"As a result, large employers like Northrop have strong economic incentives to choose sprawling areas with cheaper land, where they don't have to worry about sharing any space with pesky retail and only their employees, and the region, lose out."

You hit the nail on the head, David: Transportation costs are the burden of the employee; rent per square foot is the burden of the employer.

by Eric F. on Apr 28, 2010 11:07 am • link • report

Also, CSG isn't telling the full story. Defense contractors like Northrup benefit financially from oil dependence and global instability. Fewer wars means fewer missiles purchased.

A cynic would argue that Northrup actually has a financial incentive to promote oil use, especially> from unstable regimes.

I doubt this is part of their decision process, though.

by Eric F. on Apr 28, 2010 11:10 am • link • report

If Northrup does choose the Fairview Office Park in Fairfax County (Rt. 50 east of I-495), at least maybe between that new office, the Marriott and other new buildings the sorry Metrobus 1B service can be enhanced. The 1B service from/to Dunn Loring Metro isn't bad or a long trip, just peak only at present.

If the move is to Arlington at Fairfax Drive and Glebe Road, the Ballston Metro should get a second entrance on the west side. The existing eastern entrance is quite a hike to Glebe Road.

by Transport. on Apr 28, 2010 11:12 am • link • report

I had assumed that the Fairfax location off the Beltway they are considering is their current building on Colshire south of 123 (next to Mitre). Is it not? If it is, that's right across the street from the future Tysons East Silver Line station.

by Ken Archer on Apr 28, 2010 11:16 am • link • report

The FFX Co. location I've read about and heard about is the Fairview Park Drive office park - - a tangle of braided interchange ramps at 50/495.

See this link to the Wash. Bus. Journal: http://washington.bizjournals.com/washington/stories/2010/04/26/daily9.html

by Transport. on Apr 28, 2010 11:21 am • link • report

I wouldn't call it quite a hike, less than 10 min. walking. There were plans w/ JBG's The Spire, aka The Fairmont, to build a western entrance to the Ballston metro. But that project was shelved, but the long-term plans to add that entrance still remain I believe. I think Ballston is a better location geographically, even if metro weren't there. It's close to the main highways, closer to the Pentagon, downtown DC, Reagan National, Rosslyn, Crystal City, etc. CACI and DARPA are nearby as well.

But if cheaper land and a more controlled environment is what they really want, they'll probably choose the office park, which isn't really all that far, as long as they don't mind the beltway and the traffic associated with it.

by Vik on Apr 28, 2010 11:23 am • link • report

I've never understood why businesses are given tax breaks to build in terrible locations. They should be paying recurring fines for not having located within sensible areas and forcing their employees to use more resources as well as paying for the incredibly expensive infrastructure they are taking for granted in their 'ideal' nowhere locations.

by james on Apr 28, 2010 11:25 am • link • report

"as long as they don't mind the beltway and the traffic associated with it."

Not that I would ever want to work off Fairview Park Drive (yuk), but it's not like I-66 is traffic or congestion free. In fact, I'd take Beltway traffic over I-66 traffic anyday.

by Transport. on Apr 28, 2010 11:26 am • link • report

I have a hunch that the bulk of their executives are not the Metroing types. Plus isnÂ’t the total jobs around 150? Although NG is a huge employer, they are contractors and their employees are located around their clients not HQ.

by RJ on Apr 28, 2010 11:28 am • link • report

I think Va is looking for 150 wealthy customers for the hot lanes which should have an entrance located just outside of parking garages of Fairview Park.

by RJ on Apr 28, 2010 11:33 am • link • report

According to other blogs, the headquarters staff is just a couple hundred employees averaging $200,000 annual salary.

Those people are not interested in metro accessibility, they're interested in the quickest way to get their Jaguar to work from Great Falls.

And it makes me wonder: why are we using state tax money to subsidize relocation (at $47K per job!) for a handful of people who are already getting rich off of Federal tax money?

by Novanglus on Apr 28, 2010 11:48 am • link • report

Given all the other non-Metro-convenient spots NG already occupies in the greater metropolitan region, I think I can already surmise where the company stands.

by Greenbelt Gal on Apr 28, 2010 11:52 am • link • report

Good analysis, David. I really don't think that we in Montgomery lost much by not landing Northrup Grumman's corporate headquarters.

by Cavan on Apr 28, 2010 11:56 am • link • report

Using rough numbers: if the average annual salary is $200k, then Virginia would collect $11,243 in income taxes annually per person. The state will recoup the $47k/employee subsidy on the fourth year. One could consider some extra real estate tax income, too, but that's hard to estimate at this point.

The joke's on Virginia, though, because NG probably would have located in Virginia anyway, but by playing the jurisdictions off each other, they get a tax break.

Clever move.

by Eric F. on Apr 28, 2010 12:00 pm • link • report

Ok, I doubt NG is choosing their office location in a sneaking desire to increase oil consumption and spur further conflict around the globe. Just saying.

What hasn't been discussed is the need for security. There has been alot of hatred in comments towards these executives (driving jags, etc.). The fact of the matter is Northrop must consider a number of factors including the safety of their senior executives and staff. Unfortunately, access restriction is probably a key concern for these folks given the fact that they oversee and work on sensitive weapons systems thus likely making them and their corporation a target for those that would wish us harm.

by John on Apr 28, 2010 1:06 pm • link • report

@John, good point about the security concerns. I wonder if the facade changes they requested (as mentioned above) have anything to do with that.

by Lou on Apr 28, 2010 1:23 pm • link • report

Here's my completely selfish opinion.

I work two buildings away from the Ballston building (not built yet) they're looking at. The company that owns my building and is constructing the one Northrop is looking at has said for a few years that they would pay for a western entrance to the Ballston metro station (the current sole entrance is a little more than a quarter-mile away; the planned location for the new one is one small block away). If Northrop moves in, there's a good chance the real estate company will get cracking with that western entrance, which would make my commute a bit easier.

A little less selfishly, there are a few new buildings around the planned western entrance of the station and at least two (including the potential Northrop one) are being built. A lot of workers would really appreciate an entrance there, I'd think.

by Tim on Apr 28, 2010 1:32 pm • link • report

AFAIK Northrop-Grumman's largest employee base in the Balt-Wash Area (the huge Electronic Systems HQ complex), is on the grounds of BWI Airport (Linthicum, MD) and immediately adjacent to the BWI Airport Amtrak/MARC station on the Northeast Corridor. Not to mention that Light Rail isn't far away at the BWI Business District station. I'm sure the proximity to transit for the ES HQ was a deciding factor in the location choice, although the new VA HQ won't have as many employees (and the execs will much prefer driving their Ferraris from Potomac and McLean).

by King Terrapin on Apr 28, 2010 1:36 pm • link • report

I've always figured the west Ballston Metro entrance was going to be in that little carved out part of the Ballston Gateway office building on the Fairfax Drive side. It always seemed just about the right size for escalators and aligns with the station as far as I can tell.

I imagine there are plans for that intersection to tear down the "Blue Goose" building, although I will be sad to see it go. It has some architectural significance I believe, something about its curtain wall construction.

by Lou on Apr 28, 2010 1:41 pm • link • report

@John: Security is far from impossible in dense areas. Hell, some of the most secure buildings in the world are in downtown DC. Plus, DARPA's planning to move to Ballston soon, and if I recall correctly, the plans put a lot of emphasis on making the building extremely secure while still looking good, inviting, generally not cold, etc.

by Tim on Apr 28, 2010 1:42 pm • link • report

"Not that I would ever want to work off Fairview Park Drive (yuk), but it's not like I-66 is traffic or congestion free. In fact, I'd take Beltway traffic over I-66 traffic anyday."

It is bad, but if you're working in Arlington, you may not have to get on I-66 for very long, if at all, depending on where you live. Some people in Great Falls, McLean, Arlington and DC don't bother much with 66, it is bad, though. I'm in favor of a widening in some spots.

A lot of buildings in Ballston these days are built w/ security requirements in mind. I know 800/900 Glebe does have them. The potential western entrance to the Ballston metro would be where I think Hillary Clinton had an office for her election. It's an ugly, 4 story or so brown building and I don't think JBG is in any rush to develop it, and last time they tried, the surrounding residents complained. It certainly would have been one of the most attractive buildings in that area.

I agree though about metro accessibility. It's probably down on the list. If it were Tysons, w/o the metro even, I can understand b/c there's some commerce there and nice restaurants and hotels, but Fairview Park is really kinda meh.

by Vik on Apr 28, 2010 1:47 pm • link • report

Here's some more info about the western entrance to the Ballston station: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/25/AR2006012500762.html

It seems as if the plan was to redevelop the parcel at the southeast corner of Fairfax Drive and North Vermont Street into a huge condominium. It currently has an old low-rise office building. While digging the foundation, the company would do some of the major work for a new entrance, saving the county $20 million. The county would still need to pay for some other expenses for the new entrance, but the digging part would be a major help.

I would assume that when the economy tanked, JBG backed off on its plans for the building (can't find anything to confirm this, but the county gave them approval in 2006 and I haven't seen a shovel). The JBG site currently lists the present building on the site as available for lease, but sections of the site also tout the new western Metro entrance as a benefit to attract potential tenants to its newer buildings.

In other words, I don't know, and I don't think anyone knows. But that walk from the eastern entrance feels pretty long some days.

by Tim on Apr 28, 2010 1:58 pm • link • report

I was just thinking while reading over these comments:

Has anyone ever done a survey of Metro use by executives vs. non-executive workers? What percentage of persons in leadership positions (government, non-profit, business) take the Metro to and from work? How does that compare with workers in middle management and support staff?

by Greenbelt Gal on Apr 28, 2010 2:31 pm • link • report

It's not too dense for being right on top of a new metro stop along with the rest of the JBG projects nearby.

http://dcmud.blogspot.com/2006/08/jbg-puts-ballston-spire-project-on.html

http://dcmud.blogspot.com/2009/12/uninspired-at-arlington-gateway-no.html

There ya go, Tim.

by Vik on Apr 28, 2010 3:43 pm • link • report

http://www.arlingtonva.us/DEPARTMENTS/ManagementAndFinance/CIP07Proposed/6BondHighPriority.pdf

See page 6 for info on the western entrance to the metro.

by Ballston123 on Apr 28, 2010 3:53 pm • link • report

@Vik: That's pretty sad. But do you think Northrop's possible move could change things? Maybe the state could toss in a bunch of money (assuming the state thinks Ballston is better than Fairview Park ... major assumption there)? Maybe JBG could contribute, since they're constructing the building that Northrop might rent/buy?

@Ballston123: Correct me if I'm wrong, but the plan in that document relies on JBG's contribution.

by Tim on Apr 28, 2010 4:06 pm • link • report

@Tim

I really don't know to be honest. I don't think it's unreasonable for the state to pitch in some money for the entrance and the county to match it or something. JBG owns a lot of the buildings at the N. Glebe/N. Fairfax intersection, so they'll probably have to put in money regardless.

But I really hope it's not decades before something gets done. I think Marymount will keep a presence at that intersection when the blue goose is redeveloped. And VT will be in the same complex where NG would be. There's some other minimally used lots in that area too. I think when Founder's Square is completed along with 800/900 Glebe is done, a western entrance should be near the top of the priorities list.

by Vik on Apr 28, 2010 4:42 pm • link • report

Do we know if the Ballston location has sufficient (and free) parking for the employees? If not, then they may very well be better off driving a few miles further. I've worked in both areas, and the Fairview Park area is definitely not lacking for amenities. Yes, you have to get in your car to find a great place for lunch or do any shopping, but once you do you have a lot more easily at your disposal then you do in Ballston where parking is difficult and you end up with only the limited reach of someone on foot. Of course, if you live downtown, Ballston is closer. There are always trade-offs. But I wouldn't dismiss Fairview Park as 'car-dependent', because provided their is sufficient parking, being 'car-dependent' can actually put far far more at your disposal then being 'foot-dependent'.

Additionally, knowing the industry Northrupp Grumman is operating in (i.e., government contracting), I'd suspect that most of their workers wouldn't be willing to give up the independence of being able to drive to work. In government contracting, your assignment to a specific location is only as long as your role on the project runs. This can sometimes be years, but is more often months or weeks. And you might be actually assigned to more than one project requiring being in multiple locations as well as working (maybe) from home. In either case, you can't be changing your residence to fit your commute, since that commute will change. And only being car independent will allow you the flexibility needed. I say they'll go with Fairview Park not because it might be a few dollars cheaper per square foot but because that is what is best for their employees, inspite of what others might think is best for them.

by Lance on Apr 28, 2010 5:33 pm • link • report

Are we talking average salary or median salary for these headquarters employees? Cause all it takes is a couple high-paid executives to skew those numbers if it's an average. Many of them could be making $50-60k.

by stacey2545 on Apr 28, 2010 5:41 pm • link • report

@Lance: If I recall correctly, JBG is planning an underground parking garage for the building. Whether or not parking is free would largely depend on whether Northrop buys the building, and if they lease it, it could depend on any number of things. For example, in my building, which is JBG owned, we pay directly to JBG's parking contractor, with no company subsidy. But it can be deducted from our pay pre-tax.

by Tim on Apr 28, 2010 5:51 pm • link • report

There should be plenty of parking at the Ballston location. They wouldn't be the only contractor in the area. Most of the buildings have ample parking underground. It's ridiculous to say you'd be foot dependent in Ballston. I don't think the parking would be free, maybe $100 or so pre-tax, but for the higher-ups, who knows. I really think it'll come down to the price of the property as well as whether or not the Ballston property can be modified for NGC's liking.

Geographically, Ballston is better. Clients or whomever from out of town would enjoy easy metro access to the airport and downtown and ample hotels, shops and restaurants nearby. I don't think Fairview Park is a bad location, it's probably a better fit a company like NG HQ's.

by Vik on Apr 28, 2010 6:40 pm • link • report

The Fairview Park Location is Central to the customer base and other Major northrop facilities. From Fairview Park, hop 50 east for 8 miles to the Pentagon, 9 to Congress. 495 North to Tysons in 3 minutes where NG Information Systems is headquartered on Colshire, down the Street from the CIA. Access to the Toll Road to major Government customers and other NG facilities in Reston and Herndon and Chantilly. Hop 495 south to get to Ft. Belvoir in 15 Minutes.

Also, these 300 Employees are Corporate HQ type People whom make kiss-my-axx money, like $250K. They aren't gonna ride Metro if it comes to their Penthouse Apartment Door.

I'm voting for Fairview Park, because I think South Arly and the Falls Church area of FFX county are lacking in Metro Love and any exposure and additional economic activity will eventally bring better mass transit options.

by Joe M. on Apr 28, 2010 6:46 pm • link • report

Yeah, good plan... explain to the weapons manufacturer that increasing our oil dependancy could lead to wars, cus I bet they will want to avoid those, right? right?

by Arch_NME on Apr 28, 2010 10:18 pm • link • report

David

You are right on! Until major corporations lead from the top with responsible lifestyle choices instead of from their short term pocket books we all loose. We must begin to think long term. Arlington, County made their move 30 years ago. It takes time and patience to build a real community. Thanks for quoting Stewart, he is a great voice for smart growth thoughts.

by David Kitchens on Apr 29, 2010 8:15 am • link • report

I almost disagree in this case only, because they types of people that will work at their headquarters will not live in transit-oriented areas and will drive to work from North Arlington, McLean, Great Falls and Potomac. Of all their offices, this will probably be one of the most devoid of young people and the demographic who would be more likely to use Metro.

Additionally, apparently Northrop requested facade changes to what looks like one of the more exciting new developments in Ballston as well as a reduction in ground-level retail. This basically takes a mixed-use component out of what is supposed to be mixed-use development. I assume they would use security as the reason. I am happy to see Northop move to Virginia, but I think of all their offices, this one could survive in a typical suburban office park the best.

I still see the point that leading from the top would encourage other companies to do the same, but I think any of their other offices would fit better.

by xtr657 on Apr 29, 2010 8:45 am • link • report

@Arch_NME: What are you talking about? No one said anything about explaining to weapons manufacturers about increasing oil dependency.

Eric said NG has a financial incentive to promote oil consumption, I responded with I doubt that was high on their list of factors to consider. I doubt its even on their list of considerations at all.

I am a fan of sarcasm and cynicism but this is a well thought out discussion and I dont think your comment adds anything of value.

Love and open-mindedness make the world go round.

by john on Apr 29, 2010 8:48 am • link • report