Editor’s note: Following is the first part of a two-part special edition of Athens Rising, focusing on long-range planning especially with regard to greenspace at the University of Georgia. Part 1 is by a guest author, J.P. Schmidt, a postdoctoral associate in UGA’s Odum School of Ecology. Next week in Part 2, regular Athens Rising columnist Kevan Williams further explores UGA’s planning strategies, expanding the focus from open space to the campus’ urban edges.

Over the last decade, land use issues have come to the fore in Athens-Clarke County - to the point of causing a political shift on the ACC Mayor and Commission. But lands in UGA ownership, because they are not subject to county planning and zoning regulations, and their future is not one the public has a direct influence over, have received relatively little attention. Despite their manifold value to the community, little in the way of formal protections exists for these lands. Nor is any formal protection apparent in the current UGA master plan (www.camplan.uga.edu/planning.html). Instead, the university’s undeveloped lands appear to be regarded largely as potential building sites. Witness the once-proposed site for the National Bio and Agro-Defense Facility on South Milledge Avenue, or the construction several years ago of the Complex Carbohydrate Research Center on a prime tract of hardwood forest on the North Oconee River. UGA, moreover, has so far refused to coordinate with Clarke County or the northeast Georgia region on greenspace protection under the Georgia Community Greenspace Program. This program, signed into law in 2000, “provides an opportunity for urban and rapidly developing counties and their municipalities to preserve at least 20 percent of the land and water within their communities as permanently protected greenspace by acquiring and protecting lands using state appropriated funds and local comprehensive land-use planning”(www1.gadnr.org/greenspace).

---

What’s at Stake: UGA lands preserve a forested buffer along sections of the Middle and North Oconee rivers (and their tributaries) benefiting water quality, and they provide some of the most important wildlife habitat in an increasingly urban county. Large areas of mature forests along the river maintain habitat and a migration corridor for a variety of reptiles and amphibians (frogs, snakes, turtles, lizards, salamanders), birds and native plants. For many bird species dependent on expanses of hardwood forest for suitable habitat, Whitehall Forest and the UGA lands along South Milledge Avenue form some of the best breeding habitat in Clarke County. Pastures on South Milledge preserve the agricultural heritage of both the university and the county, providing a sense of place. (The large Double Bridges Farm along Highway 78 on the Clarke/Oglethorpe county line performs a similar function; current UGA plans show it as home to various UGA livestock farms in the future.) This is not to mention the under-utilized “passive” recreational potential of these lands to provide public trails in open space - brought into relief by the popularity of the trails that do exist at Lake Herrick and the State Botanical Garden. Yet these assets have gone unrecognized officially. Why, we should ask, is state government encouraging and financing local communities to preserve lands while allowing its flagship institution of higher education to opt out?

---

Alternate Models: This contrasts sharply to several nearby examples such as the University of the South in Sewanee, TN and Berry College in Rome, which have made preservation of forest and agricultural lands a hallmark of their campuses and their missions. Berry, for example, advertises its campus (at 26,000 acres) as the world’s largest. The Sewanee campus includes 13,000 acres on the Cumberland Plateau called “The Domain,” and more acreage is being added.

Clearly the situation is not analogous to UGA’s in that the landholdings of both these schools are much larger, and both are private, mostly teaching institutions. However, the biggest difference seems to be philosophical. Both schools have made a strong commitment to conserving lands for both the campus and the larger community. Berry leases 16,000 acres to the Georgia Department of Natural Resources to form a state Wildlife Management Area. Sewanee recognizes that its “physical environment provides a remarkable academic and recreational resource… and one of the University’s strategic goals is to be a national leader in environmental studies and sustainability” (http://about.sewanee.edu/domain). On both campuses, recreational trails are established on the campus and are open to hikers, joggers, horseback riders and bikers from the surrounding area.

But one might argue that UGA, as a public, Research-1 institution, must restrict public access to protect research sites. In fact, Clemson, a public research university, runs a 17,000-acre experimental forest that offers one of the largest publicly accessible networks of trails in South Carolina.

At any rate, UGA must do the best it can with a relatively modest endowment of land (approximately 3,000 acres of undeveloped land including Whitehall Forest), and must find places at which to site large new research facilities. Yet the University of Florida, similar in size, has an extensive network of conservation areas on campus, each with an inventory of plant and animal species. The current campus master plan (2005-2015) designates the various uses of UF’s lands, including conservation, recreation and proposed projects. This plan was developed through an open process - lots of public hearings and many committees that included faculty - and management plans for the conservation areas were mandated. The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill has a detailed master plan protecting greenspace and defining distinct greenspace categories. The category called “natural” is meant to form “natural campus edges,” preserve “indigenous natural habitats,” play “important environmental roles” such as retaining and cleansing stormwater runoff, and provide nature trails for hiking.

So, maybe UGA is best compared to an urban (though private) institution like Emory University in Atlanta, which has steadily lost forested acres to new buildings? Impressively, Emory’s master plan protects more than half its 600 acres from development. Duke University, also urban, “has committed to build only on previously disturbed land with careful attention to protect and expand the natural areas.” So, while many within the UGA community work to promote more sustainable development throughout the state and beyond, the University appears at best halfway committed to the same principles when it comes to campus planning. While the Guiding Principles listed on the website of UGA’s Office of University Architects are laudable, how they are implemented in the actual planning process is unclear.

---

Making a Recommendation, Marking Progress: As a first step toward matching principles to action, UGA lands should undergo a comprehensive inventory to form the basis for a planning process which documents the particular value of each parcel in terms of vegetation, habitat, terrain, benefits to the university community and the region, and existing uses including ongoing research. This documentation should be used to create a future plan which designates which areas are open to development (and what kinds) and which are not. In addition, the University should make a strong commitment to ecological principles in its future growth, building on the most compromised and least environmentally sensitive lands first. Even previously built-upon sensitive areas such as floodplains should be restored, where possible, to their natural function. As a general rule, mature hardwood forests, while a scenic location for a building such as the Day Chapel at the State Botanical Garden, should be preserved rather than built upon.

These ecological principles and others (such as maintaining canopy cover, restoring hydrology, and reducing carbon and hydrological footprints on campus) have been followed in the main over the last decade or more. The initiative over this period to move traffic and large parking areas to structures at the periphery of campus - while at the same time making the campus even more pedestrian-friendly by building more densely and reducing impervious surfaces - has been a great success overall and a praiseworthy undertaking. However, a few very notable exceptions such as the Complex Carbohydrate Research Center and the proposed (now Kansas-bound) NBAF run counter to the general trend, and underscore the need for a more binding commitment to better planning.

Further, why not expand the model of progressive, thoughtful planning from the main to the extended campus within Athens-Clarke County? For that matter, why not expand this model to the University System and its holdings throughout the state? In years past, UGA has made the newspapers for mismanagement of natural resources. Several years ago the Wall Street Journal profiled UGA for, over decades, dumping and refusing to deal with the cleanup of toxic waste near the Middle Oconee River on what is now part of the State Botanical Garden. In a feature on the fate of lands donated to universities in the Chronicle of Higher Education (Sept. 29, 2000), the Warnell School of Forestry and Natural Resources offered the least conservationist example, among Southeastern state schools profiled, for logging portions of a gift of old-growth longleaf pine forest in Southwest Georgia. The decision arguably made financial sense, but shouldn’t the unit of a research university recognize and preserve the educational and scientific value of such a scarce resource? Isn’t it time UGA turned its reputation around and became not just a leader in ecological research, but also a consistent leader in natural resource management?

J.P. Schmidt

Note: In developing this two-part article, J.P. Schmidt and Kevan Williams met late last year with UGA staff in the Office of University Architects for Facilities Planning. Shortly prior to publication, that office informed Flagpole that new progress is already being made regarding open lands planning. In particular, the office has recently performed an “Impact Study of Proposed Conservation and Transportation Zones on UGA Property,” which entails a detailed analysis of - and elaboration upon - the relationships between the most recent ACC Greenway Network Plan and UGA properties. Further, according to Kevin Kirsche, Assistant Director for Planning in the architects’ office, “The intended result is a UGA Open Lands Conservation Plan for campus properties that can also supplement the Greenway Network Plan.” [Ben Emanuel]