May 2002
Judge Sides with GW on Critical Campus Plan Issues
District Considers Appeal
By Greg
Licamele
A federal judge ruled in favor of several University claims in its Campus
Plan litigation last month, lifting burdens imposed by the DC Board
of Zoning Adjustment in its Campus Plan Order, including the requirement
that GW add 1,500 beds by August 31 and not be allowed to count the
beds in some residence halls outside of University boundaries. The District
of Columbia is considering an appeal.
US District Court Judge Louis Oberdorfer found the BZA requirement that
GW house 70 percent of students on campus and outside of the Foggy Bottom
area by the start of the fall semester to be “unconstitutionally
arbitrary and capricious and devoid of connection to a legitimate government
interest.” Additionally, Oberdorfer found it reasonable to allow
GW to use existing off-campus residence halls, such as the Hall on Virginia
Avenue and Pennsylvania House, to meet its housing needs.
“This order relieves the University of the burdens imposed by the
more unreasonable and arbitrary conditions,” says Charles Barber,
GW senior counsel. “We were very concerned about being required
to obtain 1,500 beds outside the Foggy Bottom community by August and
we had our doubts whether that was even possible, much less necessary.
We have some 1,400 beds in existing facilities near campus that are
permitted as a matter of right under existing zoning regulations that
the judge’s order permits us to use and to count. We think that
is a clear victory not just for the University and the students, but
a clear victory for reason. It doesn’t make any sense to have these
beds authorized by law and not be able to count them.”
The BZA order also required GW to house freshmen and sophomores within
buildings on campus. However, the court disagreed and ruled students
may be housed in any University facility.
The court’s decision recognizes
GW is aggressively developing more residence hall space on campus, which
would help in “significantly alleviating pressure on the surrounding
residential
neighborhood.”
“We acknowledge there is a need for additional housing and we are
committed to increasing the amount of on-campus housing,” Barber
says.
The University plans to add more residence hall rooms with the construction
of two facilities near the Smith Center on 23rd Street. These two buildings,
which are scheduled to be open for the 2004–05 academic year, will
add a total of 900 beds to the on-campus system. The University plans
to add 193 beds at the Elliott School of International Affairs building
on E Street as part of the on-campus system, while talks with the DC
School Board about the School Without Walls property continue. In total,
GW is scheduled to have more than 5,200 on-campus beds for the 2004–05
year.
“It is undisputed that GW has accelerated its plans to construct
on-campus dormitories,” the court writes.
Barber says the judge’s ruling was balanced, acknowledging GW’s
constitutional rights and the government’s interests.
“This order shows there is a limit to how far zoning authorities
can go in imposing conditions,” Barber says. “When the government
acts unreasonably, then it’s up to the courts to step in and say
constitutional rights have been violated.”
This litigation is an outgrowth of the Campus Plan process. Every 10
years, DC universities must submit campus plans to the BZA for approval.
Some issues were left unresolved by the judge’s ruling, specifically
the issue of a cap of 20,000 on students, and separate caps on faculty
and staff. Barber explains GW and the District asked for resolution
of this issue, but the court merely discussed the matter and did not
definitively rule on it.
Barber says the District and GW have agreed to defer resolution of certain
remaining issues pending any appeal by DC of the Order. If the District
does not appeal to US Circuit Court, then both parties will have the
opportunity to request that the court address some of the remaining
issues, such as the caps on students, faculty, and staff.
“We don’t think there’s a need for additional litigation
(in US Circuit Court),” Barber says. “We were hoping the District,
in light of the Order, would come forward and we could resolve this
matter. That is still our hope.”
Send feedback to: bygeorge@gwu.edu
