SEPTEMBER 1, 2016

CAMPUS PLAN

2017 - 2036

TABLE OF CONTENTS

FOREWORD ...... 1

SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION ...... 2

1.1 Georgetown University in the District of Columbia ...... 2 1.2 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 1.3 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 Georgetown University in the 21st Century ...... 12 2.2 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 Campus Populations ...... 16 3.1.1 Student Populations ...... 16 3.1.2 Faculty and Staff ...... 17 3.2 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

3.2.4 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 3.3 Conservation Issues ...... 24 3.3.1 Historic Resources ...... 25 3.3.2 Sustainability Considerations and Environmental Impacts...... 25 3.4 Comprehensive Transportation Planning ...... 26 3.4.1 Transportation Demand Management (TDM) ...... 26 3.4.2 Parking...... 28 3.5 Managing Off-Campus Activities and Impacts ...... 28 3.6 Proposed Conditions of Approval ...... 29

SECTION 4: COMPLIANCE WITH THE CAMPUS PLAN REGULATIONS ...... 30

4.1 Sub-section 101.1: Educational Use by a College or University ...... 30 4.2 Sub-section 101.2: The Uses Shall Be Located so They Are Not Likely to Become Objectionable to Neighboring Property ...... 30 4.3 Sub-sections 101.3 and 101.4: Analysis of Incidental Uses ...... 30 4.4 Sub-sections 101.5 through 101.7: Campus Development Standards ...... 31 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 ...... 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 4.6 Sub-sections 101.9 and 101.15: Further Processing for Specific Buildings, Structures, and Uses ...... 32 4.7 Sub-section 101.10: No Interim Use of Land or Improved Property Proposed .. 33 4.8 Sub-section 101.11: Compliance with the Comprehensive Plan ...... 33 4.9 Sub-section 101.13: Referral to the District of Columbia Office of Planning, Department of Transportation, and Department of the Environment ...... 33 4.10 Sub-section 101.14: Application is in Harmony with the Zoning Regulations .... 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...... 34 4.12 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 University Charter EXHIBIT B Aerial Photograph of Campus EXHIBIT C Existing Conditions EXHIBIT D Existing Campus Land Uses EXHIBIT E Georgetown University in the District of Columbia EXHIBIT F Campus Neighborhood Context EXHIBIT G Campus Plan Compliance Milestones EXHIBIT H Georgetown Downtown EXHIBIT I Enrollment EXHIBIT J Faculty and Staff EXHIBIT K Development Program Summary EXHIBIT L Proposed Twenty-Year Development Plan EXHIBIT M Proposed Twenty-Year Development Plan Land Uses EXHIBIT N Proposed Student Life Corridor EXHIBIT O Undergraduate Student Housing Commitment EXHIBIT P Athletic and Other Recreational Facilities EXHIBIT Q Proposed Hospital and Medical Center District EXHIBIT R Existing Open Spaces and Pedestrian Circulation EXHIBIT S Proposed Open Spaces and Pedestrian Circulation EXHIBIT T Proposed Material Palette EXHIBIT U Existing Tree Canopy Map EXHIBIT V Proposed Tree Canopy Map EXHIBIT W1 Campus Topography – Elevation Map EXHIBIT W2 Campus Topography – Slope Percentage Map EXHIBIT X Existing Loading and Service Areas EXHIBIT Y Proposed Loading and Service Areas EXHIBIT Z Campus Wayfinding EXHIBIT AA Sustainability Plan for Campus Operations EXHIBIT BB Existing Pervious Surface Coverage Diagram EXHIBIT CC Proposed Pervious Surface Coverage Diagram EXHIBIT DD Existing Vehicular Circulation and Parking Facilities EXHIBIT EE Proposed Vehicular Circulation and Parking Facilities EXHIBIT FF Proposed Conditions of Approval EXHIBIT GG 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 ground- breaking 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: UNIVERSITY CHARTER EXHIBIT B: AERIAL PHOTGRAPH OF CAMPUS EXHIBIT C: EXISTING CONDITIONS EXHIBIT D: EXISTING CAMPUS LAND USES EXHIBIT E: GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

1.2 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 on- campus 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 twenty- year 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 agreed- upon 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 21st 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 highly- qualified 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 north- south 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 single- occupancy 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 move- out ▪ 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 (EDU- 3.3.2), ensures that the Plan is not likely to become objectionable to neighboring properties (EDU-3.3.3), and addresses the University’s transportation impacts (EDU- 3.3.5). 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