FINAL PROGRAM DESIGN
2000 VIRGINIA
INDUSTRIAL SITE
DEVELOPMENT FUND
PLANNING
GRANT
Department
of Housing and
Community
Development
501 North Second Street
Richmond, Virginia
23219
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction 3
Funding 4
Program
Design
Goal 5
Objectives 5
Strategy 5
Planning
Grants
Purpose 5
Amount 5
Application Deadline 6
Threshold Requirements 6
Minimum Size
Requirements 6
Eligible Projects 7
Competitive Selection Process 7
Appendix A - Distress Eligibility (Counties) 9
Appendix B - Distress Eligibility (Cities) 11
INTRODUCTION
The 1997 Appropriation
Act directed the Department of Housing and Community Development, with
assistance from the Virginia Economic Development Partnership and the
Department of Business Assistance, to undertake a study [of] financing options
for the Commonwealth to assist localities in the development of industrial
parks and related infrastructure improvements.
Three focus group meetings were held to determine how such a program
could best benefit distresses regions that lacked fully served industrial
sites.
Industrial
Site Study
The study was
delivered to the General Assembly in October of 1997. It made the following observations:
Economic
Development Building Blocks. Infrastructure is one of the key building
blocks for economic development and that although rural communities have many
distinct quality of life advantages, the lack of ready-to-build sites is an
important competitive factor in a marketing environment.
Site
Development. The
increase in Virginia’s site inventory during the 1980s has been sold-off due to
the aggressive and successful marketing efforts of the State and its local and
regional economic development organization.
Site
Inventory Reduction.
It has become increasingly difficult for the Virginia Economic
Development Partnership (VEDP) to match stated prospect site selection
requirements with a wide variety of communities that can meet the prospect’s
criteria Prospects demand sites in a greater state of readiness than ever
before within a shorter time frame.
Sites
Without Public Utilities.
The VEDP inventory database contains 881 sites outside of Northern
Virginia; 40% of these sites do not have water or sewer available that
significantly limits their marketability.
At least 50% of the sites in seven Regional Economic Development
Advisory councils lack water and sewer.
Sites
With Public Utilities.
There is a strong correlation between water and sewer availability and
prospect visits.
Site
Sizing. The
VEDP database contains 284 properties of 50 acres or less which have water and
sewer. These smaller parcels are
successful in suburban and urban areas where they meet the needs of small
manufacturers and suppliers serving larger regional facilities. One emerging trend is the development of larger
sites that can handle projects requiring 45-70 acres and the demand for 150-300
acre sites for manufacturing and distribution facilities near major highways
has been strong for years. These sites
are scarce throughout the state.
Need
for Product in Distressed Areas. VEDP
concluded that the regions with site inventory shortages are also exhibiting
the greatest degree of economic distress, usually evident through higher than
average unemployment and lower personal incomes.
Study Recommendations
The study made four recommendations relative to
the creation of a new program of state financial assistance. Two of the
recommendations were of an administrative nature and will not be discussed here
but the two primary recommendations that are of primary interest are as
follows:
The establishment of a competitive, creative and
flexible Industrial Site Development Grant Program for the purpose of improving
and developing local and regional industrial properties in distressed areas
throughout Virginia and, that This program emphasize and give strong
consideration for local actions and initiatives that promote regional
cooperation and the development of regional industrial sites and parks
including local growth-sharing agreements, joint regional and state marketing
strategies, joint funding participation or other innovative funding mechanisms.
General Assembly Funding
The General Assembly responded to the study with
a program of financial assistance of $3 million in the first year (1998) for
the creation of an Industrial Site Development Fund and $5.5 million in the
second year (1999) for the Fund’s continuation. Subsequent appropriations of
$5.5 million each year for 2000 and 2001 have been approved. DHCD has been
tasked with the development of criteria and guidelines for the fund giving preference to regional sites (two or
more localities), sites purchased or placed under option and engineering study
contracted for or completed.
The following Planning Grants of the Virginia
Industrial Site Development Fund utilizes some of the concepts and experiences
learned from two successful models previously administered by DHCD, the
Southwest Virginia Economic Development (SWVED) Grant Program and the Rural
Economic Development (RED) Planning Grant Fund. Additional refinements and
improvements were suggested by staff of the original working group with
subsequent input provided by public and local economic development officials
during focus group meetings in 1997 and again in 2000.
GOAL
To improve the economies and the quality of life
of Virginia’s distressed communities through increased capital investment and
employment opportunities.
OBJECTIVES
To assist in the development of public,
marketable regionally significant industrial sites.
To strengthen the capacities of these
communities to stimulate and promote economic development activity.
To encourage the development of regional
cooperation and marketing concepts for economic development purpose.
To increase Virginia’s total industrial site
inventory
STRATEGY
To provide $5.5
million in State financial assistance to distressed communities to assist with
the development of regional or regionally significant industrial sites.
Assistance will be provided for the following two different purposes, each with
its own application requirements: Planning Grants for site planning assistance
(identification/selection, preliminary engineering and environmental
evaluation) of new sites that have potential for development and Construction
Grants for physical site development and/or infrastructure improvements
essential to site marketability
PLANNING GRANTS
(A) Purpose of Assistance
The purpose of the
grant is to jointly participate with applicants in the funding of planning
projects necessary for future development of a regional industrial site or park
(or one that is regionally significant) resulting in its eventual addition to
the state inventory of marketable products. It is anticipated that satisfactory
completion of a planning project funded with this grant will provide potential
applicants with sufficient information to compete successfully for an ISDF
Construction Grant in subsequent funding rounds, provided that funds are
available and/or for matching funds from other state and federal programs.
(B) Amount of Assistance
$ 185,000 in total
assistance for planning grants is available between September 2000 and February
28, 2001. The amount available is $40,000 for comprehensive projects and
$25,000 for preliminary engineering projects.
(C)Application Cycle
Applications
are due at any time between September 2000 and February 28, 2001. Applications
will be reviewed and evaluated based on organizational capacity and program
design. Applications will be received and awarded based on a first-come,
first-served basis. In order to be funded, applications must meet a certain
minimum number of points in the scoring system. Applications that do not meet
the minimum score initially may be reconsidered at the end of the funding
cycle. Regional impact will be given significant consideration.
(D) Threshold
Requirements
Planning Grants shall only be available to those
applicants who meet the following threshold requirements:
a)
Applications may be submitted by a distressed region. A distressed
region shall be defined as a minimum of two or more contiguous cities,
counties or towns. One-half of the total number of participants must meet one or more
of the distressed criteria identified below. Qualified distressed localities
are 1isted in appendices A and B. The site must be located in a distressed
locality. All localities participating in a regional application cannot be
part of a single jurisdiction. For example, an application comprised of a
county and a town whose boundaries are wholly contained within the county would
not be considered a region. A city, county or town may participate in more than
one application for assistance. However, each of such applications must address
improvements for separate sites that serve different geographic and labor
market areas.
b) A
single application may be submitted from a city, county, town or political
subdivision, however, scoring preference will given to regional applications
that include distressed
localities.
(E) Distress
Criteria
(1) An unemployment rate of 1.5 times
higher than the 1999 annualized state rate
(2) A Commission on Local Government (COLG)
fiscal distress ranking of high or above average on the most recent COLG index
(3) a median adjusted gross income (AGI) of 80% of the 1997 state median. See
Appendix A and B.
(F) Local Match
A
local match of 25% is required. Ten percent (10%) of this match may be in-kind
for administrative costs incurred for project management. The remaining fifteen
percent (15%) must be in local cash. No prior expenditures or any state or
federal grant may be counted towards the matching requirement.
(G) Financial Packaging
Applicants shall
submit a complete financial package including commitment of the local match
requirement by resolution and/or ordinance at the time the planning grant
application is submitted.
(H) Minimum Size
Requirements
The Industrial Site
Development Fund will target sites consisting of a minimum of 200 net
developable acres. Acreage within the 100-year floodplain or in wetlands
generally will not be considered developable. Site limitations must be
addressed in a preliminary engineering report.
Applicants with
geographic, topographic or other physical limitations may propose sites that
are less than 200 acres, but not significantly less, if conclusive
justification is provided. Applicants who propose sites with less than 200
acres must contact the Department of Housing and Community Development to
discuss their situation. Sites that are less than 200 acres must be shown to be
quality, marketable sites. Justification of extreme circumstances may result in
a waiver of the 200 acre requirement. This will be a rating factor.
Water and sewer,
access roads and the percent to which slope will be graded must be consistent
with the development requirements of a regional park based on market projections
and justified by a preliminary engineering report.
(I) Eligible
Projects
Comprehensive - Assistance
up to $40,000 will be available to applicants to help identify, select and
evaluate a marketable regional industrial site. This type of project may only
contain the following elements: (1) a site-selection study (2) a preliminary
engineering report (PER) and (3) an environmental audit. Costs associated with
requirements for revenue/growth sharing agreement may also be eligible if
critical to the success of the project. If the completion of the site selection
study results in the identification of a suitable site, site control (public
ownership or at a minimum an exclusive,
12-month fixed-price option) must be obtained within 90 days in
order to release
funds for the preliminary engineering or
environmental audit elements. All projects will be completed within 12 months
of grant award.
Preliminary
Engineering and environmental Audit - Assistance up to
$25,000 will be provided to applicants for preliminary engineering
evaluations of existing sites which are already public owned or under
fixed price option and to conduct environmental audits. Costs associated
with requirements for revenue/growth sharing agreement may also be eligible if
critical to the success of the project. Only preliminary engineering reports
are eligible. All activities will be completed within six months of grant
award.
(3) Competitive
Selection Process
Since minimum distress thresholds have been
established for program access, relative need will subsequently not be weighed
as heavily as project impact. Therefore, project impact will be assigned a 70%
weight and project need assigned a 30% weight. Specific indicators of need and
impact will be established to measure how well an application meets the intent
of these two criteria. The more an application’s indicators can successfully
satisfy these criteria, the higher the point value will be assigned for that
particular indicator.
Project
Need. Two
indicators of need will be used to determine scores for both comprehensive and
preliminary engineering projects.
Distress
- One-half of participants in a regional project must have already met one of
the three minimum distress criteria thresholds for program access. Applications
will receive points based upon an average or weighted average of the scores of
each regional participant’s ranking among the three distress criteria. A weight
of 10% will be assigned.
Economic Development
Need - The intent of this program is to increase the
availability of marketable, regional industrial sites or sites with regional
significance. The lack of existing sites, land availability and cost, economic
development strengths as well as constraints or obstacles, the impact of recent
industry closures and downsizing and the proposed strategy to overcome these
obstacles will be evaluated. For PER projects, the existing site and physical
characteristics, capacity, availability of utilities and site limitations will
be examined as well as the need factors indicated above. A weight of 20% will
be assigned.
Project
Impact. Three indicators will be used to determine a
project impact score. Some of these indicators have a higher priority and will
be assigned a greater weight:
Impact on Need
- The economic development needs, strengths and weaknesses of the region, the
importance of the proposed project to the region’s economic development
strategy, a recent history of commitment/effort to overcome these obstacles
will be evaluated. The potential impact (expressed in anticipated, quantifiable
terms) of a regional industrial site to relieve economic distress and resolve
economic development problems will be an important consideration, particularly
if an identifiable product gap is closed. Of interest also will be the strategy
for incorporating the project into existing economic development plans and how
site development will address regional issues. The proposed method of final
site selection will also be examined to determine impact on economic
development need in the region as will the degree of cooperation among
jurisdictions in the site selection process. A 40% weight will be assigned.
Special Coordination
of Effort - Special attention wilt be given to any
special actions taken to promote regional cooperation and the development of
regional industrial sites including growth-sharing agreements, joint marketing
strategies, joint funding mechanisms or other innovative initiatives. A 20%
weight will be assigned.
Organization and
Marketing - Cooperative efforts among economic
development organizations, consensus regarding regional site development as a
solution to regional economic development problems, proposed new marketing
efforts and strategies that are designed to promote both the site and the
respective communities that comprise the regional community will all be
considered/evaluated. Special attention will be given to the capacity (staffing
and operational stability) and ability (experience and financing) of the local
and regional economic development organization(s) to effectively market and
coordinate marketing efforts related to this site and the regional community in
which it will be located. A 10% weight will be assigned.
COUNTIES UNEM COLG AGI
Accomack XXXX XXXX XXXX
Alleghany XXXX XXXX
Appomatox XXXX
Bath XXXX XXXX
Bland XXXX XXXX
Brunswick XXXX XXXX
Buchanan XXXX XXXX XXXX
Buckingham XXXX XXXX XXXX
Carroll XXXX XXXX XXXX
Caroline XXXX
Charles City XXXX
Charlotte XXXX XXXX
Craig XXXX XXXX
Cumberland XXXX XXXX
Dickenson XXXX XXXX XXXX
Dinwiddie XXXX
Essex XXXX XXXX
Floyd XXXX
Franklin XXXX
Giles XXXX XXXX
Grayson XXXX XXXX XXXX
Greensville XXXX XXXX
Halifax XXXX XXXX
Highland XXXX
Henry XXXX XXXX XXXX
King and Queen XXXX XXXX
Lancaster XXXX XXXX
Lee XXXX XXXX XXXX
Lunenburg XXXX XXXX XXXX
Madison XXXX
Matthews XXXX
Mecklenburg XXXX XXXX
Middlesex XXXX
Montgomery XXXX
Nelson XXXX
Northampton XXXX XXXX XXXX
Northumberland XXXX XXXX
Nottoway XXXX XXXX
Page XXXX XXXX
Patrick XXXX XXXX
Pittsylvania XXXX XXXX
Prince Edward XXXX XXXX
Pulaski XXXX XXXX XXXX
Richmond XXXX XXXX
Rockbridge XXXX
Russell XXXX XXXX XXXX
Scott XXXX XXXX
Shenandoah XXXX
Southampton XXXX
Smyth XXXX XXXX XXXX
Surry XXXX
Sussex XXXX XXXX
Tazewell XXXX XXXX XXXX
Washington XXXX XXXX
Westmoreland XXXX XXXX
Wise XXXX XXXX XXXX
Wythe XXXX XXXX
9/6/00