Ramble On

Tuesday, March 23, 2010

Some Page County EDA Background: The 2004 Strategic Plan

Apologies in advance for those who may remember some of my posts on the Page County economy last year – as the blog begins taking a new look at the role and functions of the EDA, it’s necessary to revisit some of the background, starting with the 2004 Strategic Plan. From those original four posts last June, I am going to summarize into two posts before moving on to the 2008 and 2009 updates to the plan. These background posts will be a little longer than I typically would like, so thanks for staying with me.


This original plan was developed by MarshWitt Associates, based in Roanoke, and funded by the Virginia Department of Housing and Community Development. It starts with a section called "An Economic Vision for Page County" as follows:

"Page County's sustainable high quality of life is the result of a diversified economy based on tourism, industrial development, agriculture, and retail and service industries. Existing jobs are being retained, and new high quality jobs are being created in the County. Job growth is the result of the County's educational system and workforce training partnerships that ensure the available of a trained labor force and the County's investment in water, sewer, and transportation infrastructure that has been planned to accommodate existing and future economic development needs."

When I first wrote on the topic of EDA last year, it seemed to me that much of this vision statement was obsolete, or at least overcome by events. However, the report continues, and is organized around guiding principles and an action plan. The executive summary recommends that the County be proactive in these matters, reviewing the plan and updating it based on changing conditions and priorities.

The report lists six economic development "levers" or economic system components:

• Business attraction
• Existing business retention/growth
• Community infrastructure
• Education and workforce development
• Government economic development programs and services
• Transportation

The Plan describes a "high quality of life" in the county - good land prices and a relatively low cost of living, combined with scenic environment in an area bounded by the National Park, GWNF, and the Guest/Shenandoah River State Park. Looking at the resources that would provide a foundation for executing the plan, there is an appropriate focus on transportation and utility infrastructure, a brief consideration of what low land prices for zoned commercial and industrial properties might mean to development opportunity, and a reference to the qualifications of the Page County work force.

The transportation issue creates some of the most challenging constraints on the Page County economy, and in this summary of past posts, it’s the only one I’ll mention. While the intersection of two US highways in Luray might have served as adequate all the way up to the '50's, once the interstate system was built allowing speedy and fast transportation, much of the traffic moved off of the old two lane roads and onto the new four-laners; in Page County's case, that means across the mountain to I-81, or 30 miles north, to I-66.

Effectively, this eliminates most manufacturing from consideration in an economy such as Page County's; reaching into the dark resources of my economics undergrad I seem to recall location theory that suggested proximity to natural resources is one factor, and proximity to market is the other. With the exception of agricultural and food products, we just don't have a driver that justifies manufacturing business location decisions or further development of a larger scale transportation infrastructure.

We could talk about the rail line that goes through town. There is capacity in that system for Page County commerce, as the trains head up to the inland port in Front Royal.  However, those economic theories emphasize that you don't offload goods from transportation unless you are at the source of production or at the market...suggesting that there are no rail oriented activities to be economically located in the County.

That original June 2009 post went on to look at other issues like electrical infrastructure, the impact of land prices, and goals related to developing the local work force. Tomorrow’s post will take a look at a couple of the economic goals outlined in the 2004 plan.

After reflecting on this for the past year, watching the committment the County made to purchasing Project Clover, and the curious pursuit of the Fibrowatt powerplant, I hope that I am finally getting around to an understanding of the County. As a stakeholder - a property owner and a potential business owner - I am interested in understanding the situation so that I can better find a way to make my own contribution to making positive changes.
A link to the original June post is here: http://hawksbillcabin.blogspot.com/2009/06/page-economic-development-plan-review.html

No comments: