Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: SUNDAY, June 6, 1993 TAG: 9306070118
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: F3 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: ROBERT A. CRAIGHEAD
DATELINE: LENGTH: Long
The tendency is to fault economic-development efforts of local governments and agencies when in fact they have little, if any, influence over corporate decisions involving mergers, restructuring or retrenchment.
This tendency to place blame has prompted some to call for unification of local economic-development departments and the Regional Partnership into a single agency responsible for marketing the entire valley. Some even propose the new organization be set up as a unit of the Roanoke Regional Chamber of Commerce.
Those making such proposals either have had little or no direct involvement in locating plant facilities, or are using it as another ploy to further efforts to consolidate governments. If unifying local economic-development agencies had merit, other metro areas such as Northern Virginia, Richmond and Norfolk would have done so long ago. To date this has not happened.
The reason is simply that local governments can best be assured of a growing tax base by having their own economic-development department responsible for bringing in new businesses and assisting existing ones to expand. This would certainly not be the case with a unified agency, since individual governments would have limited authority over its operation and a staff that might well be inclined to direct more effort to one entity than to others.
The same would apply to questionable economic-development projects the agency may elect to pursue or support that appear to be of value to one entity but considered counterproductive and costly by others. The Hotel Roanoke Conference Center and Explore Park are typical examples.
As for central marketing of the valley, this was accomplished in the early '80s through formation of the Regional Partnership representing governments, the business sector and area chambers of commerce. Today, the partnership continues to do a commendable job despite depressed economic conditions under which far fewer industries are looking for new locations.
A second proposal generated by current economic concerns is for the valley and region to develop a "new vision" by retaining outside consultants to prepare a long-range plan for future economic growth.
While most studies of this type gather and highlight positive and negative factors already known to the area, and convert local ideas into formal recommendations, they nevertheless can provide valuable new insights, particularly if those selecting the consultants do not attempt to slant the finished report.
Despite recent adversities beyond our control, the Roanoke Valley has fared quite well economically when compared to other metro areas. Some important new industries and businesses have moved in, and existing ones are expanding. As consultants would quickly discover, however, we are faced with major problems that impede economic growth.
This is particularly true in attracting new manufacturing industries - which, contrary to the view of some, continue to be the best foundation for a solid economy, since they draw in service industries and commercial operations.
Our No. 1 problem in the valley is an acute shortage of quality industrial sites of varying size. For all practical purposes, we are now out of large (50 to 100 acres) rail-accessible sites. Unfortunately, this precludes showing the valley to a significant number of major industries - a situation that all too soon will also apply to large non-rail sites as well.
Even in the category of mid-size (25 to 50 acres) non-rail sites, there is cause for concern, for they are rapidly being depleted. Many of those remaining have development problems or are priced at a premium.
Comparatively speaking, the Roanoke Valley is not unlike a bowl that is nearing its capacity. At our present rate of growth, within approximately two decades we will approach full development, with little usable raw land remaining.
Logically, our answer is to now reserve key undeveloped areas for industrial and commercial development, and concentrate efforts on attracting industries and businesses requiring five- to 25-acre sites. On the plus side, this approach would assure substantial diversity and an overall stronger economy.
A second, equally important problem is the fact that our valley's only liquid waste-treating plant is already operating over designed capacity. Unless measures are taken immediately to increase capacity, we face being told by the state that no additional industrial connections will be permitted.
Treatment of liquid waste is vital to both the valley and surrounding area. To eliminate the likelihood of another capacity crisis in the future, it is time to follow the lead of the Hampton Roads area and establish a sanitation commission that would own, operate, maintain and expand both the waste-treatment plant and its interceptors.
This approach would also lay groundwork for the day when the Roanoke Valley reaches full development and, as a commercial and service center, will have to depend on undeveloped areas in surrounding counties for industry-related growth.
This is the situation that Norfolk has faced for years. As the area's commercial center, it has been able to redevelop sufficient obsolescent properties to sustain continued economic growth. The Roanoke Valley should prepare to follow suit.
Actually, such an avenue to the future is not nearly so bleak as may be imagined, when it is realized that the new Coca-Cola plant and many new office buildings in downtown Roanoke are situated on redeveloped land.
As for our professional economic developers such as Brian Wishneff of Roanoke, Tim Gubala of Roanoke County and Joe Yates of Salem, a tour with them through their respective entities would quickly confirm that each is doing an excellent job despite current economic conditions. As for their competing for the same plant or business - great!
It simply assures the prospect of getting the best deal our valley has to offer. The same exact thing happens in the Richmond and Norfolk areas, where it is not unusual for four or five cities and counties to compete for the same enterprise. Understandably, the prospects love it.
Robert A. Craighead of Roanoke is a retired regional manager of industrial development for the Norfolk Southern Corp.
Editor's note: This is the first in an occasional series in which Southwest Virginians and others comment on the perils and promises confronting this region and its future.
by CNB