District residents will weigh in at an April 25 D.C. Zoning Commission hearing that could determine whether the public will lose access to District House’s basement dining options as part of a planned overhaul of the University’s open dining plan. The Commission reviews proposed changes to how District residents want to use their property and its approval would allow GW to rezone, or reallocate, the building’s retail space to an all-you-care-to-eat dining hall restricted to the GW community. While the change may strengthen the University’s community, banning members of the public from its property threatens its relationship with Foggy Bottom at large.

Concerns over food insecurity, a serious problem at GW, and student safety underline the University’s rationale. While these new dining halls may address food insecurity, there’s no guarantee they’ll make students safer. Student and staff safety is a serious concern, but such boilerplate language portrays Foggy Bottom and its residents as inherently dangerous. “Protecting” students and their neighbors from one another through an unenforceable ban on the public’s access compromises the University’s commitment to a unique urban campus and damages its relationship with the community. GW’s privately-owned, quasi-public spaces ought to accommodate both students and their neighbors.

District House is a public space, albeit one that’s privately owned. Its subterranean selection of counter-service restaurants offers burritos, salads, sushi and more to locals and students alike.

While the Zoning Commission isn’t reviewing the renovation itself, replacing the requirement for public retail space with restricted University “food service” is a prerequisite for District House’s new University-only dining hall.

University officials like Karen Zinn, the associate vice president of real estate, and Kevin Days, the director of community relations, have said the University will maintain its community presence while adding new dining halls exclusively for the GW community.

At a January 2022 Foggy Bottom and West End Advisory Neighborhood Commission meeting, Days said the University “is not interested in reducing public facilities for the community” as it transforms and reallocates its own property. But turning District House’s basement into a student-only dining hall means losing a public facility.

Closing these restaurants may not matter to Foggy Bottom’s wealthier residents, but students at the School Without Walls High School, which lacks a traditional cafeteria, will lose access to more affordable dining options.

The University has also argued that these limited-access dining halls “will provide a buffer that offers students enhanced campus safety.” Students and staff, especially those who are women and nonbinary, are right to be concerned about their safety around and off-campus.

But barring the public’s entry addresses a largely nonexistent or otherwise wholly unreported problem –  threats to student safety aren’t occurring in dining halls, and further, members of the public largely aren’t responsible for on-campus crimes. A review of the University’s crime logs reveals that sexual assaults, stalking and other more serious crimes overwhelmingly happen in students’ residence halls – not public spaces like District House’s basement. Assigning GW Police Department officers or private security to shoo away passersby leaves students vulnerable to far more serious crimes than trespassing.

The University must resort to this constant enforcement if it’s serious about limiting the public’s access. Instituting a swipe-only system like at The Eatery at Pelham Commons would eliminate the public’s ability to dine at District House altogether but won’t stop them from accessing the building. GW’s sophisticated tap access system is unenforceable – you can foil it just by walking behind someone, typically a courteous student holding the door open.

“Student safety” doesn’t need to be and quite frankly isn’t the underlying reason behind the University’s new dining hall push – food insecurity is serious enough. But that University officials would invoke this phrase at all is telling in its own right. If the very presence of non-GW affiliated people on University property threatens its “protected community space,” where, exactly, can locals and residents go? Under the guise of “student safety,” the University could theoretically file for more zoning changes to bar the public from its privately-owned but quasi-public property.

While the University may not intend to criminalize members of the public for entering its property, how and whether it enforces its property rights could easily spiral out of control. Rather than promoting community spaces within and without GW, the new dining halls could engender mutual mistrust between University officials and Foggy Bottom.

Officials have said that “locating a university campus in the heart of a city presents a number of challenges and requires a thoughtful balance of student and city interests.” I agree, which is why it’s a shame that its action seems so thoughtless. The University can renovate a dining hall without invoking “student safety” and the consequences it invites, and it can safely open those dining halls to all residents of Foggy Bottom whether they are students or locals.

Even with the potential for cheaper, fresher food, these new yet traditional dining halls are dangerously conventional – GW’s open, urban campus is one of its greatest features and allows it to navigate tensions with nearby residents. Adopting the model of a gated community is a disservice to the University, its members and the surrounding community. There’s no harm in rubbing shoulders with your neighbors, even if it’s just in line for lunch.

Ethan Benn, a sophomore majoring in journalism and mass communication, is an opinions columnist.