GSA proposes trading Hoover Building for new FBI campus (College Park: apartment, condos)

[UrbanScholar]

Metro has decided to extend the agreement for the land next to greenbelt metro. One point that was made on the news is that any Site chosen may not generate additional business(contractors etc) since the FBI does not spend as much as say the DOD. I don't know how true that would be. Granted they don't spend as as much as other law enforcement/intelligence/military agencies but I think there presence would merit an expanded private sector. I also find it interesting that minimal impact was mentioned with PG but not other jurisdictions

Metro committee advances land deal that could bring the FBI to Greenbelt - Washington Business Journal

[justtitans]

Originally Posted by UrbanScholar

Metro has decided to extend the agreement for the land next to greenbelt metro. One point that was made on the news is that any Site chosen may not generate additional business(contractors etc) since the FBI does not spend as much as say the DOD. I don't know how true that would be. Granted they don't spend as as much as other law enforcement/intelligence/military agencies but I think there presence would merit an expanded private sector. I also find it interesting that minimal impact was mentioned with PG but not other jurisdictions

Metro committee advances land deal that could bring the FBI to Greenbelt - Washington Business Journal

This is good news for PG. I believe with this, this should be the time to start focusing on marketing Greenbelt. Seems like it's going to come down to Greenbelt and Springfield.

[UrbanScholar]

Originally Posted by pgtvatitans

This is good news for PG. I believe with this, this should be the time to start focusing on marketing Greenbelt. Seems like it's going to come down to Greenbelt and Springfield.

I agree and even though Metro did not endorse PG, their justification for entertaining the extension (under used metro station) speaks volumes as to why Greenbelt is an ideal location

[UrbanScholar]

Here is a response from one of NOVA's politician's

Fairfax official says Metro is playing favorites in fight for FBI headquarters - The Washington Post

[Zimar]

Originally Posted by UrbanScholar

Here is a response from one of NOVA's politician's

Fairfax official says Metro is playing favorites in fight for FBI headquarters - The Washington Post

I read this! Gosh, what a whiny baby. "Wahh they're being meanies and they won't let me get what I want wahhh."

[adelphi_sky]

Originally Posted by UrbanScholar

Metro has decided to extend the agreement for the land next to greenbelt metro. One point that was made on the news is that any Site chosen may not generate additional business(contractors etc) since the FBI does not spend as much as say the DOD. I don't know how true that would be. Granted they don't spend as as much as other law enforcement/intelligence/military agencies but I think there presence would merit an expanded private sector. I also find it interesting that minimal impact was mentioned with PG but not other jurisdictions

Metro committee advances land deal that could bring the FBI to Greenbelt - Washington Business Journal

I can think of a few contracting firms. They would mostly be forensic in nature. Consider the rise in cyber crime. There are already computer forensic firms that exist. That would fit nicely with the NSA being the cyberdefense hub. It would be interesting to know what private firms actually support the FBI and in what capacity.

[adelphi_sky]

Originally Posted by UrbanScholar

Here is a response from one of NOVA's politician's

Fairfax official says Metro is playing favorites in fight for FBI headquarters - The Washington Post

Like I said before, it will be harder to justify not selecting open land next to a metro within 20 minutes of downtown DC as opposed to cramming more workers in an already overburdened commuter route. We can also talk about crime and schools, but the DHS HQ isn't necessarily located in an area the likes of Bethesda or Alexandria.

[adelphi_sky]

When you take the time to look at both sites from Google Maps, the differences are huge between the two. It's almost laughable in that it would be ridiculous not to use such a wide expanse of usable space right at metro's door.

[justtitans]

Originally Posted by adelphi_sky

When you take the time to look at both sites from Google Maps, the differences are huge between the two. It's almost laughable in that it would be ridiculous not to use such a wide expanse of usable space right at metro's door.

I'm not sure I see a huge difference. The area to the left of the metro in Springfield are the GSA owned warehouse, which is the area they would tear down to build a new complex. It's not green space like it is in Greenbelt, but it would serve the same purpose. Greenbelt has more space sure, but I guess it would depend on how much space is necessary.

[adelphi_sky]

Originally Posted by pgtvatitans

I'm not sure I see a huge difference. The area to the left of the metro in Springfield are the GSA owned warehouse, which is the area they would tear down to build a new complex. It's not green space like it is in Greenbelt, but it would serve the same purpose. Greenbelt has more space sure, but I guess it would depend on how much space is necessary.

That's the difference and it's huge. The difference is between developed and undeveloped land between the two. Greenbelt is at a state where it would be ready to dig, Springfield isn't.