Reading Time: 5 minutes

Key Topics: Space Planning, Campus Growth, Student Union Capacity, Master Planning

Author: Sojo Alex, Executive Principal at Envision Strategies

Featured Interview: Jim Dwyer, Washington University in St. Louis

Watch the Full Video Interview Here

The 50/50 Program Model

Washington University in St. Louis operates a dining program with an unusual balance. Half focuses on residential dining. The other half centers on retail dining incorporating local restaurants from the surrounding community.

“Between those two programs, it makes up about 50/50 related to our overall dining program, which I think is pretty unique,” Jim Dwyer explains.

This structure reflects the spatial reality of campus and how students move through their academic day. Understanding where students are and when they need food service drives every operational decision.

The $300 Million Magic Wand

When asked what operational challenge he’d fix with a magic wand, Dwyer doesn’t hesitate: space.

“I would love to have a $300 million magic wand that would allow us to really reposition space on campus to better maximize how we service our students where they are and when they need us.”

The challenge stems from rigorous academic schedules. Students need different dining experiences at different times: sit-down meals with peers in residential settings, and grab-and-go options when traversing campus between classes.

The problem? The infrastructure doesn’t match the demand pattern.

When the Student Union Is Tapped Out

During the academic day, students congregate in the heart of campus for classes. That concentrates demand on the Student Union and other centrally located dining venues.

“Our Student Union is actually not big enough to accommodate the entire population of students that would want to eat in that space,” Dwyer explains. “From a throughput perspective, we really struggle with being able to accommodate how they need to get through the space to get their meal, to be able to find a space to sit.”

This isn’t isolated to one location. Across campus, pockets of insufficient capacity create the same frustration. “We’re really taking an intentional approach to master planning, what that needs to look like, and working with folks like yourself and others to really think critically about how we spread our space, how do we leverage what we do have,” as Dwyer puts it, reframing the issue with a path towards solution. 

Growth Without Solutions

The challenge is about to intensify. WashU is adding new housing without corresponding new dining facilities.

“New housing without new dining facilities that are really going to solve the problem,” Dwyer notes.

This is the reality many campus dining programs face: enrollment growth and residential expansion happen on one timeline, while dining infrastructure investment happens on another. The gap between student population and dining capacity widens.

Master Planning as Problem-Solving

Rather than waiting for that magic wand, Dwyer’s team is taking an intentional approach through comprehensive master planning. They’re working with consultants to think critically about how to spread existing space and form strategic partnerships across campus.

“How do we form partnerships with different areas of our campus, academic units, other facilities, to look at our space and think, what’s the capacity we could have here?” Dwyer asks. “Should we move a food service operation here because we have more capability without having to spend $30 million on a new dining hall?”

This represents a fundamental shift in approach. Instead of viewing the problem as purely about building new dining facilities, the question becomes: where else on campus could dining operations exist that would better serve student movement patterns?

What This Means for Campus Dining Leaders

WashU’s experience offers important lessons:

Demand concentration is a planning problem, not just an operations problem. When your Student Union can’t handle peak demand, operational efficiency won’t solve it. You need more capacity or distributed capacity.

The 50/50 model reflects strategy. WashU’s split between residential and retail dining follows student movement patterns. Understanding how students traverse campus should drive program structure.

Cross-campus partnerships unlock solutions. Academic units and other facilities may have space capacity that could accommodate food service operations. Master planning should evaluate the entire campus.

The question isn’t always “should we build new?” Sometimes the better question is “where else could dining exist that we haven’t considered?”

Planning for Reality

The $300 million magic wand isn’t coming. WashU knows that. So they’re approaching the problem systematically: comprehensive assessment of current capacity, strategic master planning that considers unconventional locations for food service, and partnerships that leverage existing campus infrastructure in new ways.

That’s the path forward for auxiliary leaders facing similar constraints. The magic wand would be nice. But intentional, strategic planning that reimagines how and where dining happens across campus creates real solutions without waiting for massive capital investment.