D.I.G. Frankfort maintains that all aspects of economic development are important to the long-term vitality of a community. From providing support to existing businesses, to the recruitment of new industry and jobs, and promotion of infill, commercial, residential, and industrial development, Frankfort needs it all. While traditional economic development efforts can drive expansion and new locations, it takes experience, creativity, and money to be successful at infill projects, which is the development of vacant or under-utilized parcels within existing urban areas that are already developed.
Building on under-utilized properties can promote growth. There is no question using vacant infill properties adds to a community’s preservation and sustainability efforts. What is important to note is that infill projects have more barriers to success than traditional development projects. Infill development cannot be the primary option for our community’s growth plans. To the citizens and preservation groups who want to restrict new development efforts in favor of infill projects, DIG challenges the notion.
Every community has vacant, rundown properties. It is a function of the modern consumer who is always in pursuit of something new or more convenient. In our town, for example, we have a nearly vacant shopping center where national retailer, Sears and Roebuck, Co., was the anchor. There are also two nearly vacant shopping centers where Big Box retailers once operated and eventually vacated for larger spaces and better access to consumers. Markets evolve, consumers redirect, and once popular stores are no longer in business. Investors of the original development have long since earned back their investment and now have little incentive to redevelop. Their properties no longer have the value they once had as the trade areas have transitioned. Smoke shops, discount retailers, and flea markets take advantage of the lower lease payments. Buildings decline and the tax revenues decrease.
Many developers do not find an infill project an attractive proposition due to the cost involved in rehabilitating such a property. Often these projects can be very expensive due to the added cost of demolition or providing the necessary infrastructure or repairs. Rezoning challenges can be exhausting. Added to the complexity of such a project, many infill sites are too small to provide a reasonable return to private investors. As a side note, they are also too small for industrial development prospects. Even if an infill property could provide the necessary amount of land for an industrial project, it would likely not qualify under comprehensive plan requirements.
A housing project might work if the area is suited for residential development. However, for communities that value these types of projects, the local government can mitigate the incremental costs with additional funding, tax incentives or rebates to stimulate interest from developers.
This commentary began with the premise that all types of Economic Development are important. Land for industrial parks identified by a professional economic development entity, residential communities, commercial complexes, agricultural growth, and infill development are all part of a diverse menu of growth options. Local officials and preservation groups need to support a comprehensive approach to development. This is an important consideration as we work on the Comprehensive Plan to determine the future land use for Frankfort for the next 10 to 20 years. This community should not move forward with fractured positions and a limited approach to growth but incorporate the various avenues of growth that will make Frankfort a vibrant community.
Comments