades so many towns and cities did away with green space and now are trying to recover from it by being intentional about it in urban planning. I would hate to see this piece of land used for a parking lot even if it is supposed to be green. From what Eva has written, the plans in the works sound ethically irresponsible. Satellite parking areas with electric shuttles would be more "green".
ReplyDeleteThanks Eva for bringing this to our attention.
It's a shame that in so many places, new pavement lots and steel & concrete buildings are built, while just down the street stand empty shopping centers collecting graffitti and old, unused lots sprout weeds where the sun has baked the abandoned edifice. I have not yet been to Claremont campus, so I don't have first hand knowledge of what unused lots exist. However, from what has been written thus far, I have the impression there are some in existence. If this is the case, it would be a much better choice for the college to pursue purchasing or leasing the existing lots, fix them up and provide a shuttle. Joni was a prophetic voice crying in the wilderness when she wrote that song. We should continue to take heed.
ReplyDeleteI am going to agree with Jim, and everyone else. How's that for sitting on a fence. I am one to say , "Keep the Green," it is so important to our enviornment and our sanity in a world continually being paved over. I am however , fascinated by the possibility of a "green" parking area. More research needs to be done, but it is an inevitable conclusion that more of nature will be sacrificed to expanding populations. I do like the propsals to use existing parking lots and abandoned areas then shuttle, in an environmental friendly, way to campus. Arcosanti in Arizona might be something to look into.www.arcosanti.org Arcosanti is a living experiment in how to have an eco-freindly, high human density living environment that is acomplished on minimal land.
ReplyDeleteThank you everyone for sharing your thoughts. I encourage everyone to keep track of what is happening in the city of Claremont. I know that many of us are commuters, but because of the numerous hours we spend on campus (classes, studying, library, chapel, etc) we all have an invested interest in what happens in Claremont. Since the new apartments behind our campus for the Claremont Graduate University were completed last fall, we have experienced more traffic and litter on our own campus. This issue was brought up at past CST student council meeting. I'm sure the issue of the Harvey Mudd parking lot/land use will be discussed by our student council or Seminarians for Social Justice groups in the future as well. So keep an ear out next semester for more news to come.
ReplyDeleteBy Sangjae Lee
ReplyDeleteThese days in Korea, new buildings do not have the ground parking lot and it is the law. Instead of the ground parking lot, there are lawns and places for refreshment on the ground. Korea is not that big country and there are almost 55 milions of population, so the people try to develop the whole country. As a result of exploitation, green tracts of land are insufficient, so basement parking lot is to be the law. I think it is one of good ideas which afforests limited area.
Do you think this city could ever become a place of bikes and buses? Surely, I'd like to see much of the existing nature untouched. Could there possibly be a completely "green" parking lot? Would simply supplying renewable power ports and layers of floors constitute a green parking lot? It's interesting how we keep trying to expand inwards, when all we can do is go higher. In my undergrad, we were constantly having trouble finding parking. There was talk about constructing a multi-layer parking structure, but it would be costly because not only would there be cost in building the structure, but also a loss of revenue in what could have been charged for the existing spots.
ReplyDeleteOh, at what cost do we destroy the environment for our convenience?
Great post, Eva!
Can I just say I hate that song? Not the message but the tune. It's so catchy it gets stuck in my head for days and I hate it. I dislike it even more because it's the type of song where I feel pressure to like it because of the message; similar to the christmas shoes song that is soooo depressing. "Going Green" is one of my biggest concerns and interests yet sometimes I get annoyed with how popular it has become to "go green". It just seems like another form of mass consumerism and socialization that doesn't take into account the real life situations. Recently I had a conversation with a business (well the owner) that on the outside looked like they were making poor ecological decisions just to save money. The reality was more complicated. The business actually has made many steps to reduce their ecological impact. The remainder of their decisions were based on the reality of their business and their tight budget. My initial instinct is to "demonize" and assume that they were just a business that doesn't care. After the conversation I felt akin to this business because I make many of the same accommodations in my own life out of necessity. I don't know if the decision to build the parking lot is out of necessity or not but I can certainly understand if it is. Maybe I just want to be the devil's advocate here but I don't want to so easily reject this decision. What if a parking lot somewhere else isn't available? What if it's not in the budget? What if it won't be used by students if it's too far, which could be a real situation for students who like me might be running late and not have time to catch the shuttle. I also think about space. I heard about the possibility of this parking lot awhile ago and a thought I had was what about CST? If the school grows as changes take place we are going to need more space. We are going to need parking and possibly more buildings. CST might someday find it's self in the same position where space is simply needed. Will we reject any building plans so easily when it is us in need of parking?
ReplyDeleteWon-Seok, You raised the question -- Do you think this city could ever become a place of bikes and buses? It brought to mind a recent conversation my friend and I had. She is quite attached to having her car and feels the need to have "wheels" available at all times in order to get around. (I am making no judgement, just giving you the facts as she has presented them.) I, on the other hand, feel no such need. I am perfectly content without a car at my disposal.
ReplyDeleteAfter talking about how very differently we react to our access to a vehicle, we realized that I grew up walking or riding a bike everywhere I went (small town), while she grew up in a sprawling city with no public transportation system to speak of.
Perhaps our "programming" as youth is once again adding to our environmental problems.
I agree that no parking lots can be green. Maybe for inch of green parking lot there should be an equal inch of alternate bike paths and maybe there should be a consideration given by businesses and schools and all other organizations to schedule meetings, classes, etc. to help each of us use alternate modes of transportation.
ReplyDelete