In June 2007 the Army published its Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for Implementation of 2005 Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Recommendation and Related Army Actions at Fort Belvoir, Virginia. On August 7, 2007, the Army issued a Record of Decision (ROD) that deferred decisionmaking on the disposition of BRAC 133 to Fort Belvoir. BRAC 133 involves moving various elements of BRAC 133, which consists of miscellaneous Department of Defense (DoD) Agencies and Field Activities, including Washington Headquarters Services (WHS), that are currently located in leased facilities within the National Capital Region (NCR). Therefore, in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), an Environmental Assessment (EA) is being prepared to analyze additional alternative locations for BRAC 133 agencies and activities.

The 2007 Fort Belvoir BRAC EIS evaluated proposals for facilities for BRAC 133 at Fort Belvoir's Engineer Proving Ground (EPG) and Main Post. Therefore, those locations are not evaluated again in the BRAC 133 EA. They remain potentially available for selection. In addition to these alternatives, three additional sites are being analyzed. They include a warehouse site owned by the General Services Administration (GSA), comprising approximately 40 acres, at 6999 Loisdale Road in Springfield, Virginia (the GSA site); the Victory Center, a 17-acre site at 5001 Eisenhower Avenue in Alexandria, Virginia; and the Mark Center, a 24-acre site at the intersection of Seminary Road and I-395 in Alexandria. The BRAC 133 EA analyzing these three alternatives as well as the No Action Alternative is available for public review until August 13, 2008.

You can download a copy of the EA and submit comments about it by going here: http://www.belvoirbrac-eis.net/133ea.htm

The Army, in their infinite wisdom, failed to fully take into account the impact of TOD within their Environmental Assessment of the relocations of the military jobs out of Crystal City. The “Environmental Assessment for Implementation of 2005 Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Recommendation 133” was release. This report stated that they would not select the GSA warehouse alternative unless the site receives Defense Access Roads certification or Congressional appropriations to make the necessary road improvements around the warehouse site. The GSA alternative is truly the only logical location for the Crystal City jobs as it is situated next to a major transit hub ( Aprrox. ¼ mile from Franconia/Springfield Metro and VRE Station). The other two sites, Mark Center (Seminary and 395) and the Victory Center (over a mile from the Van Dorn Metro) are not transit accessible. Considering that most of these jobs are located in Crystal City and are extremely Metro Accessible, a decision to relocate these job outside close proximity to transit will only encourage car based commuting. Hopefully congress realized the impact of not locating these jobs to the GSA site as any alternative will just clog more streets.



The Fort Belvoir BRAC is taking public comments on their Environmental Report. Feel free to let them know that accessibility to Transit should be criterion that weighs heavily in their decision.

http://www.belvoirbrac-eis.net/questions.cfm

It's sickening the untold millions of tax dollars they're wasting to move out of Crystal City.

If Crystal City isn't "secure" enough....FUCKING SECURE IT!!!

The US military is allegedly the most powerful fighting force on earth. Why can't they secure a few blocks in Arlington Va?

coffin Wrote:
>> Why can't they secure a few blocks in Arlington Va?


Because it creates the illusion that DoD is trimming its budget.

Same reason that DARPA is moving from VA Square to Ballston in a few years.

coffin wrote: "It's sickening the untold millions of tax dollars they're wasting to move out of Crystal City."

I think the Congress and DOD answer, at least partly, is that the move costs are more than overshadowed by the savings in rent money to be realized by putting DOD agencies onto DOD real estate.

coffin wrote: "The US military is allegedly the most powerful fighting force on earth. Why can't they secure a few blocks in Arlington Va?"

That's not really the question, is it, since the US military doesn't own the property? Besides, while the landlords may allow a certain amount of security measures to be put in place, the Homeland Security standards that DOD must meet (standards established after 9/11 such as standoff from roadways, etc.) aren't possible.

Don-

Thanks for continuing to enlighten us about BRAC issues. The propoganda from Storck/Bradsher/Dale (the 3 stooges) is very confusing.

My understanding is that when BRAC was first announced, Dale was complaining in the media that Fairfax County was going to be overwhelmed and demanded federal money. Then, I read recently that Storck was going to sue the army-not sure on what basis.

My feeling is that FC has been outright rude and hostile to the US Army/Belvoir and is basically saying FU take your business elsewhere.

Does this latest post say that perhaps the Army will select locations OUTSIDE of FC- In the Alexandria City limits?

If so, how is it that Alexandria is rolling out the red carpet, while the dimwits in FC don't seem to know a good thing when they see it.

Please clarify for me. Thanks.

1. You can't secure Crystal City. Do you really want high caliber machine guns and missile batteries on top of the Marriott?

2. Regarding the money issue, the real problem is Route 1. There is no way that road is going to be tolerable once Ft. Belvoir is expanded. The road needs to be expanded or, better yet, Telegraph Road needs to be turned into an Expressway to bypass the Fort. That takes money, though.

I actually haven't heard anything in weeks about the schools issue. I think folks may finally have realized the facts (albeit perhaps begrudgingly) as we've discussed them here before: there just isn't that much population involved in the jobs moving brand new into the region. More than 95% of them already live here, their kids already in school here.

Your other point raises a subtle fact that's clear when you read through the EA for the BRAC 133 jobs. TWO of the sites evaluated are NOT in Fairfax at all. They are in Arlington/Alexandria. IF one of those two sites is selected, that will REDUCE the number of jobs moving into Fairfax by about 6,400. That would leave 8,500 going to EPG, another appx 4,600 going to main post, for a total of about 13,100 total jobs coming into Fairfax, instead of nearly 20,000.

-------------------------------------------------------
explain please Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Don-
>
> Thanks for continuing to enlighten us about BRAC
> issues. The propoganda from Storck/Bradsher/Dale
> (the 3 stooges) is very confusing.
>
> My understanding is that when BRAC was first
> announced, Dale was complaining in the media that
> Fairfax County was going to be overwhelmed and
> demanded federal money. Then, I read recently
> that Storck was going to sue the army-not sure on
> what basis.
>
> My feeling is that FC has been outright rude and
> hostile to the US Army/Belvoir and is basically
> saying FU take your business elsewhere.
>
> Does this latest post say that perhaps the Army
> will select locations OUTSIDE of FC- In the
> Alexandria City limits?
>
> If so, how is it that Alexandria is rolling out
> the red carpet, while the dimwits in FC don't seem
> to know a good thing when they see it.
>
> Please clarify for me. Thanks.

WashingToneLocian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> 1. You can't secure Crystal City. Do you really
> want high caliber machine guns and missile
> batteries on top of the Marriott?
>
> 2. Regarding the money issue, the real problem is
> Route 1. There is no way that road is going to be
> tolerable once Ft. Belvoir is expanded. The road
> needs to be expanded or, better yet, Telegraph
> Road needs to be turned into an Expressway to
> bypass the Fort. That takes money, though.


Then throw the Marriott out! Start closing Crystal City streets until the powers that be feel "safe". Look at all the once public streets in DC that are now closed due to terrah.

And that "savings in rent money" argument is horseshit...it NEVER turns out to be true, just ask the Gatehouse Gang.

I think the County Board has a right to be peeved. Once again, the government, in it's usual arrogant manner says, "We're doing such and such, and there isn't a damn thing you can do about it". Yeah, except clean up the mess they make of the area on the County taxpayers' dime.

How long have we been waiting for the Army to decontaminate the Proving Grounds so the Parkway can be completed?

The issue isn't with Ft. Belvoir it is about the GSA warehouses. Those BRAC facilities that are going to FT Belvoir is a sealed deal. The problem FC has is that the Springfield area is begging the Army to locate there as the whole area will be cleaned up and redeveloped, while those outside are crying that traffic is going to get worse. But the reality is that traffic will get much worse if they pick one of the Alexandria locations as neither are located near a Metro or VRE station.

coffin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
>
> Then throw the Marriott out! Start closing
> Crystal City streets until the powers that be feel
> "safe". Look at all the once public streets in DC
> that are now closed due to terrah.
>
And listen to the DC government bitch about those street closings. I'm sure the powers-that-be in Crystal City and Arlington don't want to create a more inhospitable environment in Crystal City (I mean, it really is a pretty shitty area anyway in terms of human beings actually living and working there).

I also agree some of the anti-terror measures in DC have been overkill. The Secret Service shuts down E Street and the Ellipse, but does nothing about very public buildings with clear views of the White House. Whatever.

Ok, maybe BRAC isn't perfect. Sure, it will contribute to our already dreadful traffic issues, but attracting jobs to the county is key-particularly in this eceonomy when many companies are shrinking.

For those who don't think the Army is worth courting- then why the hell are they bending over backwards to put this Laurel Hill project together. Do we really need more houses built right now? Do we really need more retail space? Take a look at the roads over there? They are all 2 lanes!!! Who pays for the roads? Aren't all these units going to drive prices down more?

We are either pro business or we're not. BRAC has a lot more to offer us than Laurel Hill.

FC is inconsistent Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> We are either pro business or we're not. BRAC has
> a lot more to offer us than Laurel Hill.


The difference between BRAC and Laurel Hill is that county supervisors can compel developers to help pay for improvements to the roads, etc. They are SOL when it comes to getting the military to do that.

JR Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The issue isn't with Ft. Belvoir it is about the
> GSA warehouses. Those BRAC facilities that are
> going to FT Belvoir is a sealed deal. The problem
> FC has is that the Springfield area is begging the
> Army to locate there as the whole area will be
> cleaned up and redeveloped, while those outside
> are crying that traffic is going to get worse.
> But the reality is that traffic will get much
> worse if they pick one of the Alexandria locations
> as neither are located near a Metro or VRE
> station.


What about the Joseph Alexander transportation place behind Springfield Mall?

I believe that's pretty damned close to those GSA warehouses.

Thats why it should be in Springfield and not at the two Alexandria locations.

This proffer crap is a zero sum game. We give the green light to the developers to build 500 houses and then of course we need wider roads and new schools to accomodate the growth. I don't see it as aprofitable enterprise. Someone show me the numbers that Laurel Hill will pay for itself.

The middle school alone is expected to cost $70 million. What is the cost of widening all those roads? My guesstimate is this growth costs us $3 for every $1 we get frm the developers.

Lastly, how many house in FC are in foreclosure? Do we need 500 more? The retail space won't be built out until the rooftops are ocupied. FC is buying foreclosed properties to help stabilize the market-it makes no sense to increase inventory right now.

BRAC is a better deal and the army jobs are solid-not subject to whims of the economic cycles.

There is also consideration of things the Army/DOD have paid for, or are committed to paying for already, such as:

- Totally funding construction of the Fairfax County Parkway between Richmond Highway and Telegraph Road. (There are those who suggest the Army's total investment includes the value of the Belvoir real estate provided as ROW for the road underneath the asphalt.)

- Funding all but two lanes of the four-lane "Woodlawn Road replacement" between Richmond Highway and Telegraph Road, including all cost of environmental analysis and design of the four-lane facility. (And, again, the value of the Belvoir real estate to be provided for that part of the road between Pole Road and Telegraph is part of the Army's total investment.)

- Providing just over 2 acres of Belvoir land to be used by County/State in a "land swap" with Woodlawn Plantation to acquire ROW for that piece of Old Mill Road between Richmond Highway and Pole Road, so that four lanes will fit.

- Seeking and receiving Defense Access Road certification for three road projects needed around EPG for the work force there, clearing the way for DOD funding of construction of the roads.

Also important to remember that every decision made about where to put the BRAC jobs was driven first by transportation concerns. That's why Army, at County and VDOT urging, agreed to cap the number going to EPG at 8,500. Traffic planners insisted VDOT's 2004 design for the parkway through EPG can handle up to 8,500 with the addition of an interchange (which the Army will fund) for EPG traffic to enter and exit.

It is that traffic-driven (pun; sorry) decision which required Army to go back to the drawing board on where to put the 6,400 BRAC 133 jobs. The GSA site - having been raised by the Army's planners in the first place as useful because of its proximity to Metro - was certainly one place to look. The only reason it wasn't included in original analysis is that Army doesn't own it. Following the decision to cap EPG at 8,500, Congress gave Army the authority to consider it.




I don't think so Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> This proffer crap is a zero sum game. We give the
> green light to the developers to build 500 houses
> and then of course we need wider roads and new
> schools to accomodate the growth. I don't see it
> as aprofitable enterprise. Someone show me the
> numbers that Laurel Hill will pay for itself.
>
> The middle school alone is expected to cost $70
> million. What is the cost of widening all those
> roads? My guesstimate is this growth costs us $3
> for every $1 we get frm the developers.
>
> Lastly, how many house in FC are in foreclosure?
> Do we need 500 more? The retail space won't be
> built out until the rooftops are ocupied. FC is
> buying foreclosed properties to help stabilize the
> market-it makes no sense to increase inventory
> right now.
>
> BRAC is a better deal and the army jobs are
> solid-not subject to whims of the economic cycles.

FYI, in case you haven't seen this week's Fairfax Times ... I do encourage folks on the Forum to go to www.belvoirbrac-eis.net for info on BRAC 133, and, most important, provide any comment you may have. And please share this with others you know who may be interested. - Thanks, Don Carr


Fairfax Times
July 17, 2008

Report compares BRAC sites

Fort Belvoir's preparation for the incoming throngs of defense department workers in 2011 is almost in full swing, and this week's public release of an environmental assessment puts the Army one step closer to making a decision on where the final piece of the puzzle will be placed.

That piece is the location for 6,400 employees and multiple offices for Washington Headquarters Services.

The 400-page assessment evaluates the environmental and socioeconomic effects of building on one of the two sites in Alexandria or on the Springfield site in contention for WHS.

The Alexandria sites are the Victory Center on Eisenhower Ave. and the Mark Center on Seminary Road. The Springfield site is the General Services Administration warehouse property along Loisdale Road.

"The GSA site has always been and continues to be to best site," Lee District Supervisor Jeff McKay (D) said. "Van Dorn Street (intersecting Eisenhower Avenue) cannot take the traffic of Victory Center and Mark Center is not transit-friendly. The GSA site is already owned by the federal government, is transit friendly and currently is a poster child of dumb growth."

However, Alexandria Mayor Bill Euille (D) contends that the sites in his city do have merit.

"We have a lot more positive characteristics and factors in place," Euille said. "May the best jurisdiction win."

The GSA site and Victory Center are a half-mile from Metro stations and near major highways. Although near Interstate 395, the Mark Center is four miles away from the nearest Metro station.

The study said that the greatest impacts at the GSA site would be on local roads, since the county has not planned for road improvements, despite multiple neighboring projects such as the Springfield Mall redevelopment beginning this summer.

In contrast, improvements on the roadways surrounding both developments in Alexandria are "already part of regional plans and fewer additional transportation mitigation measures are required, making these sites available and more suitable from a transportation perspective for occupation," the report said.

Environmentally, the GSA and Victory Center sites would have a minimal impact, while building on the Mark Center would tear up forested areas, according to the assessment.

The public may comment on the environmental assessment through Aug. 13. Visit www.belvoirbrac-eis.net for more information.

I don't think so Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> This proffer crap is a zero sum game. We give the
> green light to the developers to build 500 houses
> and then of course we need wider roads and new
> schools to accomodate the growth. I don't see it
> as aprofitable enterprise. Someone show me the
> numbers that Laurel Hill will pay for itself.
>
> The middle school alone is expected to cost $70
> million. What is the cost of widening all those
> roads? My guesstimate is this growth costs us $3
> for every $1 we get frm the developers.
>
> Lastly, how many house in FC are in foreclosure?
> Do we need 500 more? The retail space won't be
> built out until the rooftops are ocupied. FC is
> buying foreclosed properties to help stabilize the
> market-it makes no sense to increase inventory
> right now.
>
> BRAC is a better deal and the army jobs are
> solid-not subject to whims of the economic cycles.


I firmly believe that the Laurel Hill LOCAL complex should be funded via a special tax district as should South County Middle School. FCPS seems to have abdicated it's responsibility to the children of military parents attending Fort Belvoir Elementary. Why not do a DOD elementary, middle, and high school?

It is disgraceful the way FCPS treats the kids and families at Ft Belvoir. That school is busting at the seams. They had one of the largest enrollment increases this past school year.

And yet, FCPS transfers the $2 million in BRAC planning funds to the spoiled brats at SOCO Middle.

I am losing patience with the mismanagement of this school district.

I hope BRAC goes to Alexandria-it will teach FC a lesson.

We are aware that the School System is retarded. It is odd that retarded people are educating your children, but that is what you get when you dont vote. If you dont like it, sue the FCPS. They are afraid of lawsuits becuase they cant afford them and it makes them look bad.

So Fairfax County loses 6400 Army jobs to Alexandria.

Gee I wonder if that idiot Dan Storck on the Fairfax County School Board who at one point threatened to sue the army had anything to do with the decision???

Or maybe when the School Board voted to move the $2 million set aside for BRAC planning that the TAXPAYERS AUTHORIZED got shifted to that South County Middle School that we don't need....

Or maybe when BRAC was first announced and Jack Dale whined that Fairfax County could not handle all the new jobs.

Are these people morons or what????

Jobs are the backbone of any community.

Nice job Fairfax County Public School Board.

Is there anything that you do right?

will they ever learn? Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So Fairfax County loses 6400 Army jobs to
> Alexandria.
>
> Gee I wonder if that idiot Dan Storck on the
> Fairfax County School Board who at one point
> threatened to sue the army had anything to do with
> the decision???
>
> Or maybe when the School Board voted to move the
> $2 million set aside for BRAC planning that the
> TAXPAYERS AUTHORIZED got shifted to that South
> County Middle School that we don't need....
>
> Or maybe when BRAC was first announced and Jack
> Dale whined that Fairfax County could not handle
> all the new jobs.
>
> Are these people morons or what????
>
> Jobs are the backbone of any community.
>
> Nice job Fairfax County Public School Board.
>
> Is there anything that you do right?

This SB is the biggest group of ass holes in the county.

will they ever learn? Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So Fairfax County loses 6400 Army jobs to
> Alexandria....
>


GOOD!

I work down that way and I sure won't miss those 6400 sumbitches in my traffic jams!

As I just noted in a related thread, reducing the total number of jobs coming into Fairfax County certainly helps offset traffic and other concerns with having all 19,300 jobs here, doesn't it? Putting these jobs in Alexandria means 6,400 fewer jobs coming Fairfax County's part of Fort Belvoir. The number of jobs being moved into the Fairfax's part of Fort Belvoir is now 12,900 - 8,500 to EPG and 4,400 to main post. 12,900 is nearly 10,000 fewer than we were given to expect when BRAC 2005 was first announced and would have moved 22,000 to Fort Belvoir. The 22,000 is the number from which "worst case" scenarios were drawn about impacts on schools in the region.

One original fact that remains, regardless of where the JOBS go: the PEOPLE in approximately 18,800 of the jobs ALREADY LIVE HERE ... they're already on the roads, their kids already in the schools. It's the nature of the region - the "seat of the federal government."