You are on page 1of 39

SEPTEMBER 1, 2016

CAMPUS PLAN
2017 - 2036

TABLE OF CONTENTS

FOREWORD ................................................................................................................... 1
SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................... 2
1.1
1.2

1.3

Georgetown University in the District of Columbia ................................................ 2
University Programs and Opportunities ................................................................ 2
1.2.1 Academic Programs................................................................................... 2
1.2.2 Research ................................................................................................... 3
1.2.3 Residential Life .......................................................................................... 3
1.2.4 MedStar Georgetown University Hospital .................................................. 3
1.2.5 Cultural and Civic Opportunities ................................................................ 4
1.2.6 Religious Programs.................................................................................... 5
1.2.7 Athletic Programs and Events .................................................................... 5
1.2.8 Ancillary Campus Activities ........................................................................ 5
1.2.9 Collaboration with Local Institutions and Other Organizations ................... 6
The Georgetown Community Partnership ............................................................ 6
1.3.1 The Campus Within the Community .......................................................... 6
1.3.2 A Successful Model for Consensus-Based Planning ................................. 7
1.3.2.1 Steering Committee ...................................................................... 7
1.3.2.2 Working Groups ............................................................................ 7
1.3.2.3 Communication and Transparency ............................................... 8
1.3.3 The GCP and the Campus Plan ................................................................ 8
1.3.3.1 Compliance with the 2010 Campus Plan ...................................... 8
1.3.3.2 Development of the 2017 Campus Plan ....................................... 9
1.3.3.3 Implementation of the New Campus Plan ................................... 10

SECTION 2: PLANNING FOR THE FUTURE .............................................................. 12
2.1
2.2

Georgetown University in the 21st Century ......................................................... 12
University Master Planning Initiatives ................................................................. 12
2.2.1 The Future of the University at its Historic Main Campus ........................ 13
2.2.2 Georgetown Downtown............................................................................ 14
2.2.3 MedStar Georgetown University Hospital Planning ................................. 14

SECTION 3: THE GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY 2017 – 2036 CAMPUS PLAN ........ 16
3.1

3.2

Campus Populations .......................................................................................... 16
3.1.1 Student Populations ................................................................................. 16
3.1.2 Faculty and Staff ...................................................................................... 17
The Future Campus: Enhanced Physical Environment and Facilities ................ 17
3.2.1 Architectural Considerations .................................................................... 17
3.2.2 Stewardship of Existing Resources.......................................................... 18
3.2.3 Optionality ................................................................................................ 18

GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY CAMPUS PLAN: 2017 – 2036

Page i

3.3

3.4

3.5
3.6

3.2.4 Organized and Strategic Growth to Enhance the Living and Learning
Experience ............................................................................................... 19
3.2.4.1 Creating a Vibrant Student Life Corridor ..................................... 19
3.2.4.2 Student Housing ......................................................................... 20
3.2.4.3 Athletics and Recreation Uses .................................................... 21
3.2.4.4 Academic Opportunities .............................................................. 21
3.2.4.5 MGUH Medical/Surgical Pavilion ................................................ 22
3.2.5 Creating a More Pedestrian-Friendly Campus ......................................... 23
3.2.5.1 An Emphasis on Open Space and Active Campus Connections .. 23
3.2.5.2 Circulation Improvements ........................................................... 24
Conservation Issues ........................................................................................... 24
3.3.1 Historic Resources ................................................................................... 25
3.3.2 Sustainability Considerations and Environmental Impacts....................... 25
Comprehensive Transportation Planning ........................................................... 26
3.4.1 Transportation Demand Management (TDM) .......................................... 26
3.4.2 Parking..................................................................................................... 28
Managing Off-Campus Activities and Impacts .................................................... 28
Proposed Conditions of Approval ....................................................................... 29

SECTION 4: COMPLIANCE WITH THE CAMPUS PLAN REGULATIONS .................. 30
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.5

4.6
4.7
4.8
4.9
4.10
4.11
4.12

Sub-section 101.1: Educational Use by a College or University ........................ 30
Sub-section 101.2: The Uses Shall Be Located so They Are Not Likely to
Become Objectionable to Neighboring Property ................................................. 30
Sub-sections 101.3 and 101.4: Analysis of Incidental Uses .............................. 30
Sub-sections 101.5 through 101.7: Campus Development Standards .............. 31
Sub-section 101.8: Plan for Campus as a Whole, Showing the Location, Height
and Bulk, Where Appropriate, of all Present and Proposed Improvements ........ 31
4.5.1 Buildings, Parking, and Loading Facilities................................................ 31
4.5.2 Screening, Signs, Streets, and Public Utility Facilities ............................. 31
4.5.3 Athletic and Other Recreational Facilities ................................................ 32
4.5.4 Description of all Activities Conducted or to be Conducted on the Campus,
and the Capacity of all Present and Proposed Campus Development .... 32
Sub-sections 101.9 and 101.15: Further Processing for Specific Buildings,
Structures, and Uses .......................................................................................... 32
Sub-section 101.10: No Interim Use of Land or Improved Property Proposed .. 33
Sub-section 101.11: Compliance with the Comprehensive Plan ....................... 33
Sub-section 101.13: Referral to the District of Columbia Office of Planning,
Department of Transportation, and Department of the Environment .................. 33
Sub-section 101.14: Application is in Harmony with the Zoning Regulations .... 33
Sub-section 101.16: A Further Processing of a Campus Building Shall Not be
Filed Simultaneously with a Full Campus Plan Application................................. 34
Section 102: Special Exception for Use of Commercial Property by a College or
University ............................................................................................................ 34

SECTION 5: CONCLUSION ........................................................................................ 35

GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY CAMPUS PLAN: 2017 – 2036

Page ii

TABLE OF EXHIBITS

EXHIBIT A
EXHIBIT B
EXHIBIT C
EXHIBIT D
EXHIBIT E
EXHIBIT F
EXHIBIT G
EXHIBIT H
EXHIBIT I
EXHIBIT J
EXHIBIT K
EXHIBIT L
EXHIBIT M
EXHIBIT N
EXHIBIT O
EXHIBIT P
EXHIBIT Q
EXHIBIT R
EXHIBIT S
EXHIBIT T
EXHIBIT U
EXHIBIT V
EXHIBIT W1
EXHIBIT W2
EXHIBIT X
EXHIBIT Y
EXHIBIT Z
EXHIBIT AA
EXHIBIT BB
EXHIBIT CC
EXHIBIT DD
EXHIBIT EE
EXHIBIT FF
EXHIBIT GG

University Charter
Aerial Photograph of Campus
Existing Conditions
Existing Campus Land Uses
Georgetown University in the District of Columbia
Campus Neighborhood Context
Campus Plan Compliance Milestones
Georgetown Downtown
Enrollment
Faculty and Staff
Development Program Summary
Proposed Twenty-Year Development Plan
Proposed Twenty-Year Development Plan Land Uses
Proposed Student Life Corridor
Undergraduate Student Housing Commitment
Athletic and Other Recreational Facilities
Proposed Hospital and Medical Center District
Existing Open Spaces and Pedestrian Circulation
Proposed Open Spaces and Pedestrian Circulation
Proposed Material Palette
Existing Tree Canopy Map
Proposed Tree Canopy Map
Campus Topography – Elevation Map
Campus Topography – Slope Percentage Map
Existing Loading and Service Areas
Proposed Loading and Service Areas
Campus Wayfinding
Sustainability Plan for Campus Operations
Existing Pervious Surface Coverage Diagram
Proposed Pervious Surface Coverage Diagram
Existing Vehicular Circulation and Parking Facilities
Proposed Vehicular Circulation and Parking Facilities
Proposed Conditions of Approval
MedStar Health, Inc. and Community Representatives Agreement

GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY CAMPUS PLAN: 2017 – 2036

Page iii

FOREWORD
The Georgetown University Campus Plan 2017 – 2036 (“Campus Plan” or “Plan”)
represents the collective and collaborative work of University administrators, faculty and
staff, student representatives, and community leadership to arrive at a twenty-year
consensus plan for Georgetown’s historic main campus.
The twenty-year term of this Campus Plan is unprecedented for Georgetown University.
The consensus nature of a Campus Plan of this magnitude for any university in the
District of Columbia is likely unprecedented as well. Yet while the Plan may be groundbreaking in many respects, its fundamental principles are well-established and reflect
the substance and goals set forth in the 2010 Campus Plan, and its foundation is built
upon the successful and dedicated work that has been undertaken by the Georgetown
Community Partnership since the current Plan’s approval in 2012.
The twenty-year term allows the University to think more broadly in terms of envisioning
the future of the campus, and provides members of the community with additional
certainty and understanding of the University’s key priorities and commitments. To this
end, the 2017 Campus Plan sets forth a predictable yet flexible framework that
acknowledges the positive effects that have been realized on campus and in the
surrounding neighborhoods through the implementation of the 2010 Campus Plan, and
carries forward many of its fundamental elements – including maintaining all existing
student enrollment caps – in order to continue the meaningful and results-oriented
progress that has been achieved in addressing campus impacts. At the same time, the
2017 Campus Plan sets forth a long-term vision for the campus that embodies
Georgetown’s core mission, responds to academic and health-care imperatives,
supports the needs of faculty and staff, and provides an environment for students that
fosters their personal, intellectual, and spiritual growth – all within the broader context of
a harmonious relationship with the surrounding community.

GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY CAMPUS PLAN: 2017 – 2036

Page 1

SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION

1.1

Georgetown University in the District of Columbia

Founded in 1789, Georgetown is the nation’s oldest Catholic and Jesuit university.
Drawing upon the 450 year-old legacy of Jesuit education, Georgetown provides
students with a world-class learning experience focused on educating the whole person
through exposure to different faiths, cultures and beliefs. Students are challenged to
engage in the world and become men and women in the service of others, especially
the most vulnerable and disadvantaged members of the community.
Georgetown’s main campus was first established when John Carroll purchased 60
acres overlooking the Potomac in the village of Georgetown. Over the past two
hundred and twenty-seven years, the campus has developed in a thoughtful manner to
accommodate its diverse student body and support its core mission, while emerging
and sustaining itself as a critical anchor institution within the city it serves. The main
campus today includes approximately 104 acres and more than 70 buildings housing
university and hospital functions.
The University’s relationship with and commitment to its community and the District of
Columbia is well established and takes many forms – as a leading employer and
economic driver, a District partner in key social and policy initiatives, and a good
neighbor to residents with whom it shares the dynamic and historic community
surrounding campus. A comprehensive overview of these activities is detailed in the
University’s 2015 community engagement report, Georgetown University in the District
of Columbia.
EXHIBIT A:
EXHIBIT B:
EXHIBIT C:
EXHIBIT D:
EXHIBIT E:
1.2

UNIVERSITY CHARTER
AERIAL PHOTGRAPH OF CAMPUS
EXISTING CONDITIONS
EXISTING CAMPUS LAND USES
GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

University Programs and Opportunities

Over the course of the University’s history, activities on the main campus have evolved
to not only address the needs of Georgetown students and the University community,
but also to accommodate programs and initiatives that benefit a wide range of
organizations, institutions, and private citizens throughout the District and beyond.
1.2.1 Academic Programs
Georgetown is home to a vibrant community of accomplished students, distinguished
faculty members, and committed professional staff. The University's nine schools,
seven of which are located on the main campus, offer a wide variety of intellectually
rigorous programs designed to prepare students for many disparate careers and guide
them toward their intellectual and professional goals. The schools offer undergraduate
GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY CAMPUS PLAN: 2017 – 2036

Page 2

and graduate degrees in the liberal arts, sciences, international relations, law, medicine,
business administration and public policy, as well as a growing number of specialized
certificates and continuing education programs.
In addition to its formal academic programs, the University facilitates a range of
educational experiences consistent with its tradition of and commitment to lifelong
learning. Examples include opportunities for middle and high school students that
expose them to college-level coursework and campus life; programs, career training,
and executive education opportunities for professionals seeking to advance or shift the
course of their career; and an established senior-citizen course audit program.
1.2.2 Research
Few universities in the world offer the extraordinary range and diversity of research
opportunities that are currently pursued by Georgetown students and faculty.
The Jesuit tradition of scholarship in service to others informs many of the University’s
priorities as a research institution, both through programmatic venues such as Public
Policy and Global Human Development and through broader interdisciplinary programs
such as the Reflective Engagement Initiative.
The University’s largest research center – Georgetown University Medical Center
(GUMC) – is home to more than 400 scientists working on basic and clinical research
projects and 300 active clinical trials. Georgetown’s location in the nation’s capital
provides unparalleled opportunities for learning at leading scientific centers and global
institutes as well as prominent policy think tanks.
1.2.3 Residential Life
An integral part of the undergraduate experience at Georgetown is the living and
learning environment fostered by the University’s residential life program. The
University takes an intentional and committed approach to encouraging the personal,
intellectual and spiritual growth of students while they live both on-campus and in the
surrounding neighborhoods. All undergraduate students are eligible for on-campus
housing, and in fall 2015 the University implemented a policy that requires that
undergraduate students must live in on-campus housing during their first year
(freshman, transfer sophomore or transfer junior), sophomore year, and either junior or
senior year. Student housing is available in a variety of traditional residence hall and
apartment-style configurations, and the University also offers unique residential
opportunities such as its Faculty-, Chaplains-, and Jesuit-in-Residence and Living
Learning Communities (LLC) programs.
During the summer months, University residence halls also house college students from
across the country and around the world who come to the District to enroll in
Georgetown courses and participate in other educational experiences.
1.2.4 MedStar Georgetown University Hospital
MedStar Georgetown University Hospital (“MGUH” or the “Hospital”) is a not-for-profit,
acute-care teaching and research hospital with 609 licensed beds located in the
GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY CAMPUS PLAN: 2017 – 2036

Page 3

northern district of the main campus along Reservoir Road. Founded in the Jesuit
principle of cura personalis – caring for the whole person – MGUH is committed to
offering a variety of innovative diagnostic and treatment options within a trusting and
compassionate environment.
MGUH’s Centers of Excellence include cancer, neurosciences, gastroenterology,
transplant and vascular diseases. Along with Magnet® nurses, internationally
recognized physicians, advanced research and leading technologies, MGUH's
healthcare professionals have earned a reputation of medical excellence and
leadership. Over the past century, the Hospital has grown to include a Faculty Group
practice, the National Cancer Institute (NCI) designated Lombardi Comprehensive
Cancer Center, and scores of clinical departments and divisions. Through its
relationship with Georgetown University, the Hospital trains both students from the
school of medicine and the school of nursing, and almost 500 residents and fellows
annually through its accredited graduate medical education programs. Furthermore,
MGUH works closely with the University's research enterprise to help bring innovative
therapies from the scientific laboratory to the patient bedside.
MGUH offers many services for complex diseases not offered at other hospitals in the
region. Among many accolades, MGUH is the only hospital in Washington, DC to earn
designation as a Center of Excellence by the National Parkinson Foundation and is the
only comprehensive transplant center in DC and Southern Maryland to earn
accreditation from the Foundation for the Accreditation of Cellular Therapy. In addition,
the Transplant Center for Children is the only facility of its type in the DC area and the
Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center is the region’s only accredited NCI designated
Comprehensive Cancer Center.
MGUH remains an active member of the community as a facility that offers the highest
quality of care to all patients, as well as a steward for research, education and innovation
within the healthcare industry.
1.2.5 Cultural and Civic Opportunities
Georgetown University features a vibrant arts community, where students are
encouraged to express their creativity and think critically about the arts, both in and out
of the classroom. Numerous University performances and exhibitions are open to the
public throughout the year, and members of the community are welcome and invited to
attend.
Each year the University convenes a wide variety of programs, lectures, symposiums
and workshops addressing issues of local and global concern with speakers ranging
from presidents and heads of state to thought-leading scholars and cultural icons. In
addition, the University partners with local governments, businesses, and civic
organizations to support local and regional priorities, addressing issues such as
transportation, urban planning, climate change, and public education.

GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY CAMPUS PLAN: 2017 – 2036

Page 4

1.2.6 Religious Programs
From the time of its founding Georgetown has welcomed students from various religious
backgrounds, a respect that is firmly rooted in the University's Catholic and Jesuit
identity. Reflecting a deep commitment to interreligious understanding, the University’s
Campus Ministry supports Roman Catholic, Protestant, Orthodox Christian, Jewish,
Muslim, and Hindu chaplaincies, and daily hosts numerous services on-campus in a
variety of sacred spaces.
As an integral component of its Jesuit tradition, Wolfington Hall is home to the
Georgetown University Jesuits, an apostolic religious community grounded in love for
Jesus Christ and animated by the Ignatian spiritual vision of helping others and seeking
God in all things.
1.2.7 Athletic Programs and Events
Over the past decades, Georgetown’s reputation as a preeminent institution has
extended beyond the classroom into the realm of inter-collegiate athletics. In addition to
its widely recognized men’s basketball program, the University fields twenty-eight men’s
and women’s varsity athletic teams, ranging from soccer and lacrosse to sailing and
track and field.
A wide variety of recreational athletic programs provide Georgetown students the ability
to maintain an active lifestyle during their years on the Hilltop. Over thirty club teams
offer students the option to play a sport competitively against teams from other
institutions without the rigorous schedule expected of varsity athletes. Intramural and
recreational sports programs provide students, as well as other members of the
University community, an opportunity to compete in a recreational setting designed
primarily for fun and fitness. A wide range of competitive sporting events are open to
the public throughout the year, and Georgetown offers community memberships to
Yates Field House, the University’s primary recreational facility.
During the summer months, the University hosts a variety of sports camps for area
youth, which provide the unique opportunity for young athletes to train at collegiate-level
facilities and learn from Georgetown’s nationally-ranked coaches and training staff.
1.2.8 Ancillary Campus Activities
Like all major university campuses, Georgetown’s main campus includes a number of
ancillary functions that support the academic, residential, and clinical components of the
University. These traditional campus activities have evolved over the years and
currently include the bookstore, fast-service dining options and coffee shops, an oncampus grocery store and convenience store, a campus pub, two credit unions and a
bank branch, and the Leavey Center Hotel and Conference Center, which provides
lodging for University and Hospital visitors as well as event space for academic and
professional gatherings. Notably, a number of these establishments are owned and
operated by Georgetown students through The Corp, the largest entirely student-run
501(c)(3) non-profit corporation in the world.
GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY CAMPUS PLAN: 2017 – 2036

Page 5

Ancillary functions at the Hospital include a coffee counter, a carry-out restaurant, a gift
and flower shop, an outpatient pharmacy, and durable medical equipment space.
1.2.9 Collaboration with Local Institutions and Other Organizations
Since its founding, Georgetown has supported a wide range of institutions and
organizations, particularly groups focused on serving those in need. That tradition is
manifested today in many programs for which Georgetown provides its resources and
campus facility space, including providing educational and outdoor recreation
opportunities for nearby Holy Trinity School, and hosting a wide range of community
events, including the Greater Washington Boys and Girls Club Leadership Conference
and the 2015 Roundtable Discussion on Racial Equity and the Role of Local
Government. For more than fifteen years, Georgetown has participated in the Marion S.
Barry Summer Youth Employment Program to provide summer jobs to DC youth.
For over two decades, the University’s Institute for College Preparation has provided
intensive, comprehensive pre-college academic enrichment to Ward 7 middle and high
school students to empower them to graduate from high school and succeed in college.
Through its partnership with Cesar Chavez Public Charter School for Public Policy,
Georgetown hosts the school’s annual Public Policy Symposium, where graduating
students present and defend their thesis addressing an important public policy topic.
University offices also host three public policy fellows from Cesar Chavez, and provide
other meaningful internships for DC school students. During the 2015 academic year,
approximately thirty DC Public and DC Public Charter School students participated in
these unique enrichment programs.
In 2012, the University formed a partnership with DCPS to customize an Executive
Master’s in Leadership program to equip DC educators with leadership and
management skills to promote excellence within the District’s public school system.
1.3

The Georgetown Community Partnership

1.3.1 The Campus Within the Community
The main campus of Georgetown University is uniquely located within the context of
several established residential neighborhoods. The campus is generally bounded by
the Georgetown neighborhood to the east, Reservoir Road and the Burleith and
Hillandale neighborhoods to the north, Glover-Archbold Park and the Foxhall
neighborhood to the west, and Canal Road and the Potomac River to the south. The M
Street and Wisconsin Avenue commercial corridors are located within a few blocks of
the campus.
EXHIBIT F: CAMPUS NEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT
All of the University’s long-range planning initiatives that undergird and support this
twenty-year Campus Plan have sought to more fully understand the campus and its
potential in the context of its surrounding community. To that end, residents of the
neighborhoods surrounding the campus are not only stakeholders but critical partners in
this effort – partners who share a strong interest in the continued vitality of the
GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY CAMPUS PLAN: 2017 – 2036

Page 6

University as well as in ensuring that its impacts are appropriately and effectively
minimized and managed.
1.3.2 A Successful Model for Consensus-Based Planning
The Georgetown Community Partnership (GCP or Partnership) was created in 2012 as
a forum to facilitate discussion, information sharing, and consensus-based
decision making among University administrators, students, and members of the
community. At the time of the approval of the current Campus Plan, Georgetown
University entered into a five-year Campus Plan with a term through 2017, and
committed to launching a comprehensive planning process and to working with the GCP
to develop a consensus twenty-year plan for the main campus. Since its inception, the
GCP has continued to operate in a genuine collegial partnership, with representatives of
all stakeholder groups actively engaged to evaluate existing programming, identify
creative solutions to ongoing quality of life concerns, implement and evaluate programs
to fulfill Campus Plan commitments, and plan for the future use of the main campus.
1.3.2.1 Steering Committee
The GCP is led by a Steering Committee composed of representatives from ANC2E,
ANC3D, the Citizens Association of Georgetown, the Burleith Citizens Association, the
Foxhall Community Citizens Association, Georgetown University, and the Georgetown
University Student Association. A representative from MedStar Georgetown University
Hospital is an ex-officio member of the Steering Committee. In summer 2015 the GCP
Steering Committee agreed to add two seats for the students who serve as ANC2E
commissioners representing the campus Single Member Districts ANC2E04 and
ANC2E08.
The Steering Committee meets quarterly and receives reports from and provides
guidance to various GCP working groups.
1.3.2.2 Working Groups
The Steering Committee created six working groups that meet regularly, typically
monthly, to address shared goals for neighborhood quality of life and University master
planning. Each working group has a University and a community co-chair (and in the
case of the Safety and Student Life working group, a student co-chair), and members
include Georgetown administrators, staff, faculty, students, neighbors, and consultants.
On occasion, a working group will create an ad-hoc subgroup to address a specific
issue, such as off-campus orientation, transient noise, and communications regarding
transportation and parking information. The six working groups include:

Master Planning. The Master Planning Working Group includes members of the
GCP Steering Committee and focuses on the University's master planning process
and plans for the future of the Hospital.

Safety and Student Life. The Safety and Student Life Working Group addresses
neighborhood quality of life issues, student safety in the community, and on-campus
student life.

GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY CAMPUS PLAN: 2017 – 2036

Page 7

Environment and Landlord Initiatives. The Environment and Landlords Initiatives
Working Group addresses off-campus health, welfare and safety issues related to
the physical property conditions of buildings and their surrounding environment,
including issues of home safety, property maintenance, trash management, and
landlord accountability in the neighborhoods.

Transportation and Parking. The Transportation and Parking working group
addresses issues related to travel to, from and around the University’s campus, and
mitigating the impacts of University and Hospital-related traffic on the community.

Communications and Engagement. The Communications and Engagement Working
Group works to identify University programs and activities of interest to members of
the community, and create opportunities for collaboration and improved
communications between the University community and its neighbors.

Data and Metrics. The Data and Metrics Working Group reviews University data for
enrollment, housing, and off-campus life each semester.

1.3.2.3 Communication and Transparency
The past and ongoing success of the GCP structure is dependent upon open and
effective channels of communication. The Partnership was created to promote
openness, transparency and trust between members of the Georgetown community
including community members, students, and university officials in order to improve
community conditions for all. More specifically, the GCP Steering Committee Co-Chairs
and GCP Working Group Co-Chairs are charged with leading the development of
solutions to neighborhood issues of shared concern and monitoring activities and
progress relating to the Campus Plan. In order to address the most effective solutions to
these issues, it is understood that these Co-Chairs will need to engage in information
gathering from a broad spectrum of individuals. Accordingly, community members,
students, and university employees are strongly encouraged to freely share information
and opinions with these Co-Chairs without fear of adverse consequences (while
respecting reasonable restrictions over information such as personal or financial
information that they believe is confidential and/or proprietary). At the same time, it is
acknowledged that there are well-established procedures in place for GCP leadership to
request information from other members of the Partnership. Thus, neither community
members, students, nor University employees should feel compelled to share
information and opinions outside of these established channels if they do not wish to do
so.
1.3.3 The GCP and the Campus Plan
1.3.3.1 Compliance with the 2010 Campus Plan
The collaborative efforts of the GCP have supported the University’s work toward
ensuring compliance with the terms of the 2010 Campus Plan and implementing all of
the conditions set forth in the 2010 Campus Plan Order of Approval. Specific details
GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY CAMPUS PLAN: 2017 – 2036

Page 8

addressing compliance have been addressed in annual compliance reports filed by the
University with the District of Columbia Zoning Commission and Zoning Administrator.
These compliance reports have all been developed on a consensus basis, representing
the shared perspectives of the University and GCP with respect to each of the specific
Campus Plan conditions of approval.
EXHIBIT G: CAMPUS PLAN COMPLIANCE MILESTONES
1.3.3.2

Development of the 2017 Campus Plan

Since the launch of the GCP in 2012, the University and members of the community
have worked together to establish the framework, goals, and principles of the
comprehensive master planning effort undertaken by the University (discussed more
fully in Section 2 below). At the same time, working groups have also addressed
specific issues associated with neighborhood impacts, including noise, trash removal,
and traffic considerations.
Over the last year, the GCP Steering Committee has focused more intensively on plans
for the future of the University and the Hospital, and has been actively engaged in the
development of this integrated, consensus twenty-year Campus Plan as well as the
proposal for a new medical/surgical pavilion for the Hospital. This collaborative planning
effort has addressed major questions of campus physical development, program needs
and enrollment and the challenges of long-term planning in the shifting global climate of
higher education and healthcare, as well as transportation and other quality of life
impacts.
Given the consistent and substantial progress made by these collaborative efforts, in
January 2016 the GCP Steering Committee adopted a timeline that would provide for
the twenty-year Campus Plan to be submitted earlier than initially anticipated, and
established a summer 2016 filing target. Between January 2016 and May 2016, the
GCP engaged in a series of focused discussions addressing key Campus Plan issues,
and participated in the development of this consensus Campus Plan document.
A complete draft of the proposed 2017 Campus Plan was posted on the University’s
website on June 6, 2016. Members of the University community (including students,
faculty and staff) and residents of the neighborhoods surrounding campus were
encouraged to review the draft Plan and submit questions or comments through an
online Comments Portal. This open comment period extended from June 6, 2016
through July 15, 2016. During this time the University received and responded to
approximately 75 comments.
The draft Plan was also presented and discussed at the following meetings throughout
the spring and summer of 2016:
▪ June 2, 2016 Planning 401 presentation to members of the University community
▪ June 6, 2016 meeting of the ANC 2E Committee of the Whole
▪ June 15, 2016 meeting of the Foxhall Community Citizens Association
▪ July 6, 2016 meeting of ANC 3D
▪ July 6, 2016 meeting with the National Park Service
▪ July 7, 2016 public hearing before the Old Georgetown Board
GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY CAMPUS PLAN: 2017 – 2036

Page 9

A number of modest changes were incorporated into the Plan document to respond to
feedback received from various stakeholders during the review and comment period.
Pursuant to Subtitle Z, Section 302.8, the updated 2017 Campus Plan was reviewed by
Advisory Neighborhood Commissions 2E and 3D in August 2016. Both Commissions
unanimously approved the 2017 Campus Plan as presented.
1.3.3.3 Implementation of the New Campus Plan
The GCP and its working groups will continue to provide a forum for the day-to-day
implementation and review of the commitments and objectives outlined in this twentyyear Campus Plan. At the same time, the University and community organizations
represented on the GCP (collectively the “community parties”) all recognize that there is
some uncertainty about the ability to foresee the needs of the University and the
community, the effectiveness of the Campus Plan, and the real world conditions over so
long a period. The University is particularly sensitive to evolving trends in higher
education including the impact of technology.
Therefore, the University and the community parties will continue to work together
collegially through the GCP toward agreed-upon updates and improvements to
elements of the Campus Plan if needed and appropriate and, if any of those agreedupon changes need Zoning Commission approval, the parties will together bring them to
the Zoning Commission for consideration. This is not intended to suggest or encourage
frequent, widespread changes to the Campus Plan but rather the possibility of jointly
examining particular elements of the Campus Plan from time to time in a collegial spirit,
in light of then-existing circumstances.
These efforts will not supplant but will be informed by and supplement the annual
Campus Plan compliance reports that are submitted by the University. Similarly, these
efforts will not supplant the day-to-day work of the GCP and its working groups, but will
serve as a broader opportunity to consider and evaluate the implementation of the
stated goals and conditions of the 2017 Campus Plan, as well as look ahead to any
changes in the circumstances relating to the Campus Plan and the parties to it.
If the GCP is unable to reach consensus on a proposed Campus Plan amendment,
either the University or the community parties may unilaterally seek a Campus Plan
amendment (“unilateral amendment”), subject to the procedures described below. The
procedures set forth below apply only to significant unilateral amendments to key
components of the Campus Plan (i.e., enrollment, undergraduate housing,
transportation, the area of the campus that is east of the Main Gates, and quality of life
initiatives (“Covered Amendments”)). These procedures shall not apply to Campus Plan
further processing applications, amendments that are not Covered Amendments, or
amendments submitted on behalf of MGUH, which shall continue to be subject to the
applicable Zoning Regulations governing such applications and amendments.
Community Parties Unilateral Amendment
The community parties may file one Covered Amendment during the term of the
Campus Plan occurring after January 1, 2024, in addition to any community Covered
GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY CAMPUS PLAN: 2017 – 2036

Page 10

Amendment filed during consideration of a University Covered Amendment as
described below. For procedural reasons, the University will file the Covered
Amendment on the behalf of the community parties, but the University will not be
obligated to support the substance of the Covered Amendment, and shall be permitted
to affirmatively oppose the Covered Amendment.
The University shall be free to take whatever position on the merits it wishes, but shall
not argue that the application is untimely or otherwise should not be considered. The
University may also request one or more proposed Covered Amendments, to be treated
as part of the same application and considered in the same proceeding.
These procedures above are not intended to modify the community parties’ general
option to raise any noncompliance issues with appropriate authorities as need be. In
such event, the community parties would first follow the same process of engaging the
GCP in discussion of the proposed change or concerns, with the goal of achieving
consensus.
University Unilateral Amendments
The University may elect to file one unilateral Covered Amendment in the first ten years
of the Campus Plan and one unilateral Covered Amendment in the second ten years of
the Plan. The first unilateral Covered Amendment would not occur too close to the start
of the Campus Plan and the second would not occur too close to the end of the Plan.
The community parties shall be free to take whatever position on the merits they wish,
including opposing the Covered Amendment, but shall not argue that the application is
untimely or otherwise should not be considered. The community parties may also
request one or more proposed Covered Amendments, to be treated as part of the same
application and considered in the same proceeding.
The procedures above are not intended to modify the University’s general option to
propose a unilateral amendment to the Campus Plan at a time of its choosing, and the
University may do so, after following the same process of engaging the GCP in
discussion of the proposed change or concerns, with the goal of achieving consensus.
However, for any unilateral amendment that is a Covered Amendment beyond the two
described above, the community parties may, if they wish, take the position for the
Zoning Commission’s consideration that considering the Covered Amendment
proceeding at that time is not in the best interests of the Campus Plan, the public, or the
Zoning Commission. Moreover, in conjunction therewith, the community parties may
also request one or more Covered Amendments, to be treated as part of the same
application and considered in the same proceeding.

GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY CAMPUS PLAN: 2017 – 2036

Page 11

SECTION 2: PLANNING FOR THE FUTURE

2.1

Georgetown University in the 21st Century

In planning for the future, Georgetown is guided by its commitment to bridging the
centuries-old tradition of Ignatian liberal arts education with new pedagogical models
necessary to prepare students to be leaders in the globalized society of the 21 st century.
To ensure that Georgetown can continue to meet its responsibility for the formation of
the minds and spirits of the leaders of the next generation, to support original discovery
and scholarship by its faculty, and to provide service to the common good of both the
local and global community, the University must continually strive to meet the emerging
challenges prevalent in the competitive context of higher education.
Given the limited resources and valuable opportunities that the University must always
seek to balance, planning for a future that supports the University’s strategic objectives
must advance on a deliberative course that is consistent with the University’s core
values. In the context of the Campus Plan, this translates into providing academic
opportunities and learning environments that meet the needs of Georgetown’s highlyqualified and increasingly competitive student body well into the future, in a thoughtful
and fiscally responsible manner.
Specific institutional priorities over the next twenty years include strategic and measured
enrollment growth – consistent with the student enrollment caps established in the
existing Campus Plan – within the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences. This growth
is aimed at strengthening existing programs and developing new multi-disciplinary
initiatives and research opportunities that will attract top-tier graduate students from
across the country and around the world. While enrollment growth will be targeted at
graduate-level students, future facilities and enhancements pursued by the University
would serve all levels of Georgetown students and the broader University community.
The University is mindful of the challenges associated with long-range planning given
the rapidly changing landscape of higher education. Georgetown has specifically and
intentionally sought to proactively address these challenges by launching Designing the
Future(s), an integrative initiative engaging all of the Georgetown community in an
exploration of issues facing higher education. Developments and recommendations
coming out of the initiative will help equip the University to respond boldly to emerging
societal trends and a landscape constantly shifted by globalization and technology.
The creative and forward-thinking approach of the Designing the Future(s) initiative
complements and builds upon the more traditional planning efforts that establish the
foundation of this Campus Plan, and at the same time underscores the need for the
Campus Plan to be flexible enough to respond to the changing needs associated with
the delivery of higher education in a dynamic global society.
2.2

University Master Planning Initiatives

In recent years, the University has taken a highly focused and intentional approach to
planning for the future of the main campus. Consistent with the commitments set forth
in the 2010 Campus Plan, and guided by academic leadership and an emerging vision
GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY CAMPUS PLAN: 2017 – 2036

Page 12

for the future of the University, Georgetown launched a comprehensive master planning
effort in 2012. This effort has taken the form of both Physical Master Planning and
Academic Master Planning initiatives, and is aimed at developing a planning framework
and prioritizing key objectives that will support future academic programs and a vibrant
living and learning community on the main campus, while exploring opportunities for
growth at other locations throughout the District, the greater metropolitan region, and
beyond.
University faculty and academic leadership play an important role in these initiatives, to
ensure that planning efforts are responsive to the needs and challenges inherent in a
dynamic and rapidly-changing educational landscape, and provide the types of physical
spaces and technological resources necessary to support traditional academic
disciplines and research initiatives as well as leading-edge, cross-disciplinary
collaborations. Members of the Faculty Senate and the Main Campus Executive
Faculty regularly participate in discussions regarding University planning efforts, and
two faculty members currently serve on the GCP Master Planning Working Group.
Students have also established themselves as a strong and meaningful voice in this
process. Georgetown students have a long history of involvement in campus and civic
matters through service on the Georgetown Advisory Neighborhood Commission (ANC
2E), and two undergraduate students currently serve as ANC commissioners. Both
graduate and undergraduate students actively participate in various GCP working
groups as well as the Student Master Planning Consortium, which was established in
2015 to provide a regular and focused forum to address master planning and campus
development-related issues, including student housing and on-campus life,
neighborhood activities and the use of townhouses east of the main gates, and
transportation and sustainability initiatives.
These comprehensive and ongoing planning efforts, involving and engaging
perspectives from a wide range of university stakeholders, continually inform each other
from physical planning and academic planning perspectives, and together establish the
foundation of the proposals set forth in this twenty-year Campus Plan.
2.2.1 The Future of the University at its Historic Main Campus
A key focus throughout this interactive and iterative master planning process has been
envisioning future academic spaces, recreational facilities, green space, student
residences, transportation solutions, and the best use of existing buildings and
resources on the main campus. This effort has been guided by several key organizing
principles:







Introduce new, high-quality green spaces and expand existing ones
Organize strategic growth consistent with campus districts and typology
Continue to develop a more residential living and learning community
Create a pedestrian-friendly campus
Improve transportation modes and means into campus
Collaborate with MGUH to ensure an integrated campus planning effort
Address deferred maintenance and infrastructure needs
Establish an effective, efficient clinical footprint to address Georgetown’s academic
and medical mission

GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY CAMPUS PLAN: 2017 – 2036

Page 13

Progress toward achieving many of these goals can already be seen around campus,
including new and improved living and learning spaces, which not only serve to meet
the student housing commitments made in the 2010 Campus Plan, but also are
essential components of providing an enhanced student life experience. The Healey
Family Student Center opened in fall 2014 as a new hub of student life, and the
renovated Ryan/Freedom Hall opened in 2015 providing 148 new undergraduate beds
and additional student life space. Pedro Arrupe, S.J. Hall was completed in August
2016 and delivered 225 new beds of on-campus student housing, strengthening and
enlivening the student residential zone at the northern end of campus.
2.2.2 Georgetown Downtown
A key component of the University’s long-range planning effort is identifying
opportunities to grow and develop in other parts of the District of Columbia and the
surrounding metropolitan area. In so doing, the University intends to effectively
leverage its presence in areas of the city where it has already established itself, as well
as identify potential new opportunities.
The 1971 relocation of the Georgetown University Law Center to its current home at
600 New Jersey Avenue, NW is notable in its success and lasting impact. The Law
Center’s steady expansion in the heart of the city is a model for the role Georgetown
can play as an anchor institution grounding the sustained transformation of a District
neighborhood.
In the fall of 2013, Georgetown relocated the School of Continuing Studies (SCS) to a
new campus at 640 Massachusetts Avenue, NW, approximately five blocks from the
Law Center. The move enables SCS to contribute to the development of an emerging
neighborhood, expanding Georgetown's presence downtown and building on the
pioneering development begun by the Law Center. The new SCS campus, located in
the midst of the business sectors it serves and easily accessed by Metro and other
public transportation, provides accessible, high-quality educational programs that are in
increasing demand among District and metropolitan area residents.
To support its ongoing efforts to identify strategic growth opportunities, the University
has engaged Forest City Washington, an urban land use and development company
that has played a major role in revitalizing several District neighborhoods. Forest City’s
expertise with the complexity of large-scale development and land acquisition in the
District has helped the University assess its institutional strengths and challenges to
best determine its needs for future growth beyond the main campus.
EXHIBIT H: GEORGETOWN DOWNTOWN
2.2.3 MedStar Georgetown University Hospital Planning
MedStar Georgetown University Hospital’s planning process is grounded in a
thoughtfully-defined governing structure between Hospital leadership and the corporate
leadership of its parent company, MedStar Health. Following extensive review and
discussion, MGUH and MedStar Health concluded that a new medical/surgical pavilion
GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY CAMPUS PLAN: 2017 – 2036

Page 14

on the Georgetown University campus was necessary to address a confluence of
factors, including the current aging facility; a need for modern operating rooms; a
growing aging population within the District of Columbia; and the need for an upgraded
patient experience, including an updated Emergency Department, modern surgical and
ICU spaces, all private patient rooms, and right-sized patient areas.
The planning and development team assembled by MGUH for the new medical/surgical
pavilion represents a group of highly specialized, reputable and local organizations.
The project’s design effort is led by a joint venture of HKS, Inc., one of the nation’s
leading healthcare architects and programmers, and DC-based architecture firm
Shalom Baranes Associates.
MGUH has closely coordinated with Georgetown University leadership and staff over
the past five years to develop a plan for the future of the Hospital in the context of the
University’s master planning effort. This work has been informed and shaped by input
from key stakeholders from MedStar Health, Georgetown University, as well as
members of the surrounding community. Over the course of 14 months, medical
planners and architects met with over 150 MedStar Health leaders, associates,
physicians and patient groups to help inform the program of the medical/surgical
pavilion. This process involved extensive communication with multiple stakeholders at
every level of the MedStar Health organization, exhaustive research of the Hospital’s
current operating and financial data, and interjection from healthcare leaders on best
practices seen across the country. Over the past three years, the senior project team
has held and attended many formal and informal meetings with Georgetown community
leaders, civic organizations, Advisory Neighborhood Commission 2E, and individual
residents. As discussed in the previous section of this Plan, representatives from the
Hospital have actively participated in the GCP to promote effective communication and
ensure transparency in the development of plans for the new medical/surgical pavilion
and address related open space, circulation, and transportation issues.
Separate and apart from the necessary zoning review and approval for the project
sought through this Campus Plan and associated further processing application, the
medical/surgical pavilion project has already been reviewed by various regulatory
agencies within the District of Columbia. Notably, on March 25, 2016, MedStar Health’s
application for a Certificate of Need (“CON”) demonstrating public need for the new
facility was fully approved by the District of Columbia State Health Planning and
Development Agency (SHPDA). The comprehensive CON application process provided
considerable opportunity for community and stakeholder review and input.

GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY CAMPUS PLAN: 2017 – 2036

Page 15

SECTION 3: THE GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY 2017 - 2036 CAMPUS PLAN
The 2017 Campus Plan is the culmination of the University’s comprehensive Master
Planning initiatives and the Hospital’s proposal for a new medical/surgical pavilion to
modernize and enhance patient care, together with the dedicated commitment of the
GCP to arrive at a consensus plan for the future of the main campus.
The Plan is premised on carrying forward the fundamental commitments established in
the 2010 Campus Plan that have yielded successful results, and meeting the goals
articulated by the University and the community in the 2010 Campus Plan Order.
Specifically, the GCP worked collegially to develop a framework for the future of the
main campus that is wholly consistent with the University’s goal of developing an
integrated living and learning campus and the community’s goal of as rapid a transition
as possible toward a more residential undergraduate on-campus environment.
Ultimately, the vision set forth in this new Campus Plan embodies Georgetown’s core
mission; responds to academic and clinical imperatives; supports the needs of faculty
and staff; and provides an environment for students that fosters their personal,
intellectual, and spiritual growth – all while recognizing the broader context of the
surrounding community of which the University is a part. This consensus Campus Plan
effectively accomplishes all of these objectives, while also being mindful of the financial
realities and competing priorities under which the University operates.
3.1

Campus Populations

3.1.1 Student Populations
Notwithstanding the tuition-dependent nature of the University’s operating model, and
the fact that student enrollment remains a fundamental driver of the University’s
financial stability and future viability, this twenty-year Campus Plan will maintain the
same student enrollment maximums established in the 2010 Campus Plan.
Specifically, these include the maximum enrollment standards established for overall
main campus student enrollment covering both undergraduate and graduate students
(14,106); the School of Medicine (830); and the Traditional Undergraduate Program
(6,675). Given the University’s current student population profile, growth under the
existing cap would be realized in the form of additional graduate students. This growth
in graduate population will be gradual and measured as new programs and research
initiatives are developed over the term of the Campus Plan. Increases in the graduate
population from current levels will in significant part replace enrollment that was
relocated to the new School of Continuing Studies facility in 2013. Growth in graduate
programs will advance the University’s mission, contribute to maintaining its top-tier
status as a leading research university, and benefit the District and metropolitan region
by providing educational opportunities to enhance the skills and marketability of the
local job force.
The University will maintain the same definitions established in the 2010 Campus Plan
for all categories of student enrollment. These definitions are clear and well-established
with members of the GCP as well as the Zoning Administrator.
GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY CAMPUS PLAN: 2017 – 2036

Page 16

EXHIBIT I: ENROLLMENT
3.1.2 Faculty and Staff
The proposed growth in graduate-level enrollment and programming will necessitate an
associated modest increase in faculty and staff resources as well. Given the difficulty in
making specific staffing projections over the term of a twenty-year planning horizon, the
University has projected that main campus faculty and staff headcount could potentially
grow by up to ten percent over the term of the Plan, from approximately 4,150
employees to up to 4,565 employees. As with enrollment growth, it is anticipated that
increases to the employment headcount would be measured and gradual.
MGUH employee headcount, including both full- and part-time employees, is projected
to increase from 4,414 to 5,119 over the twenty-year term of the Plan.
The impacts associated with of all of these potential population increases have been
specifically taken into account as part of the Transportation Demand Management
(TDM) Plans and comprehensive transportation study prepared on behalf of the
University and MGUH as part of this Campus Plan submission.
EXHIBIT J: FACULTY AND STAFF
3.2

The Future Campus: Enhanced Physical Environment and Facilities

The comprehensive vision for the future of the campus as outlined in this Plan is
deliberate and thoughtful in its identification of potential new development sites, with an
emphasis on the stewardship of existing University resources and an appropriate
measure of intentional optionality given the Plan’s long-term planning horizon.
EXHIBIT K: DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM SUMMARY
EXHIBIT L: PROPOSED TWENTY-YEAR DEVELOPMENT PLAN
EXHIBIT M: PROPOSED TWENTY-YEAR DEVELOPMENT PLAN LAND USES
3.2.1 Architectural Considerations
The main campus is characterized by buildings from multiple eras and architectural
styles that together contribute to the campus’ visual identity. Future facilities will be
planned and designed in a manner mindful and respectful of the surrounding context of
the site and the mission of the proposed project to determine the appropriate
architectural approach. Development under this Campus Plan will be organized and
influenced by various distinct campus districts identified through the University’s
ongoing master planning effort. For example:

New construction in the vicinity of the historic stone buildings that frame Healy and
Copley Lawns should consider the use of stone to face significant open space, while
brick would be appropriate on the rear of buildings (similar to White-Gravenor Hall).
Development in the central core of campus, which is currently composed of a
mixture of architectural styles including older, solid facades (e.g., Harbin Hall) and

GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY CAMPUS PLAN: 2017 – 2036

Page 17

more recent construction that successfully incorporates substantial glazing (e.g.,
Regents Hall), should find a balance between the two (e.g., Pedro Arrupe, S.J. Hall)
and focus on creating dynamic, transparent ground floors that activate and support a
vibrant student life experience.
With respect to University facilities east of the main gates in the West Georgetown
neighborhood, the primary future objective shall be maintenance and preservation of
historic quality while improving building efficiency and function.

These considerations will be explored and addressed more fully in subsequent further
processing applications submitted for individual development projects during the term of
this Plan. In addition to the zoning review process, campus building architecture will
continue to be subject to review by the Old Georgetown Board and Commission of Fine
Arts.
3.2.2 Stewardship of Existing Resources
While Campus Plan submissions traditionally focus on identifying future development
sites and the potential new density associated with them, a fundamental principle
established through Georgetown’s master planning process underscores the need to
reinvest in existing campus facilities. This principle of active stewardship is critical to
ensuring that Georgetown continues to meet the dynamic and changing needs of higher
education and effectively accomplish its mission. Key stewardship priorities include:



Renovations to existing on-campus student housing to provide more competitive
and marketable housing alternatives to support occupancy rates and associated
revenues and promote the development of a rich and diverse on-campus living and
learning community
Investments in the GUMC to address deferred maintenance needs while
modernizing and optimizing the footprint to facilitate and inspire world class research
and pedagogy
Attention to Georgetown’s historic assets, such as Healy Hall, to efficiently support
the mission of formation, inquiry and common good while preserving and respecting
campus traditions, sense of place, and our rich architectural past
Upgrades to core facility infrastructure to optimize operations, reduce our carbon
footprint, and conserve water resources

Philanthropic opportunities, financial performance, economic conditions and
programmatic growth will be the primary drivers of reinvestment in campus renewal
priorities.
3.2.3 Optionality
The Campus Plan reflects a long-term view of the campus in the context of its
surrounding neighborhoods and creates a framework for campus development through
the next twenty years. Given the uncertainties of a twenty-year planning horizon, this
Campus Plan has incorporated a reasonable measure of flexibility to allow the
University to adjust to changing circumstances and conditions over the Plan term.

GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY CAMPUS PLAN: 2017 – 2036

Page 18

Specifically, it provides optionality with respect to several key Campus Plan
development opportunities and uses, including:




Henle Village and Village A Residential Communities, which could either be
renovated in place or modestly expanded to further the goal of providing competitive
and marketable on-campus housing, particularly for juniors and seniors
Reiss Science Building, which could either be renovated for continued academic/
administrative use or fully redeveloped with academic, campus life, and student
housing components
Yates Field House, which could be redeveloped in a reoriented form north of its
existing site, and house a mix of various synergistic uses including a potential
hotel/conference center in support of University and Hospital functions
Lauinger Memorial Library, which could be renovated within its existing structure
or expanded to the parking lot immediately south of the building
St. Mary’s Hall, which could continue to house the School of Nursing & Health
Studies and other academic/administrative uses, or in the future potentially be
converted to residential use, strengthening and enlivening student residential uses at
the northern end of campus
Leavey Center, which could potentially accommodate additional on-campus student
housing

The various options set forth in the Campus Plan provide the requisite flexibility the
University needs given the Plan’s long-term horizon, while still ensuring that future
opportunities are appropriately integrated into the larger vision for the campus.
3.2.4

Organized and Strategic Growth to Enhance the Living & Learning Experience

3.2.4.1 Creating a Vibrant Student Life Corridor
A central component of this Campus Plan is defining and activating a new student life
corridor that would link hubs of student activity from the south end of campus extending
north to Reservoir Road. Currently, the major pedestrian axis linking the north
residential population of campus and student activity at the Leavey Center with the
southern residential population and main dining facility at Leo J. O’Donovan Hall lacks
vibrancy and clarity. New key facilities and the repurposing of existing ones will be
critical to the corridor’s transformation. Back-of-house Facilities Department uses that
currently occupy the ground floor of this major pedestrian access route would be
relocated, and the ground floor of Harbin Hall is proposed to be redeveloped with a
double-height space containing approximately 40,000 square feet of high-energy
student life uses. The ground floor of other development sites located along the
corridor, including a potential new academic building south of Regents Hall, would be
similarly programmed and configured. The west edge of the student life corridor would
also be enhanced as future investment in Cooper Field would allow for removal of the
existing chain-link fencing and creation of a more open and integrated experience.
The opportunity also exists to reorganize and renovate existing space within the Leavey
Center and create a new entry at the northern face of the building. These
improvements would help create a more direct pedestrian connection extending north
GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY CAMPUS PLAN: 2017 – 2036

Page 19

through campus – from Harbin Hall, through the ground floors of the proposed new
academic building south of Regents Hall, Regents Hall, and the Leavey Center, to a
proposed North Green – that would ultimately provide connectivity to Reservoir Road.
Extended in this manner, the corridor can effectively connect and organize pedestrian
activity and encourage an atmosphere of vitality as people move through the heart of
the main campus.
Key Campus Plan projects that would support the development of a vibrant student life
corridor include:




The renovation and expansion of the ground floor space of Harbin Hall for student
life activities to address the needs of undergraduate and graduate students
Student life ground floor space in the proposed academic facility south of
Regents Hall
The development of a new North Green proposed in conjunction with the MGUH
Medical/Surgical Pavilion
Potential addition to the north face and internal renovation and revitalization of the
Leavey Center
Enhanced pedestrian pathways and campus connections

EXHIBIT N: PROPOSED STUDENT LIFE CORRIDOR
3.2.4.2 Student Housing
Competitive and marketable on-campus undergraduate housing is important to all
members of the GCP. During the term of the Campus Plan, the University will provide
special emphasis on renovating current on-campus housing, with a focus on senior and
junior living communities such as Henle Village, Village A, and Alumni Square
considered as priorities. The University will also adopt appropriate sustainable
measures, in consultation with the GCP, so that as of fall 2030 and each semester
thereafter, an additional 244 Traditional Undergraduate Program students who would
otherwise be expected to live in the surrounding community and whose alternate living
arrangements demonstrably reduce the number of undergraduate student group houses
in the surrounding community will be housed on campus or outside of Zip Code 20007
(“Housing Commitment”). Such measures may include raising the occupancy rate of
the number of on-campus beds required by the 2010 Campus Plan as of Fall 2015 (i.e.,
5,438 beds) above 95%. Such measures might also include, for example, some credit
for an increase (above an agreed-upon number based on historic experience) of
students studying abroad or elsewhere, to the extent the GCP upon analysis concludes
there is a demonstrable and sustainable causal link to the reduction as described
above. Alternatively, the University may meet the Housing Commitment by providing
additional on-campus beds through the renovation of existing on-campus buildings or
the construction of new housing facilities.
EXHIBIT O: UNDERGRADUATE STUDENT HOUSING COMMITMENT
As part of the its student housing renewal program, the University is seeking flexibility
with respect to minor increases in building footprint and/or gross floor area that may be
GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY CAMPUS PLAN: 2017 – 2036

Page 20

required to reasonably accommodate life-safety, ADA accessibility and other similar
needs. Specifically, the University requests that no further processing review be
required for such renovation projects so long as the increased square footage does not
exceed 15% of the existing gross floor area of the residence hall being renovated or,
alternatively, permit the approval of such renovation projects as a consent calendar
item. This will allow these important renovation projects to proceed more quickly and
efficiently to execution once funding is secured. Renovation projects would continue to
be discussed with the GCP, and the historic preservation review processes that govern
campus development will ensure that any new construction is compatible with existing
campus infrastructure. In the event the University determines that a more significant
renovation or expansion of Henle Village or Village A is required to meet the goals of
the Campus Plan, then such construction shall require further processing approval as
well as review by the GCP.
The Campus Plan includes several potential sites that could, if necessary,
accommodate additional on-campus beds, including the Henle Expansion Option,
Village A Expansion Option, Reiss Replacement Option, Leavey Center, and St.
Mary’s Hall.
3.2.4.3

Athletics and Recreation Uses

Athletics and recreation uses provide a critical component of the student experience as
well as enhance the quality of life of faculty, staff and the broader University community.
The challenges associated with years of continued renovation and repairs at Kehoe
Field (which was located on the roof of Yates Field House until its closure in spring
2016) have significantly strained resources and viable renovation options for the
existing facility are limited and costly. Accordingly, the Campus Plan supports the
option of demolishing the existing structure, allowing for broader thinking about the
facility’s future function. A replacement Yates facility would provide the opportunity to
explore the highest and best use for the site and include a variety of programs
synergistic to its primary recreational and athletic function, including a potential
hotel/conference center in support of University and Hospital operations, and also allow
the option of linking the facility to the nearby Leavey Center. Additional outdoor athletic
space could potentially be accommodated adjacent to and on the rooftop of a
replacement Yates facility. The entire western edge of West Road and the southern
edge of a proposed new road running east to west across the northern section of
campus (discussed more fully in Section 3.2.4.5 below) could also be reimagined with
better at grade access to recreation and athletic facilities, helping to strengthen the
pedestrian-focused nature of the campus. Any replacement Yates facility will be
designed and sited appropriately in light of its location in proximity to Glover-Archbold
Park and the nearby Foxhall neighborhood.
EXHIBIT P: ATHLETIC AND OTHER RECREATIONAL FACILITIES
3.2.4.4

Academic Opportunities

Long-term academic planning at the University has been constrained by the perception
that the main campus lacks expansion potential to meet future programming needs.
The master planning process deliberately yet sensitively studied the potential for future
GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY CAMPUS PLAN: 2017 – 2036

Page 21

academic capacity and identified several sites in the central core of campus that provide
substantial, well-located, and flexible space to accommodate the instructional and
research needs of the existing undergraduate population as well as support proposed
growth in graduate programming. Key academic and administrative development
opportunities identified in this Campus Plan include:


A new building South of Regents Hall in the academic core of campus, which
would provide approximately 80,000 square feet of academic space with ground
floor student life functions supporting the Student Life Corridor concept
A new Harbin Tower on the existing Harbin Hall plaza, which would provide
approximately 67,000 square feet of academic and administrative space along with
double-level ground floor space dedicated to student life functions supporting the
Student Life Corridor concept
A component of the multi-use Reiss redevelopment option, which would
accommodate a full replacement of the existing facility’s 136,000 square feet of
academic space
Renovation and potential expansion to Lauinger Library to provide physical space
that appropriately preserves the University’s extensive collections and also supports
active collaborations, scholarship, and interactions with break-out, social, and team
learning rooms

Other academic opportunities identified in the Campus Plan (e.g., Leavey Center,
Poulton Hall and the Bunn Intercultural Center) are aimed at activating underutilized
space to increase capacity, improve building function, and enhance program identity.
3.2.4.5

MGUH Medical/Surgical Pavilion

A central component of this Campus Plan is a new medical/surgical pavilion proposed
by MedStar Georgetown University Hospital and the related open space, circulation,
and infrastructure improvements which support it. A further processing application for
the medical/surgical pavilion will be filed concurrently with this Campus Plan
submission.
As currently envisioned, the medical/surgical pavilion will house 156 private patient
rooms, a new Emergency Department, larger operating rooms, a rooftop helipad with
direct access to the Emergency Room, and three levels of underground parking. The
new, state-of-the-art facility would support the Hospital’s continued focus on providing
outstanding patient care and leading-edge advancements in medical technology.
In support of the medical/surgical pavilion project, the Campus Plan proposes to
substantially re-organize the northern portion of campus through the creation of a new
North Green on the existing Parking Lot A. The North Green would provide an
important campus and neighborhood amenity and provide clarity to what is now a
confusing mix of University and Hospital uses and pedestrian and vehicular conflicts.
Kober-Cogan Building (vacant since 2010) is proposed to be demolished to make way
for the new green, and a potential addition to the north face of the Leavey Center could
anchor the green’s southern terminus, creating a new front door for the building and
simplifying access to an important campus resource.
GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY CAMPUS PLAN: 2017 – 2036

Page 22

Circulation in the northern section of campus would also be greatly improved, most
importantly through the addition of a proposed new road running east to west across the
northern section of campus which would connect Entrances 1 and 4 (and potentially
Entrance 2) to West Road in front of the Lombardi Cancer Center. The new road would
allow vehicular travel to be distributed more evenly across the four entrance gates on
Reservoir Road, create a new campus address for health-related facilities, and provide
a pedestrian connection between the academic medical center and the core of the main
campus, greatly improving clarity, wayfinding, and the circulation experience of all
campus populations. The road will also facilitate modernization of utility distribution to
increase service levels and improve resiliency. Following completion of the proposed
medical/surgical pavilion project and the subsequent reconfiguration of Lombardi
Cancer Center, circulation will be further improved by the incorporation of a new bus
turnaround at Lombardi Circle, allowing effective transportation options for GUTS buses
to provide direct transportation to north campus destinations. The new road running
east to west across the northern section of campus will be designed and sited
appropriately in light of its location in proximity to Glover-Archbold Park and the nearby
Foxhall neighborhood.
EXHIBIT Q: PROPOSED HOSPITAL AND MEDICAL CENTER DISTRICT
3.2.5 Creating a More Pedestrian-Friendly Campus
3.2.5.1 An Emphasis on Open Space and Active Campus Connections
The historic heart of the main campus centers on the gracious proportions of Healy
Lawn, around which academic, residential, and social functions mix to create vibrancy
and community, and where several major pedestrian routes intersect. Today, as the
campus moves west, that space-based organizing structure fades away, to the
detriment of both place and people. As a result, the current campus environment is a
mix of open spaces that do not create a clear hierarchy or a cohesive landscape
structure.
The open space and campus connection opportunities illustrated in EXHIBIT S aim to
reverse that trend, establishing major anchoring open spaces throughout the campus,
and clearly linking them with navigable, active connections. The underlying concept is
to unite the rich but eclectic architecture of the campus through intentional landscape
improvements, and to foster increased campus vitality by concentrating high-energy
uses on major pedestrian routes. The wide variety of landscape materials and site
furnishings currently in place throughout campus will be replaced over time from a
proposed standard palette of materials, bringing greater consistency and visual clarity to
powerful compositions of open space and reinforcing key campus connections. An
emphasis on improving the function and quality of important campus open spaces and
increasing tree canopy will enhance the campus environment, encourage pedestrian
movement, and maximize the full use of outdoor space within an otherwise urban
setting. These types of intentional interventions are important steps in creating a vibrant
campus setting with a cohesive open space framework.
EXHIBIT R: EXISTING OPEN SPACES AND PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION
EXHIBIT S: PROPOSED OPEN SPACES AND PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION
GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY CAMPUS PLAN: 2017 – 2036

Page 23

EXHIBIT T: PROPOSED MATERIAL PALETTE
EXHIBIT U: EXISTING TREE CANOPY MAP
EXHIBIT V: PROPOSED TREE CANOPY MAP
EXHIBIT W: CAMPUS TOPOGRAPHY
3.2.5.2 Circulation Improvements
Throughout the planning effort, the University has taken both internal and external
transportation systems into careful consideration in order to improve circulation,
enhance pedestrian movement and safety, and encourage and support a variety of
transportation options. A new road running east to west across the northern section of
campus, as described more fully above, will provide needed connectivity on campus,
support more balanced traffic among the Reservoir Road entrance gates, and better
organize the north campus medical district. The existing West Road will provide northsouth vehicular access, and a new turnaround at Lombardi Circle will allow for direct
GUTS bus service to north campus destinations. As discussed in more detail in Section
3.4.1 below, the University will maintain its commitment to maximize the use of the
Canal Road entrance for all GUTS routes except the Wisconsin Avenue route.
Parking is intended to be consolidated whenever possible within structure, including the
proposed underground garage on the current Lot A site in connection with the MGUH
medical/surgical pavilion project. Loading and service access will be designed to
minimize potential pedestrian conflicts, and vehicles are proposed to be kept west of the
student life corridor. This approach will allow key campus streets like Tondorf Road to
primarily serve pedestrians and bicycles while still providing limited service access as
necessary. Together, these significant investments help improve circulation and also
create the opportunity to substantially pedestrianize the core of campus.
Improvements to campus wayfinding will be aimed at establishing standardized exterior
signage that adheres to University visual identity standards. A comprehensive
collection of campus wayfinding elements, including exterior building signage,
directional signs, standardized pathway markings, street signs, and a standardized
campus map template, will together help to enhance the use of pathways to navigate
campus. New maps will focus on first-time visitor needs, showing main building names
and highlighting landmarks as well as visitor parking destinations and public
transportation options. Separate maps for vendors that focus on circulation, loading,
and vehicular access will also be developed.
EXHIBIT X: EXISTING LOADING AND SERVICE AREAS
EXHIBIT Y: PROPOSED LOADING AND SERVICE AREAS
EXHIBIT Z: CAMPUS WAYFINDING
3.3

Conservation Issues

The 2017 Campus Plan continues Georgetown’s tradition of the stewardship of historic
resources and the integration of sustainable and conservation-minded initiatives into
campus development efforts and day-to-day University operations.

GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY CAMPUS PLAN: 2017 – 2036

Page 24

3.3.1 Historic Resources
The University’s roots on the main campus are literally centuries old, and the 104 acre
campus reflects a continuing sensitivity to the historic and architectural context of its
setting within the Georgetown Historic District. The architectural heritage of the campus
honored the traditional gridiron plan of surrounding Georgetown and drew inspiration
from the classical campus planning theories of the Quadrangle at Cambridge University
and Thomas Jefferson’s Academic Village. Healy Hall, the architectural centerpiece of
Georgetown’s campus, and Heyden Observatory, one of the nation’s oldest
observatories, are both listed as National Historic Landmarks. The campus also
includes many other noteworthy resources of architectural significance, including
Dahlgren Quadrangle, Copley Hall, and White-Gravenor Hall.
3.3.2 Sustainability Considerations and Environmental Impacts
Sustainability in Mission and Operations
Georgetown plays a leading role in addressing critical sustainability challenges through
its academic mission as well as institutional operations. In so doing, the University has
taken an integrated and holistic approach to sustainability, placing value on a
“quadruple” bottom line: people, planet, prosperity, and purpose.
In recent years the University has taken a number of significant and impactful steps to
further enhance sustainability objectives, including:




Launching the Georgetown Climate Center in 2009
Founding the Georgetown Environment Initiative in 2012
Pledging to cut the carbon footprint of campus facilities in half by the year 2020, a
goal which the University met in 2014
Adopting the District of Columbia College and University Sustainability Pledge, a
commitment by Washington DC’s higher education sector to serve as engaged
participants in advancing the sustainability goals of the District of Columbia
Designation as the first Bicycle Friendly University in the District of Columbia in
2013, in recognition of the University’s efforts to promote a more bikeable campus
for students, staff and visitors

Through the work of the University’s internal Sustainability Working Group, along with
leadership of the Georgetown University Student Association (GUSA), Georgetown is
developing an intentional, stakeholder-informed set of aspirational, University-wide
goals in key sustainability functional areas, including operations, research and
education, engagement, investment, and governance and capacity.
EXHIBIT AA: SUSTAINABILITY PLAN FOR CAMPUS OPERATIONS
Sustainable Design
In addition to its focus on sustainable operations and planning, the University has
likewise been a leader in sustainable design, a commitment that will continue to be
carried out in the 2017 Campus Plan. Future building projects will include proactive
GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY CAMPUS PLAN: 2017 – 2036

Page 25

landscape elements that create habitable outdoor spaces and reinforce the social
environment of the campus. Utility infrastructure networks will be designed to align with
major transportation corridors, creating loops that provide efficient distribution,
redundancy, ample future capacity, and maintenance flexibility. Future buildings will
incorporate stormwater management features, such as green roofs and pervious
surfaces, to comply with the ambitious stormwater management regulations adopted by
the District of Columbia in 2013. All new facilities and major renovations to existing
facilities will be designed to a minimum LEED Silver certification, a commitment
established by the University in 2009.
Through focused implementation of these priorities, development opportunities
identified in the Campus Plan will improve systems that together reinforce social,
environmental, and financial sustainability objectives.
EXHIBIT BB: EXISTING PERVIOUS SURFACE COVERAGE DIAGRAM
EXHIBIT CC: PROPOSED PERVIOUS SURFACE COVERAGE DIAGRAM
3.4

Comprehensive Transportation Planning

The University’s location in the heart of the historic Georgetown neighborhood provides
numerous opportunities for students, faculty and staff and a myriad of resources for
members of the nearby community and residents throughout the District – but also
presents certain challenges from a transportation perspective. Accordingly,
transportation planning has always been an area of key concern for the University
community and residents of the surrounding neighborhood.
Despite these challenges, the University enjoys a very positive mode split – currently
69% of University commuters use modes other than single-occupancy automobile to
arrive at campus – as a direct result of Georgetown's ongoing commitment to and
substantial investment in responsible and effective transportation planning. The
Hospital, with approximately 26% of its commuters using modes other than singleoccupancy automobiles to arrive at campus, also takes significant measures to mitigate
traffic impacts on the surrounding neighborhood despite the transportation-related
challenges inherent in the nature of the services it provides.
3.4.1 Transportation Demand Management (TDM)
For decades, the University has developed and implemented a Transportation Demand
Management program that promotes the use of alternative modes of transportation and
disincentivizes single occupancy vehicle (SOV) use. Recent University survey results
report a steady positive trend in mode split for University students and employees,
indicating decreased levels of SOV and increased level of alternative modes of
transportation.
The centerpiece of the University’s TDM program continues to be a successful
Georgetown University Transportation Shuttle (GUTS) bus program. Established in
1974 to provide an alternative to driving for faculty, staff, students, and others affiliated
with the University and Hospital, GUTS provides over two million rides per year on five
separate routes. In conjunction with other TDM measures, GUTS significantly reduces
GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY CAMPUS PLAN: 2017 – 2036

Page 26

automobile trips to and from campus and decreases the demand for on-campus
parking.
To address the impact of GUTS buses traveling through neighborhood streets, in fall
2015 the University fulfilled its 2010 Campus Plan commitment to maximize use of the
Canal Road entrance for the GUTS system (except the Wisconsin Avenue shuttle) by
opening the McDonough Bus Turnaround in front of McDonough Gymnasium at the
southwest corner of campus. The bus turnaround created a new pedestrian plaza and a
dedicated location for buses to drop off and pick up riders. A University-operated mini
shuttle safely and conveniently carries passengers from the bus turnaround to north
campus locations.
In addition to maintaining and enhancing the GUTS system, Georgetown’s
comprehensive TDM Plan also includes a “tool kit” of several traffic mitigation strategies
specifically identified as suitable and cost-effective solutions for the University
population based on survey responses and input received from the GCP Transportation
and Parking (TAP) Working Group.
University TDM Commitment
As part of the 2017 Campus Plan, the University has agreed to establish both a
performance commitment as well as an aspirational goal with respect to campus traffic
volumes over the twenty-year term of the Plan. Specifically, the University will commit
to managing its traffic impacts to ensure that evening peak hour SOV trips do not
exceed a level that is eight and one-half percentage points lower than the projected
evening peak hour impacts associated with the potential population growth outlined in
this Campus Plan (which is largely equivalent to the growth permitted under the existing
Campus Plan). In addition, as an aspirational goal, the University will strive to achieve a
twenty percentage point reduction in evening peak hour impacts. Over the course of
the next seven years, as a result of the University’s commitment to immediately deploy
several TDM measures prior to experiencing any substantial campus population growth,
the University anticipates a modest reduction in traffic-related impacts from current
levels.
MGUH TDM Commitment
As part of the 2017 Campus Plan, MGUH has agreed to establish both a performance
commitment as well as an aspirational goal with respect to campus traffic volumes over
the first ten years of the Plan. Specifically, MGUH will commit to managing its traffic
impacts to ensure that morning peak hour SOV trips do not exceed a level that is 2.4
percentage points lower than the projected morning peak hour impacts associated with
the potential growth outlined in this Campus Plan. In addition, as an aspirational goal,
MGUH will strive to achieve a six percentage point reduction in morning peak hour
impacts.
After the first 10 years that the Campus Plan in effect, MGUH will do a joint “look back”
with the GCP on the results at the midpoint of the plan and make adjustments to
the TDM Plan as necessary. If agreement is not reached between MGUH and the GCP
at the ten year “look back”, as to the scope and nature of those adjustments, community
GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY CAMPUS PLAN: 2017 – 2036

Page 27

organizations represented on the GCP (collectively the “community parties”) or MGUH
may suggest a proposed MGUH TDM commitment for the remaining years of the
Campus Plan and the University shall, upon the request of the community parties or
MGUH, submit the matter to the Zoning Commission for review and determination.
3.4.2 Parking
Under the 2017 Campus Plan, the University will continue to maintain its existing
parking cap of 4,080 parking spaces. These spaces are allocated between the
University and Hospital pursuant to the University’s lease agreement with MGUH, with
2,700 spaces allocated for Hospital use and 1,380 spaces allocated for use by the
University for faculty, staff, visitors, and on nights and weekends, students. Spaces set
aside for alternatives to private automobile use, such as spaces for car sharing vehicles
(ZipCar, Car2Go) and charging stations for electric vehicles do not count toward the
parking cap.
Subject to limited exceptions, all Traditional Undergraduate Program students are
prohibited from bringing cars to campus or parking their cars on the street in
Georgetown, Burleith, and Foxhall.
EXHIBIT DD: EXISTING VEHICULAR CIRCULATION AND PARKING FACLITIES
EXHIBIT EE: PROPOSED VEHICULAR CIRCULATION AND PARKING FACLITIES
3.5

Managing Off-Campus Activities and Impacts

Through the collaborative work of the Georgetown Community Partnership and the
commitment of significant resources by the University, substantial progress has been
made in effectively managing off-campus impacts since the 2012 approval of the
existing Campus Plan. In an effort to promote continued positive collaboration and the
further progress and sustained success of these efforts, the 2017 Campus Plan
maintains the fundamental commitment set forth in the 2010 Campus Plan to operate a
comprehensive and expansive program to educate students about the responsibilities
associated with off-campus living, and to address – proactively where possible –
neighborhood concerns regarding noise, trash, and other impacts. Led by the Office of
Neighborhood Life (ONL), which reports to the Vice President for Government Relations
and Community Engagement, Georgetown’s comprehensive off-campus and
neighborhood living program will continue to be guided by input and direction from the
Safety and Student Life and Environment and Landlord Initiatives GCP working groups,
and will be implemented in coordination with the Georgetown University Police
Department and Department of Planning and Facilities Management, along with the
Metropolitan Police Department.
The University has taken a robust, multi-faceted approach to addressing neighborhood
life issues since the adoption of the current Campus Plan in 2012. Students are
educated on the rules and expectations for off-campus behavior, and the University
provides a significant administrative presence on neighborhood streets to monitor
student behavior, promote safety, and deter disruptive student behavior. The goal of
these efforts is to directly address student activity – in student homes and on the public
streets – in a proactive manner. These efforts also serve as privately funded operations
that increase neighborhood security and supplement police, trash, and transportation
GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY CAMPUS PLAN: 2017 – 2036

Page 28

services provided by the District government. Significantly, the University’s efforts in
this regard are results oriented, with appropriate attention to inputs and activities.
Success in mitigating and managing off-campus impacts in accordance with the 2017
Campus Plan will be, consistent with the 2010 Campus Plan, largely measured by
results.
Georgetown University will continue to implement meaningful programs and measures
to support its robust neighborhood life program. These initiatives and enhancements
include:





The coordination and funding of off-duty, University paid MPD officers to patrol the
neighborhoods surrounding campus during nighttime hours
Continued implementation of the Student Neighborhood Assistance Program
(“SNAP”), which permits the University to proactively address, and respond to,
issues of student safety, student behavior, and street noise during nighttime
weekend hours
Late night transportation from the main campus to off-campus locations during
nighttime weekend hours, to supplement nighttime neighborhood transportation
options
Regular litter and trash patrols throughout the West Georgetown and Burleith
communities, in addition to bulk trash collection during student move-in and moveout
Policies for on-campus and off-campus parties that encourage more on-campus
social activity and successfully address the impacts of off-campus student parties
Continued efforts, in partnership with community leaders, to promote safe and
legally compliant rental properties, “good neighbor” behavior from local landlords,
and responsibility for property maintenance by student tenants
Commitment to residential presence of University professional staff in the
neighborhoods, to serve as liaisons between students and the community and
provide educational and policy enforcement support

The University will continue to commit sufficient financial, personnel, and programmatic
resources to these quality of life initiatives during the term of the 2017 Campus Plan in
order to support a safe community, educate students to be good neighbors, and
successfully mitigate the impacts of trash, noise, and student behavior. The University
may modify these programs only as necessary or appropriate to increase efficacy,
focusing on results. Through the GCP, the University will continue to evaluate and
collegially develop meaningful ways to enhance the efficacy of these programs based
on suggestions and feedback received from neighbors, students, and other
stakeholders, and will also continue to engage city agencies to give vigorous attention
to housing code, basic business license, trash, and public safety issues.
3.6

Proposed Conditions of Approval

As part of the development of this consensus Campus Plan, proposed conditions of
approval to ensure that the objectives and goals of the Plan are effectively implemented
have been drafted and reviewed with the GCP.
EXHIBIT FF: PROPOSED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL

GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY CAMPUS PLAN: 2017 – 2036

Page 29

SECTION 4: COMPLIANCE WITH THE CAMPUS PLAN REGULATIONS

As set forth herein and below, this application satisfies the standards for approval of a
campus plan pursuant to Subtitle X, Chapter 1 of the Zoning Regulations and meets the
filing requirements for a campus plan as set forth in Subtitle Z, Section 3 of the Zoning
Regulations.
4.1

Sub-section 101.1: Educational Use by a College or University

See Act of Congress, attached hereto as Exhibit A, Thirteenth Congress of the United
States, dated March 1, 1815, authorizing the granting of degrees by the College of
Georgetown in the District of Columbia.
4.2

Sub-section 101.2: The Uses Shall Be Located so They Are Not Likely to
Become Objectionable to Neighboring Property

The proposed University uses and their locations as fully described in this consensus
Campus Plan were developed in collaboration with the GCP, and are not likely to
become objectionable to neighboring property due to noise, traffic, number of students,
or other objectionable conditions. The Campus Plan includes a series of ongoing
commitments, memorialized in the proposed conditions of approval attached as Exhibit
FF, which will be implemented over the term of the Plan through collaborative
discussions with the GCP to ensure their efficacy.
4.3

Sub-sections 101.3 and 101.4: Analysis of Ancillary Uses

As discussed in Section 1.2.8 above, the main campus includes a number of ancillary
uses that actively support the academic, residential, and clinical components of the
University and the Hospital. The nature and type of these uses on the campus are
expected to evolve over the twenty-year term of the Campus Plan in order to meet the
needs and mission of the University and the Hospital and their populations.
The vast majority of these ancillary uses are located interior to the campus, and as a
result their operation does not impose objectionable impacts on non-university
residential neighbors. Some eating and drinking establishments and a convenience
store/sandwich shop are located in the southeast corner of the campus, but they are
located in a commercial zone and are permitted as a matter of right. Any future
establishments, including a potential hotel/conference center as part of the proposed
Yates replacement facility, are expected to be located in or near the campus core (for
example, along the proposed student life corridor); it is anticipated that any potential
objectionable impacts on non-university residential neighbors will be mitigated by
consensus proposals at the time of a further processing application.
The total floor area of all ancillary uses, including basement and cellar space, currently
occupies less than 4% of the total Campus Plan gross floor area and is projected to
occupy less than 5% of the proposed total Campus Plan gross floor area over the term
of this Campus Plan.
GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY CAMPUS PLAN: 2017 – 2036

Page 30

4.4

Sub-sections 101.5 through 101.7: Campus Development Standards

The campus is located within the R-3 and MU-3 zoning districts. Pursuant to Section
101.5 of the Zoning Regulations, the total gross floor area of the R-3-zoned portion of
the campus is limited to a density of 1.8 FAR. The additional gross floor area proposed
in this Campus Plan together with the existing gross floor area of the campus will result
in a FAR of 1.54, or 0.26 below the 1.8 FAR permitted under the Zoning Regulations.
(As set forth in Section 101.7, such density does not include public streets and alleys,
but it does include interior streets and driveways within the campus boundaries.)
Subtitle X, Section 101.5 permits a base height of 50 feet for campus buildings; under
Subtitle D, Section 303.2, the height may be increased to a maximum of 90 feet
provided that each building is set back from lot lines at least one foot for each foot of
height exceeding the 50-foot height limit. Campus buildings are proposed to a
maximum height of 90 feet, consistent with these regulations. See EXHIBIT K:
DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM SUMMARY.
4.5

Sub-section 101.8: Plan for Campus as a Whole, Showing the Location, Height
and Bulk, Where Appropriate, of all Present and Proposed Improvements

As shown in Exhibits K and L and discussed in Section 3, the University has developed
a plan for the campus as a whole that shows the location, height and bulk of all
proposed improvements. These new buildings and building additions, when combined
with the proposed improvements to open spaces, pedestrian pathways, and campus
roadway circulation, will result in a more attractive, pedestrian-centered, and
sustainable campus.
4.5.1 Buildings, Parking, and Loading Facilities
Buildings. The proposed Campus Plan calls for new building development as set forth
below:



Academic/administrative: 337,790 square feet of gross floor area
Residential/Campus Life/Athletic: 87,500 square feet of gross floor area
Medical/Health Care: 450,000 square feet of gross floor area
Mixed Use: 675,450 square feet of gross floor area

Parking and Loading. As discussed in Section 3, the 2017 Campus Plan calls for
substantial improvements to the campus roadway network, intended to improve
pedestrian and vehicular movement through campus and minimize opportunities for
pedestrian-vehicular conflicts.
The current and proposed locations of campus parking facilities are shown on Exhibits
DD and EE. These spaces are largely concentrated in the Southwest Quad parking
garage, Leavey Center garage, and other garages associated with the Hospital in the
northern district of campus.
4.5.2 Screening, Signs, Streets, and Public Utility Facilities
Landscaping. As an integral part of the 2017 Campus Plan, Georgetown will enhance
the prominence of campus open spaces and the connections between them to
GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY CAMPUS PLAN: 2017 – 2036

Page 31

maximize their use and enjoyment in keeping with the environmental integrity and
historic context of the campus. A common language of paving materials, site
furnishings, and planting will help unify the campus environment. See EXHIBIT S:
PROPOSED OPEN SPACES AND PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION and EXHIBIT T:
PROPOSED MATERIAL PALETTE.
Signage. The University will enhance its visual and graphic communication on campus
through updates to its wayfinding system and related design guidelines as part of the
implementation of this Campus Plan. See EXHIBIT Z: CAMPUS WAYFINDING.
Utility Facilities. Georgetown University is currently served by a central heating and
cooling plant that produces steam and chilled water to meet the needs of the University
and Hospital. Campus buildings are purposefully designed with sustainable features to
help supplement the central plant’s operations. Through the implementation of this
Campus Plan, utility infrastructure will be upgraded to accommodate Hospital and
University growth, and networks will be designed to align with major transportation
corridors to provide efficient distribution, redundancy, ample future capacity, and
maintenance flexibility. Over the twenty-year term of this Campus Plan, the University
will continue to evaluate energy and resource conservation measures, and will
specifically explore future systems upgrades which could enhance capacity and
efficiency without adversely impacting the campus and surrounding neighborhood.
4.5.3 Athletic and Other Recreational Facilities
The 2017 Campus Plan continues Georgetown’s efforts to improve the University’s
athletic and recreational facilities for both intercollegiate and recreational uses. The
Plan provides for the opportunity to re-envision Yates Field House, the University’s
primary recreational athletic facility. The Yates replacement project will allow for
programming of a variety of synergistic uses related to the facility’s core recreational
function as well as a long-term solution to the substantial challenges associated with
years of continued renovation and repairs at Kehoe Field (located on the roof of Yates
Field House), which was closed in spring 2016 due to its deteriorating condition. See
EXHIBIT P: ATHLETIC AND OTHER RECREATIONAL FACILITIES.
4.5.4 Description of all Activities Conducted or to be Conducted on the Campus, and
the Capacity of all Present and Proposed Campus Development
As described more fully in Section 1.2 above, the main campus accommodates a wide
range of uses and activities that not only fulfill the core mission of the University but also
provide substantial opportunities and benefits for neighborhood and District residents.
The capacity of all present and proposed campus development is sufficient to meet the
needs of these activities for the twenty-year term of this Campus Plan.
4.6

Sub-sections 101.9 and 101.15: Further Processing for Specific Buildings,
Structures, and Uses

As required by Section 101.9 of the Zoning Regulations, the University will submit
applications for further processing for specific buildings and uses set forth in this
Campus Plan. The University requests flexibility to process minor building additions
GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY CAMPUS PLAN: 2017 – 2036

Page 32

related to residence hall renovations as a matter of right (that is, without further
processing approval). This will allow for a more efficient delivery of necessary housing
renewal. In addition, the University requests permission to retrofit penthouses on
existing buildings to include habitable space as a matter of right (that is, without further
processing approval) consistent with the regulations adopted by the Commission in
Case No. 14-13. The proposed uses associated with these minor renovations will not
result in an appreciable increase in the impact of such uses, and are consistent with the
uses already approved through prior further processing applications.
4.7

Sub-section 101.10: No Interim Use of Land or Improved Property Proposed

No interim use of property is proposed under the 2017 Campus Plan.
4.8

Sub-section 101.11: Compliance with the Policies of the District Elements of the
Comprehensive Plan

The 2017 Campus Plan will be implemented in a manner that fulfills the goals of the
District of Columbia Comprehensive Plan. The 2017 Plan fulfills all of the goals of the
Education Element for colleges and universities: it promotes the development of satellite
campuses (EDU-3.3.1), balances university growth with neighborhood needs (EDU3.3.2), ensures that the Plan is not likely to become objectionable to neighboring
properties (EDU-3.3.3), and addresses the University’s transportation impacts (EDU3.3.5).
In general, implementation of the 2017 Campus Plan will encourage economic growth
and will improve community labor force skills and employment opportunities. The Plan
also supports objectives in the Comprehensive Plan relating to solid waste
management, improved air quality, land area protection, environmental health,
sanitation, and energy conservation.
The 2017 Campus Plan will fulfill major goals of the Comprehensive Plan pertaining to
architectural character, building height limitations, physical and symbolic imagery,
streetscapes, sidewalks, urban parks and places. With regard to architecture and
planning, the 2017 Plan will fulfill the goals related to historic preservation and
stabilization of neighborhood character. Consistent with the objectives of the
Comprehensive Plan, the University intends to develop facilities offering unique
opportunities for learning, teaching and research.
4.9

Sub-section 101.13: Referral to the District of Columbia Office of Planning,
Department of Transportation, and Department of the Environment

The 2017 Campus Plan application will be referred to the Office of Planning,
Department of Transportation, and Department of Energy and Environment for their
review and report.
4.10

Sub-section 101.14: Application is in Harmony with the Zoning Regulations

The 2017 Campus Plan is in harmony with the Zoning Regulations and the Zoning
Maps, and will not adversely affect the use of neighboring property.
GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY CAMPUS PLAN: 2017 – 2036

Page 33

4.11

Sub-section 101.16: A Further Processing of a Campus Building Shall Not be
Filed Simultaneously with a Full Campus Plan Application

As discussed in this Campus Plan submission, MGUH is filing an application for further
processing of a proposed medical/surgical pavilion. For the reasons set forth in that
application, the University supports its request for consideration of the further
processing application concurrently with this Campus Plan. The medical/surgical
pavilion presents the University, MGUH, and community with an opportunity to address
important campus planning issues regarding circulation, transportation, and open
space, and many of the issues related to the pavilion are appropriate for discussion
within the context of the Campus Plan. Furthermore, the pavilion project and
associated renovations to the existing building will allow the Hospital to achieve more
efficient overall operations and better serve and meet the needs of patients, families,
staff, and the surrounding community. For the foregoing reasons, review of the project
should proceed as rapidly as possible.
4.12

Section 102: Special Exception for Use of Commercial Property by a College or
University

The University makes use of certain space in commercial zones off-campus to
accommodate functions that are not required to be housed on-campus. Most of these
uses are administrative-related functions (e.g., Human Resources and Benefits),
however some space functions as classroom and similar University uses. The
University does not currently anticipate use of additional commercially-zoned properties
for university uses not otherwise permitted as a matter of right in the underlying zone.
Potential future uses in commercially-zoned properties could be administrative functions
that are consistent with uses that would be located in commercially-zoned properties
(e.g., accounting, financial affairs, etc.). Other University uses, such as instructional
space (e.g., classrooms) would require further review by the Zoning Commission as a
special exception.

GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY CAMPUS PLAN: 2017 – 2036

Page 34

SECTION 5: CONCLUSION

The 2017 Campus Plan sets forth a predictable yet flexible framework that carries
forward and builds upon the fundamental commitments established in the 2010 Campus
Plan, including maintaining all existing student enrollment caps. At the same time, the
Plan sets forth a long-term vision for the campus that embodies Georgetown’s core
mission, responds to academic and health-care imperatives, supports the needs of
faculty and staff, and provides an environment for students that fosters their personal,
intellectual, and spiritual growth – all within the broader context of the surrounding
community.
Specifically, the Plan proposes interconnected campus systems that together promote
environmental, academic, social, and fiscal vitality. Increased ground-floor student life
space along major pedestrian corridors will create an energetic and activated campus
core. Attention to place, space utilization, and sustainability objectives will promote
more efficient buildings and allow the University to deliver competitive educational and
leading-edge research programs, and a focus on renovation will ensure high-quality
living and learning environments that utilize current assets to their fullest potential. An
increase in campus open space and tree canopy will enhance the campus environment,
encourage pedestrian movement and maximize the full use of outdoor space within an
otherwise urban setting, and a focus on creating a more pedestrian and bicycle-friendly
campus will encourage and support multi-modal transportation solutions. An ongoing
commitment to the work of the GCP and a comprehensive off-campus and
neighborhood living program will promote continued positive collaboration and
sustained success of these efforts over the term of the Plan.
The adoption of this consensus twenty-year Campus Plan will allow Georgetown
University to further its commitment to academic excellence and enhance its reputation
as a pre-eminent global university; to continue to attract exceptional students and
faculty from across the nation and around the world; and to actively carry out its
commitment of service to its community and the District of Columbia as a leading
institution of higher-education in the heart of the nation’s capital.

GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY CAMPUS PLAN: 2017 – 2036

Page 35