The Provost’s Student Advisory Committee took up the issue of the role of Georgetown, the university, within Georgetown, the neighborhood. We began by talking about the nature of the “campus plan” whereby the University and the neighborhood have documented joint goals to achieve a better shared environment.
They knew about the moving of students out of some university-owned properties near campus to dormitory rooms to be built on campus. This had been shared as part of student discussion groups earlier in the term. They knew about attempts to increase the number of social events on campus. They knew about efforts of the university to address noise issues off campus.
Many were surprised at the various activities that the university must finance as part of these efforts (e.g., trash pickups daily, the SNAP cars). They hadn’t thought of their tuition being spent to ameliorate problems that they and their fellow students create.
Many had attended parties in neighborhood units. They knew about the noise levels that inevitably develop with larger parties. They got the problem. We were focused on how students might be part of the solution.
There was a wide variety of ideas forwarded. They got engaged in the issue pretty quickly. Some thought the problem might be isolated to a small number of off-campus units that were well-known as hot spots. Others, based on the assumption that many off-campus students were living on their own for the first time, thought that orientation sessions about expectations and being a good neighbor might have positive effects.
Others pointed out that, since many students don’t have cars, walking to the business establishments near campus is the common alternative. The shuttles run by the university work for some, but aren’t convenient for others. Many liked the idea of running shuttles to other areas in the city where social events were prevalent, in order to reduce the late night walking down adjacent streets. They were aware of how loud even normal level conversation can appear to be on quiet late night sidewalks.
Many thought that more active discussion about these matters would be helpful, that the issues surrounding the neighborhood could be improved by heightening student awareness of the issues. Some thought that very clear, explicit rules about negative sanctions for repeat violators of guidelines would be effective. One student veteran said the issue reminded him of relationships between military bases and surrounding neighborhoods. In that context, he believed, soldiers watched over each others’ behaviors, for fear of their military superiors.
They had already seen the effects of putting more social events and parties on campus. They thought that step was working to make the on-campus experience more attractive to students.
The whole discussion made me optimistic that, if we together can find ways to make “being neighborly” part of the Georgetown culture, we could make real progress on the goals of the campus plan.
A few more suggestions for improving town-gown relations:
1. The University is already cleaning the streets in the surrounding neighborhoods at some cost. One or more of the student environmental groups could volunteer to clear up periodically the parks and green areas in the Georgetown and Burleith neighborhoods, as well the C&O Canal trail. This would be appreciated by residents.
2. The University could open an entrance to the Car Barn Building from M Street with the approval of the owners of the building. This would reduce pedestrian traffic on Prospect Street.
3. The University could sound proof the houses it owns outside of Healy Gate. This should be done gradually in view of the cost involved. Even if these houses are gradually turned into offices or faculty housing it is worth doing so to avoid complaints in the future as noise carries easily in the case of row houses. How about windows? Do they all have replacement windows? If installed they could not only reduce noise but also cut on energy costs.
4. One reason GWU has had a smoother time getting its campus plans approved is that it has quite a number of DC leaders on its Board of Trustees. Adding two or three more DC residents to GU’s Board of Directors including one or two residents of the Georgetown or Burleith neighborhoods would help as these would present the viewpoints of the neighbors in Board meetings and avoid the Board being surprised by the neighbors’ reactions to future campus plans. There is a precedent for that: Rory Quirk (C’65) who lives in the neighborhood used to be on GU’s Board of Directors.
5. For an urban university, Georgetown offers very few courses in Urban Studies especially at the undergraduate level. More such courses or even a minor in Urban Studies, would get more students interested in the affairs of Washington and more involved in the taking better care of it.
It is encouraging that Dr. Groves is involving students in trying to find solutions to tensions between the University and its neighbors. The more students are involved in the process, the greater the changes of having an effect. Town versus Gown tensions in Georgetown have existed for at least 50 years, so that it would take a great deal of patience and perseverance to reduce them. Here are some suggestions that might be helpful.
1. Prepare or revise a list of “Best Practices” for living off campus with inputs from students, giving some examples of successful neighborly experiences. This list or booklet of “best practices” can be used in orientations of students planning to live off-campus, printed in the campus media, and posted on-line for maximum exposure. It could even be distributed to new graduate students and medical students and used in their orientations.
2. Some of these “best practices” are already known. They include: turning the volume of music down after 10 p.m., establishing a friendly relationship with your neighbors and telling them ahead of time if you are planning to have some people over, using a “bouncer” to stop uninvited guests and people unrelated to the University from entering the party, mowing your lawn regularly and maintaining the garden clean and well kept. Some items may be new to some students such as not making phone calls (including cell phone calls) after 10:30 or 11 pm as they can be heard in adjacent houses.
3. Gaining the goodwill of neighbors by offering to do errands or shopping for older neighbors, and offering to mow their lawns, or shovel their snow.
4. Students could come up with additional helpful practices.
More generally, the University should adopt a new attitude towards the Washington community, because it needs the goodwill of the community to prosper. Washington residents, including those living in the N.W. area, should feel that the University is of some benefit to them and not only a nuisance. GU could do a better job publicizing in the local media events on campus that are open to the public. Right now it seems that even in the case of the events highlighted on the University website homepage it is usually not clear if they are open to the public (check for yourself). GWU, AU, CU and GMU all do a better job publicizing their events in the local media. It should not be impossible for the Office of Communications at GU to do the same if there is a will. Some people live and even retire near major universities in order to benefit from their intellectual, cultural and artistic offerings and events. This happens in the case of Charlottesville, VA, Princeton, NJ, and Williamsburg, VA. Georgetown Day could also be upgraded to appeal more to residents. At UC Berkeley, for example, Cal Day is not just about face painting and grilling hamburgers. It includes concerts, lectures, and departments opening their offices and labs to residents and giving briefings and demonstrations. Cal Day is widely publicized in the community. One reason Montgomery College is well seen by its neighboring community is that being a “community college’ it sees as part of its mission to serve its surrounding community. Perhaps, GU should see itself more a “community university.”